When Llama releases a power meter review and it's over 20 minutes, you know it's gonna be a good trip down the rabbit hole on something that's mostly likely rubbish.
@@gplamaleft field question but having trouble connecting DA9100 power meter. Just got a new/old ex demo and has said power crank, guessing it been sitting around a few years so gave it a charge and so far all good. Lost Wahoo so using old Garmin 500, it says it is calibrated but will not display any power readings, been doing zero offset thing and all that. Have noticed their is no frame magnet as this bike was built as a demo and having power connected wasnt a priority. Will the 500 edge accept a bluetooth powermeter and do I need the magnet????
@@DavidStacey-tx7on Possibly needs a magnet. You'll have to excuse me from digging into this and providing a more detailed answer. If Shimano were a little more supportive of this channel, I'd put in the extra yards for queries like this. At present they won't even reply to my emails. (not your issue, I understand, but it does make things hard providing ad-hoc support for their products).
@@gplama appreciate responding so quick, maybe Shimano could take notice. Their etube app is a mess, really weird to navigate. They had best be careful with SRAM expected to release a new RED group it may damage them even more, after these power issues that seems fine in their eyes, just like their 10yr run of cranks🤷🤷🤷🤷🤷. If SRAM nail the front mech issues of old they might be in some strife
@@DavidStacey-tx7on magnet is mandatory for the power. ( power = cadence*force ) they use magnet for the cadence. so.. not an option running without. Perhaps in future, as pioneer did, they release a firmware and not need the magnet anymore.
Used to work for the British Standards Institute, testing electrical components (plus, switches, thermostats, etc). Sample size of 3 was perfect, left no room for the manufacturers to argue that out of a product run of thousands, we had somehow managed to find the only ones with flaws. Two failures out of the three was enough to condemn the whole batch.
Shimano needs a new head of engineering for their software/hardware. Between this, quality of their mobile apps, the recent ransomware attack, curious how a multi-billion dollar company manages to be this inept
The ACCC here in Australia would roast them if there was a case put to them about this meter. (The ACCC is our government consumer watchdog, and they are good!)
The ACCC is a lame pathetic bunch. How has Shimano gotten away with the bone breaking, life altering, busted crank arm debacle? For what 7 years? A clue might be ACCC's lame response to why they hadn't acted. It went something like this: It's up to the manufacturer (not us!) To upload notifications about any known faults (which were not interested in) and upload their recall notice. I swear to God this is their attitude. Then the product liability claimant is all on their own as they face up to foreign corporations and the PL laws that were designed by our low life leaders to expressly protect them. (Let's keep the donations flowing! Yummy, we just love those hedge funds) You are naive @gplama
What I took out of this is why the heck Shimano would not send you a power meter with the new firmware to test it before releasing it to the masses. The fact that you had to personally buy this meter blows my mind. From the whole of the cycling community - Thankyou.
My solution to the issue was simple. At some point I just stopped waiting for Shimano to fix the problem (back when the first DA with power meter came out) and bought Rotor crankset with P2M power meter. I've been happily using the set since with no issues and accuracy as expected.
Same here. Using the Type S in combination with a Rotor 3D+ since 2015 without one single issue. Could not be happier...literally worth every penny and I would 100% buy P2M again. Not even talking about the fact that the whole set including cranks and chainrings was less than 1'000$!
Fantastic test without the front derailleur on😃. I'm probably wrong, but it seems shimano has 2 straightforward things to do to get roughly on track from that. It looks like the deviation was approximately double when physically in the big ring, but in the small on the bottle cage derailleur. Almost as if someone subtracted where they should have added in the power calculations for the software. Along with setting the correct software ring to match the correct physical ring. I wouldn't be surprised if its a 5 min fix for them to get into the ball park. Keep geeking out, and that was a great test hack. I think you virtually solved shimano's issue lol.🙂
Thank you for nerding out to this degree. I work at a shop and I often tell people as much as I can in person about various products and the experiences can get with them, but I almost always refer them to your videos if they'd like a more indepth and proper explanation. I've been watching you for years on here and I will keep watching as long as you keep creating. Thanks again. Also, please monitor audio levels. You don't normally have issues with this but on this video. At 3:34 the audio level drops so low that I had to bring my volume up to still be able to hear you, and then at 9:24 the little derailleur noise was loud enough actually blew out the windows in my living room, reset my neighbor's pacemaker and yet still wasn't as loud as a Campag EPS front derailleur. But please do double check these levels before posting! Thanks again!
No idea how the world's biggest bike component manufacturer simply cannot get this right. If I was Shimano I'd be completely embarrassed by results like these.
Hi Shane, As always, quite fascinating data and analysis. As I recall from one of Keith Wakeham's videos, this power meter's inherent design limitations would suggest that acheiving accurate results most likely is not possible. I'm actually surprised that Shimano continues to attemp to patch this unit insted of quietly removong it from the marketplace.
Check out my reviews of the Stages solution for the R9200 & R8100 drive side cranks (linked in the video description). They've put the gauges on the outside of the crank arm which appears to work very well.
Great Review Shane! I won’t be updating the firmware now. I don’t use them anyway, but just sometimes to counter check my Faveros. So surprisingly my dura ace was about 5w higher when I first bought them, recently since 6 months probably after an update they have been quite accurate for me but were reporting about 3-5w lower which is fine. I guess now they have totally messed up this with the latest firmware.
It's Magene PES 505 PM for me with AB oval chainrings instead my Tiagra crankset (it's even lighter). Investing in powermetar and training instead blingy stuff. As I am on budget I thank Heaven for GP Lama.
Mate, well done. I've said this for ages, these power meters are affected by chainline bending strains. Which is now why they're using a chainline lookup table and bodge fix from the rear mech position. Amazed they actually admit this. Time to start completely afresh. Didn't they acquire Pioneer? Were those numbers junk too?
Pioneer also had right side issues. It was one of the better meters in the 8000/9100 series, still not something I could use with confidence to compare other meters with.
Given the differences between big and small ring, there's obviously some asymmetric crank leg twisting forces also distorting that unnecessary integrated spider - which, remember uses GLUE as a structural part to transfer torque!?!?. I therefore come back to my comment from your earlier shimano power meter video. The integrated spider is ridiculous, especially since the Shimano comparable XT/XTR/SLX mountain bike groupset uses DIRECT-MOUNT chainrings and came out years before the 12 speed road stuff. Direct mount chainrings completely separate the right crank leg twisting force from chainring and is the reason that SRM, Rotor, Power2max and SRAM/Quarq don't have these problems. I'm more than happy with my p2m estimated L/R balance and no accuracy issues.
I am getting similar vibes to the crank arms crisis that Shimano is currently going through in conjunction with the Shimano Power Meters not reporting accurately. At least the problem with the crank arms has been sorted out (at least to our knowledge) and no longer being sold whereas they still continue to sell faulty power meters.
Shimano has done some good things such as 105 Di2, but they seem to be lacking in many other areas. Still no 12 speed Di2 GRX gravel or XTR MTB. Still no direct mount like SRAM Transmission. Shimano used to dominate road, but SRAM now is taking a bigger share of victories.
The last left/right power graph was not fully clear to me but looked to me almost that in summary total power was off by about -5%, and right side wrong by about -10% and that in fact the correction for big/small chainring did correct that problem in itself and maybe other improvements to make it more accurate which make the left side more or less ok now on both rings (?) but that just a general correction for the right side should be added. If that gets a plus of about 10%, then it should already look much better also bringing the total plus 5%. It maybe is coincedence that the correction for small/big done reversed is about the same as the increase correction necessary for the rightside to get the total power correct which is still missing (but in total divided over both sides so half of it this also has an effect of approx. 5 percent like the small/big correction). Although this all still sounds like correcting the error with an error which already then certainly is the case for the big/small chainring difference… Wait for firmware 4.2.1 or rather 4.3.0 since correction right side is a different one? ;-) or can they just adjust that in the calibration stage (software)?
Interesting - I will re-take my measures some day... I did a test myself a month ago comparing Assioma Duo, Direto XR and Shimano Dura-Ace R-9250P and I was in 1.5% tolerance for all tests I did (indoor and outdoor)... After applying firmware change what I can say is that the power balance measure improved
You also mean the right side power is correct for you? I also applied the firmware update but for me the right side still is clearly too low unfortunately.
Excellent reporting! Shimano needs a whipping! I love my single sided stages, wild that my $250 power meter can be better than one that’s 10 years newer from the OEM.
Well at least it seems fairly consistent over your tests and different powers. If they just up it another 5-6% they would be quite near the supposed power reading. Maybe in the next update then. But maybe its a quality issue of the crank itself, as some other users report correct readings.
As you stated it's strange they should account for the gear because the power is measured BEFORE the gear system is involved 🤷♂ Once you got the force applied to the sensor (basically at the crank in this case) and the vector direction you can calculate the torque and convert to power. Anyway, they messed up a lot
Presumably there's an issue with the accuracy of the actual force sensors that results in different measured force for the same actual pedal force depending on which ring you're in hence the need for the hack.
I still think Shimano is missing the mark by not bringing a power pedal to market. I used to love Shimano pedals before switching to Garmin Vector 3. Shimano pedals are smooth and light and last forever (unlike their cranksets, of course).
From parts availability, massive failures to read the market direction, getting absolutely smashed by SRAM innovation, and even botching nearly every new electrical/electronic component for a decade ... I'm kind of feeling like Shimano is off track. A 40% drop in profit this year is largely attributed to bike industry stumbles, but I also see another trend. In the mid to high end consumer market MTB models with Shimano are largely offered as the "budget" option. Luddites will scoff, but most new buyers that are "moving up" have electronic shifting and possibly a power meter on their wish list. I hope they prove me wrong, but I think this is going to get worse before it gets better.
Rode with a mate for the first time since update and was wondering why I am suffer so much with low power reading for the 4 hour ride. Mine PM9200 has gone from 3% over to 3-5% under since the recent update. I share the frustration Shane and wish I can get a refund for the damn thing. Thank you for your vids and testing to benefit the cycling community.
It’s consistent with reads but consistently wrong unfortunately so nothing new from Shimano. Thanks for posting this. You’re a go to guy on these for me and we always appreciate your efforts. Well done Shane. 😞💯🚴♂️🤷♂️
@@gplama like you say 4i works … I discussed this with my bike dealer last year and I told him it’s consistent but consistently wrong as I said above. I told him Shimano would bring out an update to compensate for the errors which is what you discovered and they can’t even get that right. I’ve moved to SRAM now and Favero pedals on TT bike as I prefer the Shimano TT group 💯 thank you 🙏 again. Keep up the great work and it saves us a bunch of head scratching.
Validates my choice of SRAM and Quark! Plus why chose Shimano anyway if the Chain Ring may delaminate 😂. Certainly not because ProTeams use them, why do they use something that does not work, for them accurate power measurement is fundamental 🤷🏻♂️.
Having just got a bike with red axs, I'd say Shimano offers better braking, massively better front shifting and slightly better rear shifting. I agree with the quark power meters being good though!
My Vector pedals have something like 50,000 miles. Been submerged countless times. Had some teething issues with the battery holder, but Garmin solves that with free parts fast, which was YEARS ago.
Can Shimano just disable the drivetrain side of the power meter? As an 8100P owner I'd much rather have fairly accurate one-sided power than inaccurate dual-sided.
Can you measure power accurately when your crank has delaminated and snapped. Shimano need to do much better than they are at the moment. My 26 year old Shimano RX100 cable shifting plus a pair of Assioma Duos just work. Thanks for the interesting and informative content. Your videos are always worth watching.
My Assioma pedals are still going strong year after year. I can flip them from bike to bike in minutes. They were cheap to buy. I see no reason to not just use these, at least for how I use them.
If they are trying to compensate for 1 thing (lg/sm chainring), wouldn't they need to compensate for all variables? Q-factor/number of teeth on each chainring/chainline/chain length/cassette teeth, Crank arm length, etc.
as a Shimano system user on all bkes I don't know which power meter to get for road bike. Assioma DUO Shimano spindles seems like the best bet (for dual-sided) until Shimano develops a proper spider-based power meter, as you allude (buying SRM e.g.). But given they'll be spending all their money on lawsuits for the foreseeable it might be a while.
I'd love to see some Shimano powermeter SPD SL pedals. I think if you get that working, you're also free to design cranks and stuff as you want. And, obviously, you could use them whereever you want. As an upgrade as well as on multiple bikes.
I have given up on hoping they would get it right I had the earlier one that always over read, all over the place and lost pairing. I now use Rotor cranks reliable and pretty accurate I would never waste my time with them again thanks for wasting your time so I don't have to.
Thanks for such a deep look into the inaccuracies of the Shimano powermeters!! Not sure if i'm alone here, but i really like them. The problem Shimano is trying to solve with this firmware update reminds me of a problem certain small spider powermeter company said they were experiencing: the 1x version was working fine, but when used as a 2x crankset they were seeing different offsets (big ring vs small ring) which led to innacuracies similar to what you are seeing with Shimano PMs. In my opinion, Shimano is trying to design those powermeters with a typical japanese mindset and that could take them a really long time to figure out by themselves. And they are in no rush because those cranks are selling and, more importantly, some bike brands keep buying them to put on their bikes Someone from their EU headquarters need to educate them on why it's OK to hire an outsider with a background on making accurate powermeters
I hear that the Japanese mindset thing is real. I'm told by an insider that US, AU and EU reps from Trek, Specialized and Giant were desperately screaming at Shimano Japan for almost 5 years at how wrong their 11-speed MTB groupset design was (basically an evolved 2x road bike flat bar design), but were completely ignored. Trek completely stopped selling shimano drivetrains on their Mid-high mtb's for almost 2 years, with Specialized and Giant mostly doing the same. THEN Shimano actually started listening... The 12 speed MTB stuff that followed was basically identical in concept to SRAM's 1x specific design.
That's an inspired workaround, Shane. But holy hell, this might be the best reality show without the pre-scripted drama to make it interesting. I love tech, but I'd be lying if I said I understood even a small portion of the nuances that go into it. What I don't get is that this is their third go with this thing and it still sucks. How does it still suck? The only thing I can think is that the device or machine or whatever they use to confirm that these power meters are accurate....well, they built that, too? Just wow.
Maybe Shimano should start thinking about outsourcing their power meter division to someone who has the know-how and resources to make a good product. They are the very best in the world for group sets but they are just drowning in the power meter arena. Food for thought...
It's impressive how many times they've managed to get this wrong. I will say though that the shape of their power graphs does at least seem consistent with the other two meters, just with a bad offset/calibration. There's no ovious drift, lag, or other major errors. Seems like it wouldn't be hard to fix that and get an accurate meter.
It's odd though that if it were simply a matter of adding/subtracting a fixed offset that would be an easy fix and something you'd expect Shimano to fix in a minute. Perhaps the error is related to the rider weight as well - clearly there's an issue with the strain guages.
Really enjoying going down the rabbit hole of your PM reviews, Shane. Thought I was going for the Favero pedals, though like a moth to a flame I keep coming back to the Rally RK. Problem is, I have top-end Look Keo Carbon Blade Ceramic Ti on my main bike, and Look Keo Carbon Blade on the other, so it feels like a waste to have to bin one set or the other to install PM pedals on whichever bike I choose to ride. Based on your reviews, I'm now leaning towards the Inpeak crank-based PM, and I could probably fit both bikes for a comparable cost to one set of pedals. Shimano Ultegra 8100 on one bike, SRAM Force (10 sp) on the other.
Stages has been great for me other than the new seal I had to buy. Somehow it is so thin it gets baked in the heat and becomes oblong so it doesn't fit in the groove anymore. If they ever come out with a new version, I hope they fix this. Not the best for water intrusion either. I hate changing the battery tbh but at least its accurate. My Direto was doing some weird things though. I was in the Zwift jungle and not sure if its the game or the trainer but power kept slowly dropping sorta like a yoyo. I was getting some random command prompt screens flickering too which I assume is just the game loading more world data. Made me very nervous that it might crash during the race. I recommend everybody zwift racing get a battery backup
At least it's coming up to summer down there. God that was torturous. The only solution I can see is a power meter specific spider, which considering all they're doing atm is slapping onto the current crankset isn't really a big ask. Sorry Shimano your star is really falling in the last few years inc the 105 12 spd debacle. Taking your long-term customers for granted just isn't going to wash with the current state of the cycling market.
I know Shimano sponsors a lot of teams (including the powermeter) but I don’t understand how professional riders want to ride and train with this Shimano powermeter. The 9200P powermeter came with my new SL8 but i sold it for a 4iiii GEN 3+ left only. Compared to the power numbers from my wahoo kickr v6 the less expensive and left only 4iiii powermeter comes close to my kickr numbers. The shimano 9200P? Sometimes 20 watts less and sometimes 20 watts higher…
There's a simple answer. Money. Professional teams only exist through sponsorship money. They're a rolling advertisement. With the exception of a few alternative fund sources from wealthy individuals... even then, they're on sponsored equipment. It's 100% clear that the Shimano power meter has issues. Reporting on this equipment and how it performs in my standard test protocol has resulted in a VERY strained relationship with Shimano (read: No relationship at all. They won't reply to my queries). This new firmware has been out for three months now with NO OTHER technical cycling reviewers covering it. Why? It's risky to publish this content. They'll solve this problem one day. Likely by producing a REAL power meter and not a lick-and-stick aftermarket modification to their standard cranks. Shimano should acquire SRM or Power2Max and sort their shit out once and for all. /rant.
What happened to Shimano? They used to be at the top of the game and it's been going downhill for a while now. The faulty disc brake rotors that delaminate, the Ultegra cranks that fall apart and the way the recall has been handled and now this. Either they make some drastic changes or they'll be gone in a few years.
The only thing that will get Shimano to respond. Class action lawsuit. Here's hoping someone gets one started. It's an easy win... That'll be Shimano's 2nd lawsuit based around their terrible cranks. You'd think they'd learn.
Thanks Shane, amazes me that they still can’t get this right. Feels like they’re 10 years behind everyone else. Plenty of companies within their grasp they could acquire to buy in the expertise and technology they need. Begs the question why they’re not doing their own testing before curling another turd into the market.
It seems a scaling factor might fix this issue, perhaps Garmin or Wahoo could add a scaling option for Shimano PM users. On SRMs something similar was possible by changing the slope on a Garmin or PC head units.
Shimano didn't care about near on 3 million faulty cranks over 11 years so it will take a while for the feedback loop to ramp up on a relatively small number of PM's.😢
The idea to use the position of the front derailleur to improve the algorithm proves to me that shimano have no idea how to design and produce an accurate power meter. A power meter should just make use of a strain gauge and the deflection determine the force applied. What difference does the position of the chain make ? Is the offset of the force to the strain gauge the reason for inaccurate reading ? Is the crank deflecting (twisting) that much to cause a false reading ??! Really ?
It's such a bodge and I really don't like Shimano decided to approach it like this, further more not to improve anything by doing so. Or maybe they did? When looking at the data with front mech off, it seems like scaling up just the right side by a few percent could get it to read "accurately" with how it is supposed to work with the data hacked based on front mech position. Or am I misseeing something? Anyway, thankful my new bike didn't come equipped with this and that my Assioma DUOs are already in the post.
Would you do an update / recommendation on the Shimano recall when you have a power meter? I have an Ultegra 8000 and Duraace 9100, both with Stages dual sided power meters. As you know Stages is not answering phones and who knows what will happen with company assets. What should one do if they wanted a dual sided crank based power meter? Maybe wait for Stages technology to reappear in some other brand through a buyout, or try to get the Shimano power meter and hope they fix the firmware accuracy in the future?
Not sure on that one. Stages were the only company who solved the right side issue (that statement is also based on my data from the latest 4iiii dual sided too). An easier solution would be to use a standard crank and look at power pedals.
It's pretty bad when Magene can basically "do" a Shimano crank and PM combo, in all aspects except looks better than Shimano for around 40% of the price.
What if you don’t have a shimano 81xx/91xx di2 drivetrain? Pretty excited that I’ll soon be shifting from an inaccurate 9100 powermeter that is getting replaced under the recall, to a less accurate 9200 model 🤭
@@danaponik5276 I like their Di2 road groupsets. I also have a GRX gravel and XTR MTB. Those all work well too. Once Shimano finally produce a meter that works, all this mess goes away.
Such a good review of the problems with the Shimano power meter. Love his persistence! On a slightly related note, does anyone know how to get a video screen capture of a Garmin 1040 like Shane has done at 6:52, for example? I've been wanting to capture a video of my Garmin 1040, but haven't figured it out. Certainly not as easy as it is with smartphone apps.
If Shimano bought SRM I’d be worried that specialty products like their track offerings would no longer be manufactured, as the global market is way smaller than for road.
Hmm after trying to reply looks like my comment on the experience after the upgrade of the firmware on my 9200P Crankset got lost. So new attempt: I did an own created Zwift structured workout and compared my powermeter values to my Wahoo Kickr Core and looked pretty consistent with having -2.5% lower values. Problem mainly in right side, when they would be +5% then pretty much ok. In total avg 196.5 vs 201W and weighted 223.5 vs 228.5 and maximum 552 vs 547. 5min 200W section gave 197 vs 201W For reference I also have my dc rainmaker dataset but maybe adding that link is causing my comments to be removed (?) (pretty annoying both my replies are gone).
When Llama releases a power meter review and it's over 20 minutes, you know it's gonna be a good trip down the rabbit hole on something that's mostly likely rubbish.
🤣🤣🤣
@@gplamaleft field question but having trouble connecting DA9100 power meter. Just got a new/old ex demo and has said power crank, guessing it been sitting around a few years so gave it a charge and so far all good. Lost Wahoo so using old Garmin 500, it says it is calibrated but will not display any power readings, been doing zero offset thing and all that. Have noticed their is no frame magnet as this bike was built as a demo and having power connected wasnt a priority. Will the 500 edge accept a bluetooth powermeter and do I need the magnet????
@@DavidStacey-tx7on Possibly needs a magnet. You'll have to excuse me from digging into this and providing a more detailed answer. If Shimano were a little more supportive of this channel, I'd put in the extra yards for queries like this. At present they won't even reply to my emails. (not your issue, I understand, but it does make things hard providing ad-hoc support for their products).
@@gplama appreciate responding so quick, maybe Shimano could take notice. Their etube app is a mess, really weird to navigate. They had best be careful with SRAM expected to release a new RED group it may damage them even more, after these power issues that seems fine in their eyes, just like their 10yr run of cranks🤷🤷🤷🤷🤷. If SRAM nail the front mech issues of old they might be in some strife
@@DavidStacey-tx7on magnet is mandatory for the power. ( power = cadence*force ) they use magnet for the cadence. so.. not an option running without. Perhaps in future, as pioneer did, they release a firmware and not need the magnet anymore.
Fool me once, shame on Shimano.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
Fool me three times, quality content!
The fools get fooled again - George Bush Jr
@@mjokffsgfjs such eloquence
Shane, thanks for the work you do in holding bike companies accountable.
Used to work for the British Standards Institute, testing electrical components (plus, switches, thermostats, etc). Sample size of 3 was perfect, left no room for the manufacturers to argue that out of a product run of thousands, we had somehow managed to find the only ones with flaws. Two failures out of the three was enough to condemn the whole batch.
Shimano needs a new head of engineering for their software/hardware. Between this, quality of their mobile apps, the recent ransomware attack, curious how a multi-billion dollar company manages to be this inept
They are all that way - the bigger a company gets the less they spend on basic shit.
They could easily buy Xcadey, sigey or some of these small companies which have good power meters?
Well what could possible force Shimano fix what's broken for years probably? The threat of a Class Action lawsuit. It's false advertising...
The ACCC here in Australia would roast them if there was a case put to them about this meter. (The ACCC is our government consumer watchdog, and they are good!)
@@gplamaI thought they're a toothless tiger
The ACCC is a lame pathetic bunch. How has Shimano gotten away with the bone breaking, life altering, busted crank arm debacle? For what 7 years? A clue might be ACCC's lame response to why they hadn't acted. It went something like this: It's up to the manufacturer (not us!) To upload notifications about any known faults (which were not interested in) and upload their recall notice.
I swear to God this is their attitude.
Then the product liability claimant is all on their own as they face up to foreign corporations and the PL laws that were designed by our low life leaders to expressly protect them.
(Let's keep the donations flowing! Yummy, we just love those hedge funds)
You are naive @gplama
What I took out of this is why the heck Shimano would not send you a power meter with the new firmware to test it before releasing it to the masses. The fact that you had to personally buy this meter blows my mind. From the whole of the cycling community - Thankyou.
My solution to the issue was simple. At some point I just stopped waiting for Shimano to fix the problem (back when the first DA with power meter came out) and bought Rotor crankset with P2M power meter. I've been happily using the set since with no issues and accuracy as expected.
Same here. Using the Type S in combination with a Rotor 3D+ since 2015 without one single issue. Could not be happier...literally worth every penny and I would 100% buy P2M again. Not even talking about the fact that the whole set including cranks and chainrings was less than 1'000$!
Same: P2m NgEco with Rotor 24mm axle and Aldhu/Vegast cranks. Works perfectly.
I am quite impressed by Shimano consistently getting it so wrong.
Fantastic test without the front derailleur on😃. I'm probably wrong, but it seems shimano has 2 straightforward things to do to get roughly on track from that. It looks like the deviation was approximately double when physically in the big ring, but in the small on the bottle cage derailleur. Almost as if someone subtracted where they should have added in the power calculations for the software. Along with setting the correct software ring to match the correct physical ring. I wouldn't be surprised if its a 5 min fix for them to get into the ball park.
Keep geeking out, and that was a great test hack. I think you virtually solved shimano's issue lol.🙂
Thank you for nerding out to this degree. I work at a shop and I often tell people as much as I can in person about various products and the experiences can get with them, but I almost always refer them to your videos if they'd like a more indepth and proper explanation. I've been watching you for years on here and I will keep watching as long as you keep creating. Thanks again.
Also, please monitor audio levels. You don't normally have issues with this but on this video. At 3:34 the audio level drops so low that I had to bring my volume up to still be able to hear you, and then at 9:24 the little derailleur noise was loud enough actually blew out the windows in my living room, reset my neighbor's pacemaker and yet still wasn't as loud as a Campag EPS front derailleur. But please do double check these levels before posting!
Thanks again!
Apologies for the audio. I noted the issues when it was processed on TH-cam but didn’t have time to tonight to go back and fix them.
@@gplama no worries. Thanks for the reply!
We went from mechanical goodness, with great powermeters to this faff. This is just crazy. Thx for taking one for the team Llama!
Yeah, this smacks of getting the original design choice badly wrong. Rarely worthwhile persevering with that.
I obviously need to test my 9200P more, but the first impression last week was that it was looking better with the firmware update.
Why did you buy it in the first place 💀
@@rein2523 probably it came with the bike
No idea how the world's biggest bike component manufacturer simply cannot get this right. If I was Shimano I'd be completely embarrassed by results like these.
Stages is the only one to get for new Shimano cranks. My Dura Ace Left / Right crankset works great!!!
Hi Shane,
As always, quite fascinating data and analysis. As I recall from one of Keith Wakeham's videos, this power meter's inherent design limitations would suggest that acheiving accurate results most likely is not possible. I'm actually surprised that Shimano continues to attemp to patch this unit insted of quietly removong it from the marketplace.
Check out my reviews of the Stages solution for the R9200 & R8100 drive side cranks (linked in the video description). They've put the gauges on the outside of the crank arm which appears to work very well.
@@gplamais stages solution copyrighted or trademarked in such a way as to prevent shimano to implementing something similar?
Really would love to see the unrated version of this! 😂 Must be the parent in you that gives you the patience for this exercise. Great stuff Shane.
Love these videos, you tell them, in this day an age you’d expect more from Shimano which I’ve been using for over 35 yrs with delight.:-).
i am so sorry for what Shimano did to you. thank you for doing this, show the world.
Great Review Shane! I won’t be updating the firmware now. I don’t use them anyway, but just sometimes to counter check my Faveros. So surprisingly my dura ace was about 5w higher when I first bought them, recently since 6 months probably after an update they have been quite accurate for me but were reporting about 3-5w lower which is fine. I guess now they have totally messed up this with the latest firmware.
It's Magene PES 505 PM for me with AB oval chainrings instead my Tiagra crankset (it's even lighter). Investing in powermetar and training instead blingy stuff. As I am on budget I thank Heaven for GP Lama.
Thank you Shane new subscriber here - great review backed up by good data. I look forward to catching up with old posts and to the future with new.
New indoor trainer that you can't talk about, now you've got my attention 🧐
Great analysis! Love the data dive. Glad i have the 4iii on my crankset.
Mate, well done. I've said this for ages, these power meters are affected by chainline bending strains. Which is now why they're using a chainline lookup table and bodge fix from the rear mech position. Amazed they actually admit this. Time to start completely afresh. Didn't they acquire Pioneer? Were those numbers junk too?
Pioneer also had right side issues. It was one of the better meters in the 8000/9100 series, still not something I could use with confidence to compare other meters with.
Given the differences between big and small ring, there's obviously some asymmetric crank leg twisting forces also distorting that unnecessary integrated spider - which, remember uses GLUE as a structural part to transfer torque!?!?. I therefore come back to my comment from your earlier shimano power meter video. The integrated spider is ridiculous, especially since the Shimano comparable XT/XTR/SLX mountain bike groupset uses DIRECT-MOUNT chainrings and came out years before the 12 speed road stuff. Direct mount chainrings completely separate the right crank leg twisting force from chainring and is the reason that SRM, Rotor, Power2max and SRAM/Quarq don't have these problems. I'm more than happy with my p2m estimated L/R balance and no accuracy issues.
I am getting similar vibes to the crank arms crisis that Shimano is currently going through in conjunction with the Shimano Power Meters not reporting accurately. At least the problem with the crank arms has been sorted out (at least to our knowledge) and no longer being sold whereas they still continue to sell faulty power meters.
Thank you sir. I was seriously considering this power meter because of the Shimano name.
Brilliant review, again. Thanks Shane for flushing rubbish like this out….👍👍👍
Shimano has done some good things such as 105 Di2, but they seem to be lacking in many other areas. Still no 12 speed Di2 GRX gravel or XTR MTB. Still no direct mount like SRAM Transmission. Shimano used to dominate road, but SRAM now is taking a bigger share of victories.
The last left/right power graph was not fully clear to me but looked to me almost that in summary total power was off by about -5%, and right side wrong by about -10% and that in fact the correction for big/small chainring did correct that problem in itself and maybe other improvements to make it more accurate which make the left side more or less ok now on both rings (?) but that just a general correction for the right side should be added.
If that gets a plus of about 10%, then it should already look much better also bringing the total plus 5%.
It maybe is coincedence that the correction for small/big done reversed is about the same as the increase correction necessary for the rightside to get the total power correct which is still missing (but in total divided over both sides so half of it this also has an effect of approx. 5 percent like the small/big correction).
Although this all still sounds like correcting the error with an error which already then certainly is the case for the big/small chainring difference…
Wait for firmware 4.2.1 or rather 4.3.0 since correction right side is a different one? ;-) or can they just adjust that in the calibration stage (software)?
Interesting - I will re-take my measures some day... I did a test myself a month ago comparing Assioma Duo, Direto XR and Shimano Dura-Ace R-9250P and I was in 1.5% tolerance for all tests I did (indoor and outdoor)... After applying firmware change what I can say is that the power balance measure improved
You also mean the right side power is correct for you? I also applied the firmware update but for me the right side still is clearly too low unfortunately.
@@akampgerard I looked into overall measure from both sides and that one was in tolerance all the time...
@@volodaXX you mean from both sides seperately right? So left/right balance also ok?
So do you mean you were within 1.5% for both chainrings? Would be great to see more data on this
The most anticipated GPLlama video of the season.
Usually we have to wait until Sundays to get a roast, but this week it was served early and seasoned with a generous quantity of both salt and pepper.
Excellent reporting! Shimano needs a whipping! I love my single sided stages, wild that my $250 power meter can be better than one that’s 10 years newer from the OEM.
Well, looks like I can be (still) very really happy with my Quarq DFour91 from 2018. Not outages at all, one battery swap a year.
Well at least it seems fairly consistent over your tests and different powers. If they just up it another 5-6% they would be quite near the supposed power reading. Maybe in the next update then. But maybe its a quality issue of the crank itself, as some other users report correct readings.
When someone wins a Zwift race with this power meter, they really deserve a big kudos
Nothing compares to the zero percent accuracy of my IQ2 pedals.
I just saw a pair of thise on eBay last week. I didn't know they were even a "thing".
No contest with No Limits, total garbage even when given away
Shane is still the man!!!! If his review is not favorable then there are real problems.
Thank you watched to whole vid.
How much money 🤑 have you saved so many people.
Thanks again 👍
Thanks for saving a lot of people a lot of time, frustration, and money. I'd like to see your advertisement post when you sold each of these 🤣
As you stated it's strange they should account for the gear because the power is measured BEFORE the gear system is involved 🤷♂
Once you got the force applied to the sensor (basically at the crank in this case) and the vector direction you can calculate the torque and convert to power.
Anyway, they messed up a lot
Presumably there's an issue with the accuracy of the actual force sensors that results in different measured force for the same actual pedal force depending on which ring you're in hence the need for the hack.
I still think Shimano is missing the mark by not bringing a power pedal to market. I used to love Shimano pedals before switching to Garmin Vector 3. Shimano pedals are smooth and light and last forever (unlike their cranksets, of course).
From parts availability, massive failures to read the market direction, getting absolutely smashed by SRAM innovation, and even botching nearly every new electrical/electronic component for a decade ... I'm kind of feeling like Shimano is off track. A 40% drop in profit this year is largely attributed to bike industry stumbles, but I also see another trend. In the mid to high end consumer market MTB models with Shimano are largely offered as the "budget" option. Luddites will scoff, but most new buyers that are "moving up" have electronic shifting and possibly a power meter on their wish list. I hope they prove me wrong, but I think this is going to get worse before it gets better.
Rode with a mate for the first time since update and was wondering why I am suffer so much with low power reading for the 4 hour ride. Mine PM9200 has gone from 3% over to 3-5% under since the recent update. I share the frustration Shane and wish I can get a refund for the damn thing. Thank you for your vids and testing to benefit the cycling community.
It’s consistent with reads but consistently wrong unfortunately so nothing new from Shimano. Thanks for posting this. You’re a go to guy on these for me and we always appreciate your efforts. Well done Shane. 😞💯🚴♂️🤷♂️
Cheers Dave. I can't wait for the day I do a video on a Shimano meter that just simply works. One day.
@@gplama like you say 4i works … I discussed this with my bike dealer last year and I told him it’s consistent but consistently wrong as I said above. I told him Shimano would bring out an update to compensate for the errors which is what you discovered and they can’t even get that right. I’ve moved to SRAM now and Favero pedals on TT bike as I prefer the Shimano TT group 💯 thank you 🙏 again. Keep up the great work and it saves us a bunch of head scratching.
Validates my choice of SRAM and Quark! Plus why chose Shimano anyway if the Chain Ring may delaminate 😂. Certainly not because ProTeams use them, why do they use something that does not work, for them accurate power measurement is fundamental 🤷🏻♂️.
Having just got a bike with red axs, I'd say Shimano offers better braking, massively better front shifting and slightly better rear shifting. I agree with the quark power meters being good though!
My Vector pedals have something like 50,000 miles. Been submerged countless times. Had some teething issues with the battery holder, but Garmin solves that with free parts fast, which was YEARS ago.
That's awesome. Well done man. Actually really nutting out bugs. Very cool
Thanks Sam! 👊🏼
Phenomenal review Llama. Great sleuthing.
Can Shimano just disable the drivetrain side of the power meter? As an 8100P owner I'd much rather have fairly accurate one-sided power than inaccurate dual-sided.
I hope you can get your money back! Would love to see an SRM solution like you mention.
Can you measure power accurately when your crank has delaminated and snapped. Shimano need to do much better than they are at the moment. My 26 year old Shimano RX100 cable shifting plus a pair of Assioma Duos just work.
Thanks for the interesting and informative content. Your videos are always worth watching.
My Assioma pedals are still going strong year after year. I can flip them from bike to bike in minutes. They were cheap to buy. I see no reason to not just use these, at least for how I use them.
The Assioma Duo in this video are my original pair from six years ago. 👌🏼
KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid or in this case Shimano). It certainly sounds overly complex to only result in not being anywhere in the ballpark
It was an interesting and unique attempt, I’ll give them that.
If they are trying to compensate for 1 thing (lg/sm chainring), wouldn't they need to compensate for all variables? Q-factor/number of teeth on each chainring/chainline/chain length/cassette teeth, Crank arm length, etc.
as a Shimano system user on all bkes I don't know which power meter to get for road bike. Assioma DUO Shimano spindles seems like the best bet (for dual-sided) until Shimano develops a proper spider-based power meter, as you allude (buying SRM e.g.). But given they'll be spending all their money on lawsuits for the foreseeable it might be a while.
This is brilliant data analysis and investigation, Shane. Chapeau!
I'd love to see some Shimano powermeter SPD SL pedals. I think if you get that working, you're also free to design cranks and stuff as you want. And, obviously, you could use them whereever you want. As an upgrade as well as on multiple bikes.
And it’s not cheap…great work Llama
I have given up on hoping they would get it right I had the earlier one that always over read, all over the place and lost pairing. I now use Rotor cranks reliable and pretty accurate I would never waste my time with them again thanks for wasting your time so I don't have to.
Thanks for such a deep look into the inaccuracies of the Shimano powermeters!! Not sure if i'm alone here, but i really like them.
The problem Shimano is trying to solve with this firmware update reminds me of a problem certain small spider powermeter company said they were experiencing: the 1x version was working fine, but when used as a 2x crankset they were seeing different offsets (big ring vs small ring) which led to innacuracies similar to what you are seeing with Shimano PMs.
In my opinion, Shimano is trying to design those powermeters with a typical japanese mindset and that could take them a really long time to figure out by themselves. And they are in no rush because those cranks are selling and, more importantly, some bike brands keep buying them to put on their bikes
Someone from their EU headquarters need to educate them on why it's OK to hire an outsider with a background on making accurate powermeters
I hear that the Japanese mindset thing is real. I'm told by an insider that US, AU and EU reps from Trek, Specialized and Giant were desperately screaming at Shimano Japan for almost 5 years at how wrong their 11-speed MTB groupset design was (basically an evolved 2x road bike flat bar design), but were completely ignored. Trek completely stopped selling shimano drivetrains on their Mid-high mtb's for almost 2 years, with Specialized and Giant mostly doing the same. THEN Shimano actually started listening... The 12 speed MTB stuff that followed was basically identical in concept to SRAM's 1x specific design.
That's an inspired workaround, Shane. But holy hell, this might be the best reality show without the pre-scripted drama to make it interesting. I love tech, but I'd be lying if I said I understood even a small portion of the nuances that go into it.
What I don't get is that this is their third go with this thing and it still sucks. How does it still suck?
The only thing I can think is that the device or machine or whatever they use to confirm that these power meters are accurate....well, they built that, too?
Just wow.
Maybe Shimano should start thinking about outsourcing their power meter division to someone who has the know-how and resources to make a good product. They are the very best in the world for group sets but they are just drowning in the power meter arena. Food for thought...
It's impressive how many times they've managed to get this wrong. I will say though that the shape of their power graphs does at least seem consistent with the other two meters, just with a bad offset/calibration. There's no ovious drift, lag, or other major errors. Seems like it wouldn't be hard to fix that and get an accurate meter.
It's odd though that if it were simply a matter of adding/subtracting a fixed offset that would be an easy fix and something you'd expect Shimano to fix in a minute. Perhaps the error is related to the rider weight as well - clearly there's an issue with the strain guages.
Really enjoying going down the rabbit hole of your PM reviews, Shane. Thought I was going for the Favero pedals, though like a moth to a flame I keep coming back to the Rally RK. Problem is, I have top-end Look Keo Carbon Blade Ceramic Ti on my main bike, and Look Keo Carbon Blade on the other, so it feels like a waste to have to bin one set or the other to install PM pedals on whichever bike I choose to ride.
Based on your reviews, I'm now leaning towards the Inpeak crank-based PM, and I could probably fit both bikes for a comparable cost to one set of pedals. Shimano Ultegra 8100 on one bike, SRAM Force (10 sp) on the other.
Stages has been great for me other than the new seal I had to buy. Somehow it is so thin it gets baked in the heat and becomes oblong so it doesn't fit in the groove anymore. If they ever come out with a new version, I hope they fix this. Not the best for water intrusion either. I hate changing the battery tbh but at least its accurate. My Direto was doing some weird things though. I was in the Zwift jungle and not sure if its the game or the trainer but power kept slowly dropping sorta like a yoyo. I was getting some random command prompt screens flickering too which I assume is just the game loading more world data. Made me very nervous that it might crash during the race. I recommend everybody zwift racing get a battery backup
I have two Stages meters and I am not happy with either of them. The results are constantly 10-15 watts high on average.
@@whynotride327 at least its consistent. I know that too so I just account for it on my power2max
I don't speak for others but I don't find a 5 wats range (always off 10 to 15 watts) to be very "consistent.
@@whynotride327 do you train your zones within 5 watts? That's the real question. Or do you ride without rewaxing your chain...
Very cool analysis Lama 👍
I just rode with my friend today with his brand new SL8 with the Ultegra Di2 group. On the left crank arm is a 4iiii PM 🤣🤣
At least it's coming up to summer down there. God that was torturous. The only solution I can see is a power meter specific spider, which considering all they're doing atm is slapping onto the current crankset isn't really a big ask. Sorry Shimano your star is really falling in the last few years inc the 105 12 spd debacle. Taking your long-term customers for granted just isn't going to wash with the current state of the cycling market.
Shimano putting out e-waste. Thanks for the thorough investigations each time!
I know Shimano sponsors a lot of teams (including the powermeter) but I don’t understand how professional riders want to ride and train with this Shimano powermeter.
The 9200P powermeter came with my new SL8 but i sold it for a 4iiii GEN 3+ left only.
Compared to the power numbers from my wahoo kickr v6 the less expensive and left only 4iiii powermeter comes close to my kickr numbers. The shimano 9200P? Sometimes 20 watts less and sometimes 20 watts higher…
There's a simple answer. Money. Professional teams only exist through sponsorship money. They're a rolling advertisement. With the exception of a few alternative fund sources from wealthy individuals... even then, they're on sponsored equipment. It's 100% clear that the Shimano power meter has issues. Reporting on this equipment and how it performs in my standard test protocol has resulted in a VERY strained relationship with Shimano (read: No relationship at all. They won't reply to my queries). This new firmware has been out for three months now with NO OTHER technical cycling reviewers covering it. Why? It's risky to publish this content. They'll solve this problem one day. Likely by producing a REAL power meter and not a lick-and-stick aftermarket modification to their standard cranks. Shimano should acquire SRM or Power2Max and sort their shit out once and for all. /rant.
What happened to Shimano? They used to be at the top of the game and it's been going downhill for a while now. The faulty disc brake rotors that delaminate, the Ultegra cranks that fall apart and the way the recall has been handled and now this. Either they make some drastic changes or they'll be gone in a few years.
The only thing that will get Shimano to respond. Class action lawsuit. Here's hoping someone gets one started. It's an easy win... That'll be Shimano's 2nd lawsuit based around their terrible cranks. You'd think they'd learn.
Thanks Shane, amazes me that they still can’t get this right. Feels like they’re 10 years behind everyone else. Plenty of companies within their grasp they could acquire to buy in the expertise and technology they need. Begs the question why they’re not doing their own testing before curling another turd into the market.
It seems a scaling factor might fix this issue, perhaps Garmin or Wahoo could add a scaling option for Shimano PM users. On SRMs something similar was possible by changing the slope on a Garmin or PC head units.
Maybe. Thats be stacking fixes/hacks to make it work though. Such a horrible situation.
Shimano didn't care about near on 3 million faulty cranks over 11 years so it will take a while for the feedback loop to ramp up on a relatively small number of PM's.😢
Shane, I hope you can get your money back for the crankset. Stages should buy Shimano or vice versa.😄
I notice during the rod test at about the 7:15 mark the bike path just ends quite abruptly. I guess it’s not just the US where this happens… 😕
Yeah… there’s a few poorly designed roads around here.
The idea to use the position of the front derailleur to improve the algorithm proves to me that shimano have no idea how to design and produce an accurate power meter. A power meter should just make use of a strain gauge and the deflection determine the force applied. What difference does the position of the chain make ? Is the offset of the force to the strain gauge the reason for inaccurate reading ? Is the crank deflecting (twisting) that much to cause a false reading ??! Really ?
It's such a bodge and I really don't like Shimano decided to approach it like this, further more not to improve anything by doing so. Or maybe they did? When looking at the data with front mech off, it seems like scaling up just the right side by a few percent could get it to read "accurately" with how it is supposed to work with the data hacked based on front mech position. Or am I misseeing something? Anyway, thankful my new bike didn't come equipped with this and that my Assioma DUOs are already in the post.
Would you do an update / recommendation on the Shimano recall when you have a power meter? I have an Ultegra 8000 and Duraace 9100, both with Stages dual sided power meters. As you know Stages is not answering phones and who knows what will happen with company assets. What should one do if they wanted a dual sided crank based power meter? Maybe wait for Stages technology to reappear in some other brand through a buyout, or try to get the Shimano power meter and hope they fix the firmware accuracy in the future?
Not sure on that one. Stages were the only company who solved the right side issue (that statement is also based on my data from the latest 4iiii dual sided too). An easier solution would be to use a standard crank and look at power pedals.
It's pretty bad when Magene can basically "do" a Shimano crank and PM combo, in all aspects except looks better than Shimano for around 40% of the price.
Shimano should just ditch the the hollowtech crank standard. Not good as a crank or PM so they should redesign it to make it durable and a good PM
All you need to know is that Shimano requires that you use a magnet, circa 1985. I'll stick with Stages or 4iiii, thanks.
This was some epic analysis, thank you
What if you don’t have a shimano 81xx/91xx di2 drivetrain? Pretty excited that I’ll soon be shifting from an inaccurate 9100 powermeter that is getting replaced under the recall, to a less accurate 9200 model 🤭
good old Japanese "fuzzy" logic (for those who remember the 80s). I was waiting for the cow to explode...
Awesome review, thanks for being honest about this :)
Kiss that Shimano sponsorship goodbye😂😂 love the geeky insight Llama.
I’ve been on their shitlist for years. All because of how THEIR power meter performs.
@@gplama I'm surprised you still consistently use their groupsets then. Any reason you haven't jumped ship and changed everything out to SRAM by now?
@@danaponik5276 I like their Di2 road groupsets. I also have a GRX gravel and XTR MTB. Those all work well too. Once Shimano finally produce a meter that works, all this mess goes away.
Perhaps the Shimano power meters only work correctly on a Shimano crankset that is in the process of delaminating and about to break?
Such a good review of the problems with the Shimano power meter. Love his persistence! On a slightly related note, does anyone know how to get a video screen capture of a Garmin 1040 like Shane has done at 6:52, for example? I've been wanting to capture a video of my Garmin 1040, but haven't figured it out. Certainly not as easy as it is with smartphone apps.
If Shimano bought SRM I’d be worried that specialty products like their track offerings would no longer be manufactured, as the global market is way smaller than for road.
Hmm after trying to reply looks like my comment on the experience after the upgrade of the firmware on my 9200P Crankset got lost.
So new attempt:
I did an own created Zwift structured workout and compared my powermeter values to my Wahoo Kickr Core and looked pretty consistent with having -2.5% lower values. Problem mainly in right side, when they would be +5% then pretty much ok. In total avg 196.5 vs 201W and weighted 223.5 vs 228.5 and maximum 552 vs 547. 5min 200W section gave 197 vs 201W
For reference I also have my dc rainmaker dataset but maybe adding that link is causing my comments to be removed (?) (pretty annoying both my replies are gone).
I have strict filtering on here to stop the spam/scammers. It’s to keep this place tidy and protect everyone.
Oh ok that explains it then. Thanks for clarifying@@gplama
Thanks, Shimano
Bought a quarq about 15years ago and I’ve never looked back.
Their acquisition by SRAM has been “problem solved” for anyone on any of their groups.
Love these deep dives
fantastic test!