Tacx Neo 2T Smart Trainer

GPLama Review:

DC Rainmaker Hands-On:

Titanium Geek (James Gill) Review:


Tacx Neo 2T Smart Trainer Product Page:

6 Likes

Ray’s post will be up soon. The embargo got the jump on us…

3 Likes

Thanks, Shane. I figured so and left the place holder so people would know I will add it when it’s available.

Appreciate the depth of your review again. That’s some serious time and effort to do those extended tests.

1 Like

This was insanely long. I did everything to eliminate the power problems. The only variable that resolved it was going back to the Neo1 or Neo2… so… anyhow. They’re a few weeks from shipping iirc. Let’s see what they can squeeze from the firmware.

5 Likes

Are you still seeing bigger power differences with a higher flywheel speed on the Neo 2 T @GPLama ? IIRC that was a problem with the other Neo trainers??

Yes, covered in the video above. 14mins.

1 Like

Clearance has always been an issue with disc brake road bike. At work and I’ll watch the entire video tonight or tomorrow. Scrubbed around and its hard to see the amount of clearance on disc brake side of Neo. Downloaded Tacx list of compatible bikes and its short and incomplete. Kinda of a pain unless you find a shop and put your bike on a Neo 2T.

When Wahoo introduced the 2017 Kickr (wheel off), it was proclaimed to have better support for thru-axles and disc brake bike. Bought one, thru-axle adapter rubbed against dropout (due to post-mounted brake), and Wahoo had to machine a new adapter for my 2015 Trek Domane 6.2 Disc (they tested with a 2017 Trek Domane, as Trek kept the post-mounted disc brake design on lower-end 2017 Domanes).

@GPLama
Pretty typical! You buy a Neo 2 and then the new and improved version comes out. Meh.

I watched your video and was wondering about drive train losses. Wouldn’t a perfect match between the trainer and the pedals be too perfect and indicate a problem?
That’s not to say it should vary like it did in your testing.

What sort of % differences between the power sources do you generally use?

A few watts difference, at worst, can be attributed to drivetrain. I use a clean chain, straight chainline, quality cassette and rings… etc… The numbers were different to the Neo 1 and Neo 2.

2 Likes

Thanks Shane.
I appreciate the effort you put into your vids.
Ross.

1 Like

Cheers… heads up there’s one about to drop in 12 minutes that’s pretty epic. Eurobike is Christmas for bike tech! :slight_smile:

3 Likes

I am not going to lie, I don’t think there is much reason to go for a Neo 2T even if you compare between the Neo 1 and Neo 2. There are basically no practical differences between the two from a functionality standpoint other than say the slip issue, which even then I personally never see and that is coming from a Neo 1. This trainer is just so damn well designed and ahead of its time that the updates are minimal at best. Yeah there’s fancy power dynamics, updated cadence accuracy etc. but I honestly see very little in terms of features being added ever since the Neo was first released, and the only real big upgrade was the case redesign to allow for greater compatibility among frames.

I am actually extremely impressed how over the past years there has been very little done to the Neo in terms of redesign, where as most other trainers have had to make leaps and bounds to just make them somewhat competitive with the Neo. I have zero buyers remorse with the Neo 1 and am amazed how it has remained basically the same over the years at the top of all trainers

Edit: It makes me wonder if Tacx (now Garmin I guess) have just held out on real updates because there is no competition. Perhaps this is tinfoil hatty but perhaps they have already designed a bunch of things that could be added if there were more market forces driving the redesign. Maybe they are holding out on us and we won’t see another huge leap for some time, even though the tech/capability already exists internally.

1 Like

The Neo is in need of a structural design change to fit more bikes. Their material on the bike side in the chainstay area is more restrictive than the Kickr and H3, and leads to contact between frames and disc brake mounts in a number of instances.

I expect a Neo 3 will include a functional shape change to address this issue. The Neo 2T native thru-axle is a great half-step, but there are still fit issues that existed on the prior models even with the functional T-A adapter option.

Much like the T-A lever contact issue on the Saris H3, I expect these companies are holding off on design changes because of the investment in tooling that was done. Lots of molded parts on the Neo, and the main die-cast aluminum for the H3. Neither of those are cheap to modify or replace, and will take some effort to address via design change and eventual tooling.

They are likely balancing the ROI (Return On Investment) from the cost of the tooling before effectively tossing it out for the “new” version down the line.

1 Like

I have a Kickr16 and my brother has the Neo 1. I purchased the kickr16 first. I haven’t had any issues w/ the Kickr16 and overall have been fairly happy with it. That being said, I wish I would have purchased the Neo. It just seems to be the gold standard. And not having to do a spindown and and constently questioning if the calibration is off (like I do on my kickr16) would be awesome. And being able to use without power sounds great.

I hated to see Garmin acquire TacX because I’m afraid they will ruin an already great product.

The structural changes (and taken in consideration I’m a consumer not a structural engineer or designer) in the Neo seem minor compared to the H2, it was bulkier than the kickr 2018 (take that with a grain of salt as the fly wheel is a monster after you get used to the slim profile of the Neo) or the Neo 2 which I still own. I did like the kickr, it just fit my bike with native through axle support, plenty of room between the trainer and the bike frame, I didn’t like sending it back every month, after the fifth time, it was getting monotonous. The Neo 2 with the 5mm (the smaller one, I thought was 5mm) adapter which you had to call to get, they should just supply it, resolved the issue of the disk caliper resting on the device. That’s in reference to my Trek Emonda, the only bike I own, so I can’t compare with others. That’s minor in my opinion compared to getting another through axle for the H2 or H3 that does not have a handle, I believe Shane Miller mentioned the kickr core conversion axle in the H3 video, correct me if I’m wrong. I’m sure you could hunt down other through axles that might work but that’s something I think you really shouldn’t have to do.

Yup, there are options for tooled or quick release T-A levers that side-step the H1/2/3 issue. But it’s something that should NOT be an issue and I expect it to be addressed with a re-design from Saris at some point.

And the space issue on the Neo is one that I have seen and should not exist either. Couple that with the restriction of some narrow TT bikes (Fuji in my case) that can’t fit on the Neo from the forward and wide width of the case, and Tacx has some work to do.

It’s funny how nearly every design has some little fit issue like this. I hope that each brand is learning from the mistakes of others. I know it’s a tough task to design one product to fit so many bikes (thousands total with about a half-dozen axles standards), but it is no fun for a buyer to take their bike and mount it on their fancy new trainer… only to discover a fit issue that needs to be addressed with a separate step, or prevents fit-up all together.

1 Like

I wonder if the accuracy inconsistencies noticed by @GPLama and @dcrainmaker are now solved by firmware, or if it units require a new factory calibration.

I’ve just asked that to their support before possibly purchasing: curious of what they’ll reply!

1 Like

Reply from Tacx:

We are currently working on the newer firmwares.
This should go live in the coming weeks.
The calibration doesn’t have to be re-done.

2 Likes