FTP/MAP test - step vs. ramp

I’ve seen recommendations for the watts per step in an FTP/MAP test to be 25w/min for standard males and 20w/min for elite cyclists. I’ve also seen recommendations to make the steps as small as possible - 5w/12sec for standard males and 4w/12sec for elites. With the ability in TrainerDay to do proper ramps (love that feature), would it make sense to take the test to the full logical extreme? Start at 50% and ramp to 200% with a smooth increase over the appropriate time? Or is there a reason to keep some sort of step?

Hi Jim, great questions. We will be building a TrainerDay official ramp test in the next month. I likely will do it like the other platforms but I have not decided. We don’t actually currently support the idea of fixed watts unless you keep a fixed FTP. I might create a special fixed watts for this ramp test not sure yet. I also might allow people to use their own ramp tests but we just calculate taking the last minute and multiplying by .75 and auto switch to cool down when failure occurs.

So my friend is probably the ramp test expert of the world, in the fact that he has been doing ramp tests on World Tour pros for 20 to 30 years (mask style…) and done lab testing for many of the top pro teams at one point or another. He suggests 25-watts starting with 15-minute warmup beginning at 40%. He uses the same protocol for all levels of riders and he test and coaches a lot of amateur’s (juniors) too. But my guess is at the minimum the are 220w FTP guys… But he is so dialed on his protocol that he does not change it because he fully understands the results. He has clarified to me, it’s more about consistency of practice than it is the actual ramp steps. I have a fairly low FTP (193) and have done 25w steps and I feel better (seems more accurate) with smaller steps. I like closer to 10w steps. I personally end up with very similar results with 25w steps or 10w steps.

So I don’t like the feeling of a continuous ramp. I think it is motivational to have steps and trying to push it to that next step. Wahoo trainers are not always predictable with ramps, possibly others as well. Everyone I have seen does 1-minute steps but my belief is kind of like yours that it probably does not matter that much as long as you have a consistent protocol.

FYI - One interesting thing about pros are for them it is actually harder to do 50% that it is for us… My friend keeps telling me pros don’t like to sustain upper zone 2 rides for long periods of time because it is a lot of work and for me upper zone 2 feels like a walk in the park. It’s kind of like a car with a big engine, you can feel and hear the difference when their is a big engine. So my point is his warmup starts at 40%.

Here is his test with 25w steps at 185 FTP. If your FTP is different then this it won’t be 25W steps.

1 Like

Thanks, Alex, for the great explanations and insight. I look forward to the test you put together. I just did my first test today with the smooth ramp. I can definitely see how getting to that next step would add motivation. I felt like I was more focused on keeping a steady cadence as the resistance increased and getting to a higher wattage took a back seat. I’ll try using steps on my next test.

Hi, Just got TrainerDay and this is my first post on the forums. Not sure how many people will see this, but it would be cool to get some idea of how well the ramp test corresponds to their “real” FTP.

I just did the TD automatic ramp test, and ended up with an FTP of 268W (I weigh 88 kg so even that would not be very high). However, I have done the Trainerroad FTP test last year (I think 15W steps) and got a similar number (I was 105 kg then). From other workouts, I think my FTP is probably around what it was at that time. However, both of these overestimate my “real” FTP by at least 25W (if I do, say, 8 min intervals at 240W, I will only be able to complete 4 or 5, so less than an hour total with some rest in between). Knowing this, I just set my interval power as if my FTP was lower than the test says. I still think the test is valuable in measuring progress, I just have to also look at the power, heart rate, and RPE during my workouts to get the full picture.

I’ll let the experts weigh in here as far as accuracy, but I’ve found something similar although not to the same extreme. The test calculated my FTP at 315, but I could only hold that for 40 minutes or so without rests. It’s possible that my style of riding won’t allow me mentally to complete 60 minutes at 315 since I’m not a fan of undue long-term suffering. :slight_smile:

I did lower my FTP in TD to 300 partially to accommodate that but also due to recovering from surgery. It definitely makes the threshold, endurance, and tempo workouts more pleasant. If I do any VO2 max or anaerobic workouts I just raise the FTP by ~5% above recommended levels.

As far as accuracy, I’m along the same line of thinking as you. I use the FTP test as a gauge of progress rather than an absolute indicator of fitness or strength. Do a test, do a workout block, then test again. Using heart rate and RPE can be good indicators as well, but day-to-day fluctuations in other factors (sleep, nutrition, recovery) can impact those. 2 identical workouts can feel completely different a week apart.

Hi and welcome. Guys that are more sprinters vs TT power duration curves a ramp test will overestimate your FTP. I am bigger too and mine is also over estimated. Congratulations on the large drop in weight. 88kg is my dream from current 99.

Ramp tests tend to be more consistent from test to test for many people due to pacing problems or bad day effects. Even on a semi-bad day a ramp test should be accurate enough. We use a .75 factor but in our (yours and mine) cases it might be more like .70 times your last minute average. For reason of mental convenience and consistency we recommend the ramp test but you might just want lower your FTP by 10% or something.

Pros don’t test much but generally the only test they will use is a ramp test with or without a mask.