Buyer beware is all I can say. If after reading about all the accuracy issues with this bike you still went out and bought one, what did you expect? This isn’t a Zwift issue, the spin bike is the problem.
Yes you can recalibrate it, maybe it will be better? You can increase weight and height too to help slow you down. Other than that, there are no settings that I know of that can help make this more accurate, other than putting power meter pedals on it.
Agree, other than the exaggerated output, I’m really happy with the bike for it’s price and still will keep it, but yes, I was expecting some inaccuracy vs a bike with a trainer but not like double output.
In the mean time, I wrote an email to EMEA support at Nautilus and they answered me in less than one hour asking me to fill a table of resistances, rpm and speed in the console, that I just sent them.
While doing that test, I realised that after reaching level 100 in the console, I could still turn the resistance knob to the right 3 full turns before it started to make some squeezing sound and finally totally brake.
Based on that I guess my resistance is not properly calibrated as I guess at 100 I shouldn’t be able to turn more to the right the knob, am i right? But also in these 3 extra turns, I didn’t find too much extra resistance until suddenly it made that sound and then stopped.
I’ll keep you posted with their answer.
Here were my speed results in km/h that look pretty consistent but in any case I doubt I can reach and specially sustain 50Km/h in a flat road with a real bike with such small effort.
|Level|Rpm|speed|
|40|25|20|
|40|50|30|
|40|75|38|
|40|100|45|
|50|25|21|
|50|50|32|
|50|75|40|
|50|100|48|
|60|25|22|
|60|50|35|
|60|75|43|
|60|100|50|
|70|25|24|
|70|50|36|
|70|75|44|
|70|100|52|
|80|25|24|
|80|50|38|
|80|75|48|
|80|100|53|
|90|25|25|
|90|50|40|
|90|75|49|
|90|100|55|
|100|25|27|
|100|50|41|
|100|75|50|
I have read here that Schwinn has replaced the consoles firmwre from 1.2 to 1.3 to fix this issue already?? any of you heard about it?
The Schwinn support team informed users that the error only occurred when the IC8 was first shipped with firmware 1.2 on the console and you can have your console exchanged for a model with firmware 1.3 - the user himself cannot simply install the new firmware. Also towards ComputerBaseSchwinn confirmed the initial problems and said the consoles were exchanged free of charge for all users with problems. In the test, firmware 1.2 was installed on the console of the IC8 and the above-mentioned performance values were too high in Zwift.
Source: hxxps://technical-news.net/schwinn-ic8-in-the-test-the-apps-for-the-spinning-bike1613979146
I proposed this to Zwift, hope they can consider it and I’d like to get your votes to support it (add an h to the url to visit the4 thread):
ttps://forums.zwift.com/t/setting-to-reduce-your-spinning-bike-watts-output-to-zwift/555659
Hi Guys! Someone knows how in my IC8 console the km are more than Swift app?
Hi @Carlo_Bonzano, the IC8 doesn’t know what is happening in the virtual world (going up a hill in Zwift for example), that’s why they don’t match.
Sorry Laurens but 230 is too good to be true… I would say 150 is more like it.
The bike is inaccurate and will be forever, they clearly cant solve it. The power curve vs resistance is not off by an 20/30 offset in all resistances but off by 30 in some and 100 in others, it turns it impossible to calibrate, and measure improvement unless you use always the same resistance and cadence.
The fact that your IC800 matches the assioma pedals of the other user doesn’t means nothing at all (had a friend with the same bike that also matched that table and he changed bikes to a stage sb20 with real power meter and his FTP changed from approximately 280 to 180). BTW the IC800 is the same exact bike they only changed the name because it was the exact name of a competitor bike.
If you can borrow some pedals from a friend you will see the reality.
My bike at R30 and Cadence80 gives me (measured by assioma pedals) sometimes 220 other 210 other 230, is not that off and I can increase the resistance by one or decrease and solve the problem, I would like it to be always 100% because sometimes in a race I want to ride R30@80 to save power or R45@90 to attack in systematic/measured/methodical way, but I’m just being picky with that.
P.S Still, I like the ride feeling and will keep the bike but wouldn´t use it without external power inside Zwift, the only thing I don´t like on the bike (besides making me use an external PM) is the Q-Factor, it is too wide and hurt the inside of my knees, otherwise top bike when paired with the power pedals.
You need an external Power Meter, pedals or the one in the cranks (less expensive but dont know about accuracy, durability), otherwise (read my last post) you cant fix it. So what you want Zwift to implement (that will never happens) wont work.
Anyone else having issues with sprint power on the Schwinn?
I just got an updated console which seems to have more accurate power than the one I had before (last console read way to high, did an ftp test on my road bike and new console 2 days apart and they were within 5w of each other) but it’s still an issue that sprint power is waaaaaay off.
I have a crank based powermeter on my road bike and can easily hit 1000w+ power but on the Schwinn it seems to peak at 560-600w in a sprint at the end of a race. No way to win any race on Zwift this way if the power readings are so low…
Hey
Exactly the same.
First I had issues getting too much power early on, then they ‘updated’ firmware - which essentially changed it to make it less sporadic early one but then peaks the sprint at around 650w. Basically it makes it impossible uphills mainly.
As I’ve said before it’s a great fun bike but it’s not suitable to get accurate power results. The problem I have is riding with other friends that have the same bike, and our power readings don’t match even though we have the same ‘updated’ console. There’s basically a huge discrepancy in the output and whatever the Dutch tech team are Called, something beginning with N or E, just shrug their shoulders and make excuses.
I’d rather have consistency in the first instance, but it’s a fun bike and good as a quick trainer.
Nautilus shipped me one of the new consoles that they claim has solved the power output issue. I will report back after I test it out and compare its readings to the assiomas I have on the bike. I’m not holding my breath.
Haha yeah I don’t think they are capable of matching power outputs. But thanks a update would be good
Hi everyone, I haven’t looked at this discussion for a while. Just wondering if the issue with the inaccurate readings with the Schwinn IC8 has been resolved? If they advertise they work with these apps, that should mean more than simply connect with them.
Hey John,
haven’t found anything on this so I took the risk and bought an ic8 a month ago and started zwifting. I never cared about watts when cycling outdoors. But the numbers of the ic8 in Zwift look good to me. When I do 80% I end up at 330 watts. I am fit but not trained. So avg. 2w/kg when sweating seems valid to me.
Hope that helps.
Cheers
What do you mean with 80%? Are 100% 412,5 Watts? That is definitely too much for “fit but not trained”.
The way I look at it is that the Schwinn IC8 isn’t a turbo trainer - it’s a fixed wheel bike meant to be used in gyms and homes. I’d say also for a different type of training.
It’s a huge shame that zwift doesnt offer compatibility with these bikes, especially as schwinn advertise as much - even if it was just for separate events.
I guess for me it’s great that the bike can at least be used with Zwift and training programs - as it would be a bit boring otherwise - and Peleton isn’t my thing.
It is unsurprising that Zwift would try to do anything more than allow these bikes to be connected to the app, as their power readings are inconsistent from one another and can easily be modified.
My experience with Schwinn IC8, and their tech support, Customer Service at Nautilus Fitness International BV, is that it has presented lots of different issues with the readings - it has even shown that there is huge discrepancies in consistency in their readings across their own bikes and meters - even with their up to date firmware. Having tied two bikes with the same settings, same firmware, same details inputted after speaking to support, the readings maintained some consistency when at Tempo, however when dialing up the power the readings were incredibly different. The issue is with Schwinn.
I’ve posted a lot on here and said the same thing.
Schwinn need to sort out their power readings so the bikes sold have the same readings. That they are consistent. They should either offer support to modify consoles, or provide customers new monitors. The app should provide updates and support. But at this stage support has told me that the settings are as close as they will ever get - which is incredibly frustrating.
It would be great that once Schwinn sort their act out that Zwift could offer races for people on similar bikes - not sure this would even work. But you have to acknowledge that these bikes are entirely different in look, feel and performance than a turbo trainer.
They are a good bike. Nice strong sturdy good looking at home spin bike. The readings are consistent with the bike and the user - which for me at least shows my progress and training. Meaning you can use it to get fit at home and not join a gym.
Again, The main issue that two exact same bikes with the same firmware can be different, rendering it impossible to race against friends that have the same bike.
It’s a real shame the Schwinn don’t seem to be doing enough to improve software - their own app, and also not make it easier for users to improve settings. It’s all a bit out of date. So it relies on using other third party apps.
Everyone using these bikes that are saying that their readings seem close - get on turbo trainer, on your bike, with a power meter, and try and keep 300-350watts for more than 15 minutes on a Zwift flat especially if you are a lightly trained cyclist. And then compare the work on Schwinn. Also try the same at hitting higher power, sprints, etc. Do a few FTPs and compare. And if you can’t do that - or you don’t care just accept that your bike probably isn’t correct, that it’s a spin bike, and that’s fine - that it’s still going to get you fitter both on and off the bike.
It doesn’t really matter if it is a spinning bike or a recumbent or a single speed or a carbon bike, it is all about the accuracy of the power measurement.
I have done rides on my wife’s spinning bike using my Assioma power pedals and it is the same as using my smart trainer except I have to adjust resistance like I would change gears. (the spinning bike is a old Gym bike with no electronics, I installed a stages crank so she can have real power numbers)
Just wanted to say that the readings on my new ic8 seems to be ok - not super accurate - but I think good enough if you don’t want to spend to munch on new gear and still have the option to do different apps than Zwift. On an amateur level I am happy with it and the results I make on events are ok I assume (I never raced).
So 250+ w is good travelling pace for me. 400+ w is sprinting for me. I won’t last for long. But yes, if you go into Zwifting only there is definitely gear to buy to get more accurate power readings and options on a controllable trainer.
So for anyone still interested in this thread I thought I’d give an update to LBreezy (cheers by the way) power pedal settings for comparison with the schwinn ic8. I bought my schwinn in July and was also concerned I wasn’t getting accurate output and was considering getting some power pedals. Before I did though I thought I’d compare against LBreezy’s power pedal readings below and the results (in brackets) was fairly accurate. A couple of slight differences at low and high resistance but not enough to fork out £500 for power pedals. I’m not really concerned about racing and I am mainly working on improving myself so as far as I’m concerned my schwinn does the job. It’s QC10 console. Schwinn results in brackets below. Hope it’s useful.
LBreezys post:
Here is a power output chart which shows the readings from my Assioma Duo power meter pedals, using various resistance levels and RPMs on the Nautilus bike. Hopefully this will help you figure out whether your own bike is currently giving an accurate output, and whether calibrating may help.
Resistance: 15
60rpm: 70w. (82w)
80rpm: 115w. (133w)
100rpm: 170w. (194w)
Resistance: 25
60rpm: 115w. (120)
80rpm: 185w. (190)
100rpm: 270w. (277)
Resistance: 35
60rpm: 160w. (155)
80rpm: 260w. (260)
100rpm: 360w. (365)
Resistance: 45
60rpm: 200w. (200)
80rpm: 325w. (315)
100rpm: 450w. (445)
Resistance: 55
60rpm: 230w. (240)
80rpm: 375w. (375)
100rpm: 530w. (525)
Resistance: 65
60rpm: 265w. (285)
80rpm: 445w. (435)
100rpm: 615w. (605)
Resistance: 75
60rpm: 307w. (320)
70rpm: 400w. (405)
80rpm: 485w. (470)
Resistance 85
60rpm: 360w. (365)
70rpm: 460w. (470)
80rpm: 563w. (540)
I just received my IC4 a few weeks ago and attempted to replicate your test and experienced very similar results. I’ve been using Zwift for a little over a week and by no means am I feeling super human on the IC4. I’m a novice rider and a bit heavier at 97 kg and got an FTP score of 210. That seems very realistic for me. Schwinn must’ve fixed the power output issue with the newer models they are shipping.