Athletica Heart Rate Zones vs Grappe BIKE

[JBB]

Hi all,

I’ve noticed a significant difference between Athletica’s auto-calculated HR zones and the Grappe zones (used i.e. by French Cycling Federation).

My data:

• CP: 240 W
• Athletica Critical HR: 188 bpm
• Tested Max HR: 193 bpm

Athletica Z2: 128–155 bpm
Grappe Z2: 144–163 bpm

( One clarification: the Grappe method defines quite a wide Zone 2 (144–163 bpm in my case).
In practice, for me real endurance work sits closer to the upper end, around 155 bpm (~200 W).
So while Grappe’s Z2 is broad, I usually target that narrower range as my effective endurance zone.

However, this means Athletica places endurance much lower, while Z3 extends up to 183 bpm, covering what Grappe would classify as tempo, sweet spot, and even threshold. Athletica also gives me a VO2 zone above 195 bpm, which isn’t realistic with a max HR of 193.

Has anyone else compared Athletica’s zones with other methods like Grappe? Do you stick with Athletica’s defaults, or is there a way to adjust them manually?

Thanks for your insights. JB

[Marjaana]

Hey @JBB

There are many ways to skin the cat. with HR the only anchor that matters to me personally is zone 2 - I personally like to use a Norwegian Olympiatoppens intensity scale and I also use MAF method to double check where my Zone 2 lies. Zone 2 HR 72-82% of max HR.

For anything above zone 2- I use RPE and or power/pace targets. It takes a while for heart rate to get up to speed at higher intensities so i like to use power or pace together with the day’s perceived effort and feel.

You can always adjust your hr/power/pace in your overview page manually.
MJ

[JBB]

Thank you. There are so many ways indeed to calculate the zones… As an amateur, I’m a sometimes a bit lost in the different methods.

As said in my previous post, thanks for your advices and see you in october for the start of the real training ! JB

[Marjaana]

No problem, that’s why we are here! See you in October - enjoy off-season!
MJ