World’s Lightest Power Meter option at 622 grams with BB and chainrings.

I’m excited about the someday-to-be-released Metrigear pedal based power meter system, but I got tired of waiting and decided that it was time to add power to my weight weenie machine. Here are a few photos of the system weight including everything except for the head unit. The lightest head unit I could find was the Bontrager Node 2, but I like the Garmin EDGE 500 better, so that’s what I’ve been using. The Node is maybe 20 grams lighter than the Garmin, but the display on the Node shows your speed in huge numbers and the power in really small numbers, and you can’t configure the display to do otherwise. I don’t really care how fast I’m going, but I really care about the wattage I’m producing. The Bontrager Node also doesn’t store the power data, rather it just displays it. This is fine for pacing yourself while racing, but it’s not much good if you want to analyze the numbers later. The Garmin, on the other hand, lets you configure the display so that your power is most prominent, and I love it. I have mine configured to show power (largest), heart rate, cadence and distance.

The 622 gram scale photo includes the cranks, the Quarq, the BB cups with ceramic bearings, and even the BB magnet attachment.

10 thoughts on “World’s Lightest Power Meter option at 622 grams with BB and chainrings.

  1. With the Metrigear change of platform resulting in both delays and likely added mass, I agree this is the more weenie solution, although I don’t think Quarq would claim 2% accuracy with those chainrings.

  2. I was wondering if you had used an SRM or other power meter previously and how the numbers seem to compare. I have 7 years of SRM data and would like to use a power meter that I could compare numbers to.

  3. Is the Lightning the lightest crank of the crank options that Quarq offers?

    How does the weight of the Quarq CinQO Saturn unit compare to the additional weight between a lightweight rear hub and the lightest PowerTap rear hub?


  4. Yes, the Lightning crank is the lightest option with a Quarq. I don’t know the exact numbers, but it’s a big difference. Maybe 150 to 200 grams? As for comparing to a PowerTap, I consider the PowerTap as adding about 250 grams over a light rear hub, and the Quarq adds about 85 grams over a light crank with no CinQo.

  5. Interting stuff and good blog. Keep it up & thanks

    I saw in the photos from the Centurion race it looks like you are riding Di2. Is that the case? How about a report on it, from your point of view.

  6. I did ride Di2, along with the Lightning/Quarq setup, at the Centurion. I’ll try to write up something on it here soon. Thanks.

  7. Hey great blog and crank….just wanted to know what type of rings you are using on this crank…..are they fiberlyte? Ho do they shift in comparison to other setups you might have?

  8. I’m using FibreLyte rings, and they are super stiff. You can only use stiff rings with the Quarq otherwise they won’t calibrate well. I was skeptical as to whether the carbon rings would be stiff enough so I sent them in for testing. Quarq responded that they tested very well. I don’t know how long they will hold up — I’ve only used them in half a dozen races. So far, so good.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>