Question about Ramp Tests


Last night I did the TD Ramp Test (Automatic).

I had set the FTP in my account to 150 as per the advice. I completed the ramp test, just struggled to hold 300w at the end for a minute but I did. Anyway, it didn’t ‘spit out’ a number like I was expecting. The average power of the ride was 156w but surely that’s just dependent on what I set in the first place, i.e. if I’d set 225w as the FTP it would have given me a ramp with bigger numbers which I may or may not have met?

What I’m saying is I don’t know exactly what my FTP is, this could be improved in the app for new users (just make it easier to understand please)



Hi Joe, yes the problem is people like you are too strong and first FTP test is off. I just added more steps to reduce the chance of this happening (we should automatically add steps if you get to the end to stop this from happening). If you were at your end at 300 or could do one more step maybe then it sounds like your ftp is about 225 (75% of 300). I know this is not fun, but if you want to be sure you could do one more test starting with 225 as your FTP but you can probably guess close enough how much farther you could have gone. Personally I don’t go to complete failure but close, I just make sure each time it is that same level of effort (RPE) at the end.


Thankyou very much for your quick reply and explanation. I was at 95% I would say, one or two more steps would have broken me. Sounds like 225w is close enough (within 5%) to work from for the first block going forward. I had a quick search of training plans for FTP building but couldn’t find one I liked so I spent a little while making a new plan (GREAT tool btw) based on a previous one I’d used :slight_smile:

Thanks again,


I hate any form of FTP tests :stuck_out_tongue:

I basically just use whatever my Garmin says my “new ftp” is and just use that number. (you know, outdoor, group rides are basically testosterone filled lolz)

If you have a Garmin that’s CIQ compatible, you can also try out the XERT What’s My FTP Data Field.

I don’t mind a ramp test, but it’s much better if you only go to 95-98% and treat it is a workout rather than a test. Trying to go to 100% is seriously no fun but I also agree tests are not ideal. The problem is indoor cyclists frequently don’t go to 100% on longer efforts unless racing in Zwift or something so then the automatic versions don’t do well either. Anyone going on group rides with faster friends then them probably get close enough. Generally we advise against going to 100% at all except maybe in a ramp test and in situations of joy or racing.

1 Like

Yeah FTP building is actually a funny idea. This is what is popular these days but what is FTP? It’s just a test. You want a plan to increase your ability to do ramp tests? I am being “funny” but pointing out the problem that other good coaches have idendified. Everyone wants to build their FTP but really you should focus on building your ability to meet your end goal. Faster at 60 minute efforts? Faster at longer efforts? Preparing for a race. Just improving your FTP does not necessarily mean you are better prepared for your goal. TrainerRoad pushes sweet spot because it does build your FTP rather quickly but the problem is that is a short term strategy. If you want a long term strategy most would agree you need more periodization.

We are a big fan of more zone 2 work now, and later in the season adding more intensity.

GCN dive into Zone 2

But ultimately there is so many opinions on this stuff (ours seems to be more popular now and backed by more science but that does not mean it is the only solution). Partially you need to do what is fun and motivates you and if you do too much intensity for too long you will start to fall apart and the next season you might start out doing more zone 2 :slight_smile:

1 Like

Talking about Zone 2… I’ve had good results (in my view) for sub Zone2 work (maffetone method) and I actually achieved good results (for my age group) in trail running. So I stuck w/ it (almost exclusively which was a mistake)

When came to my “A” race, I blew my quads cos they weren’t able to handle the NON Zone2 stresses I was throwing at it.

Power/Hr at Z2 is a good metric to be looking at as well I think. I also agree that there’s a lot of literature (science backed as well) and it’s hard to digest all of them and w/ the differing opinons (that are science backed as well).

Then there’s the “what works for you, doesn’t work for me” like for Sepp Kuss. (

Yes I fully agree with “it depends,” and I agree with Maffetone sub z2 (which is still likely z2 not really sub :slight_smile: but most people want to do Z2 max and push it a bit) … But yes to your point, you definitly need to have some intensity in your season especially for race prep. 100% sub zone 2 prior to a race is risky. My partner, Andrea, is an ex-pro coach and still pro-advisor and connected to many pro coaches he says many of the crazy kid pros are doing it all “wrong” right now and winning races… but taking high risks to get there.

I fully agree on hr/power I.e. MAF test or polar’s running index. I assume Garmin’s VO2MAX estimate is based on this as well.