On Monday, June 14, 2021 at 3:08:25 AM UTC-7, Rolf Mantel wrote:
Am 13.06.2021 um 21:35 schrieb Tom Kunich:

While there are still those who might think it useful I would like to
know why you think it would be useful and what sort of knowledge do
you think that it would impart that you could not detect simply
through your legs without the extra weight of $500 in your wallet?
I'd take a power meter for $100 or so, in the hope that I can see more
easily whether I'm slower than usual

a) due to a bad night's sleep (power low)
b) due to external factors (power normal)

As of today, I can tell easily whether I'm slow due to the wind (speed
difference after the 90 degree bends) but issues like "far too low tire
pressure" and "chain is in desparate need of oil" I only notice
indirectly (Monday after servicing the bike I'm significantly faster
than Friday before servicing the bike).

If the power meter is sufficiently exact, I'd use it to still my
scientific curiosity comparing the wind resistence with various setups
(on the drops vs on the hoods vs recumbent bike, one very full pannier
vs two half-filled panniers etc).

Similary, once in my life I bought a heart rate monitor for cycling
which confirmed that my "feeling good" was a close enough measurement,
and after a few years of bike computers with cadence sensor I'm now
happy with mobile phone GPS without cadence sensor.

I had a power meter that used wind speed so that you got an actual work number. Then there was a program that entered your frontal area and weight and would give you a power output. I would expect that it didn't correct for climbing but I normally used it on flat rides. The knowledge it imparted was so minimal that the Garmin return of Calories burned is probably just as well.