How did you 5w/kg+ riders make it there?


I honestly just take a rolling average of my weight over a 7 day period (the Withings scale does this automatically).

I’ll have to carry water weight for races (especially since I’m a salty sweater that usually needs a pre-load for longer days) so I’d rather just know where my baseline is with what I normally need to consume.


I hate you all :wink:

3.6w/kg and busting my ass to get to 4w/kg. I’m 44 years old and a very fit 175 lbs. FTP at 289 and rising.

Congrats to this entire thread :metal: I’m f#cking jealous.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming . . .


MyFatnessPal… lol


Are you sure your Kickr is accurate? Like using the little ring and middle of the cassette when I used it, it overread my wattage by a lot when using the big ring. Just asking because if everything is in order 5w/kg at your weight is very impressive.


Are you a salty sweater genetically? or because you eat lots of salt? Kind of like a chicken or egg thing. I have at times been a person who will have a crust of salt on my helmet strap, but under consistent good diet/training it becomes less salty.


I’ve done a lot of long events and I always perform better when pre-loading and supplementing with heavier sodium drinks.

Every time I don’t, i tend to suffer badly


Same for me. On long events I always got headache. Since I have started taking salt tablets every hour the problem is gone.


I would agree with RobertK.

In fact, I did some simulations using the INSCYD software (which has been discussed in the VLaMax thread to see what sort of VO2max would be required to get a 5.0 W/kg, with the assumption that we can get VLaMax down to 0.3 mmol/l/s.

I chose 0.3 because this is on the very low end of where you can get it (which is good for a high FTP!), but it is feasible. Many good age-groupers in TT and triathlon would fall around this region, and pretty much any good professional long distance triathlete and even GC contenders as well.

So with VLaMax fixed at 0.3, I found that 70 ml/min/kg was the exact VO2max needed to get FTP to 5.0 W/kg. Since VO2max and FTP here is normalised to weight, this applies to any weight - but of course reaching a high relative VO2max also requires that dietary discipline and weight-focus mentioned already.

And naturally, if VLaMax is any higher than the “ideal” 0.3, that also means that a higher VO2max is needed to get to 5.0 W/kg at FTP. For example, with a VLaMax of 0.5 (a typical Classics rider profile) the VO2max required would be 76 ml/min/kg.


Yeah, that doesn’t necessarily answer which came first, but if what you are doing is working, keep on it. For me, if I have a bit of a salt bloat I have higher cardiac stress (elevated HR), which would make sense as a temporary increase in body fluid usually also means elevated blood pressure.


Any of you 5w/kg riders 45+ yrs old? 50+?


Yes. :wink:


Fasho, my man! Awesome to hear you’ve almost hit 260! I’ll keep plugging away :).


47, was at 5 in ‘17, at 4.6 today indoors after a months training


Just did first FTP test today. Clocked in at 301 with a weight of 70kg. Puts me just over 4w/kg. Ive only 2-3 months of training, sedentary for the past 15 years. I was surprised by this, just shows how much weight has a bearing on this number.


There is also a limit to how much weight can be lost. I think I am at that point now where only 1lb or two is worth losing right now until I start racing. As a TT rider FTP is important, but when I do crits, I’m not too concerned as crits never go the way they should.

My FATnesspal :joy:


I was working all winter on that. Basically what I found is a smooth pedalstroke will give you numbers in the high 90% but feel weird. So what works best is deweighting the foot and really trying to drive the pedals when pushing down. Due to that the deweighting will feel kind of like pulling up.

Also anecodately I found that TE goes up the more watts you do and also it is easier riding uphill. When doing low force high cadence I notice the biggest decline in TE. So spinning at 70rpm when I do 50% FTP gets a much better TE than 90. Then again when sitting at only 50% the loss of energy might not matter that much.


The roots are in genetics.

No amount of training (specific or not) will make some people have 5 wt/kg… Wont happen, but it is a nice thought. This is like saying if I lift weights long enough I will be “Arnold” strong…clearly there are genetic limits for maximum capability. This is not to indicate you can not keep working to find your maximum potential, but be realistic.

Also high Vo2 is (beyond) a great indicator like Chad says, but he sells it a bit short IMO. Yes not all winners have the highest VO2, but ALL race winners have very high VO2. So again genetics.

For the sake of it, I blew a 61 on and oxygen mask (in low fitness 4 years ago), around that time I would estimate I had a FTP around 270-280 at 180-185 pounds. I was weight training heavily and just riding mountain bikes for cardiovascular fitness (did not use power). Now I am 162-165 pounds while training, 155-160 in race season, still do weight training (because there is more to life then wt/kg and looking like Froome; heaven help it if that lad had to pick a small child up), and have upped my FTP to 330. I have been training for 4-8 hours a week for 2 years , with some weekly breaks here and there, nothing longer then 2 weeks. In the fall I did and outdoor real world one hour test and completed 319 watts for 60 minutes (REAL FTP). I did complete a traditional 20 minute test on the trainer recently in December and held on for 358 watts (barely), which using the 5% rule would say I am closer to 340. I split the difference and feel it is a good spot to train around (oh and my Garmin spit out a vo2 max of 66 maybe close?). So my Vo2 maybe increased 10% at the most. All aside this puts me at 4.4 - 4.7 range. From and equation stand point I need to either increase power to 364 watts FTP OR drop weight below or at 68 kg (150 lbs) at 6’1". Both a big ask… I carry 170 naturally very easily, and look “thin” at 160, ten more pounds…woof, 150 seems like a stretch for my composition, not worth the ROI may be my analysis.

On the power side that is a 10% jump essentially, and at this point I can not see it based upon many limits, maybe ekk up to 345 this year on a outdoor test. So best case in my eyes is 4.8, and enjoying life and my kids…

End of the story quit chasing specific numbers, find balance, and be thankful if you had good parents passing down the genetics, then put in some work and “run what you brung”!


This thread has been getting pretty deep, but there’s a big assumption here, that VO2 directly correlates to pVO2, which as far as I know it is kind of weak. I have seen a thread on a running forum about how bad the correlation is with best mile pace and or other running paces with VO2 max.

It’s a very old thread, but has some good nuggets.

There’s a Noaks study linked, showing that relationship between finishing time of a half marathon and marathon and VO2 max was relatively poor r = .55 to .81 and VO2 at 16 km/hr (speed used in the treadmill test) r = .4 to .45


I suspect that there are much bigger differences in gross mechanical efficiency between well-trained runners and well-trained cyclists.


Without a doubt.