This study aimed to determine if the Garmin Vector (Schaffhausen, Switzerland) power meter produced acceptable measures when compared with the Schoberer Rad Messetechnik (SRM; Julich, Germany) power meter across a range of high-intensity efforts. Twenty-one well-trained cyclists completed power profiles (seven maximal mean efforts between 5 and 600 s) using Vector and SRM power meters. Data were compared using assessments of heteroscedasticity, "t" tests, linear regression, and typical error of estimate (TEE). The data were heteroscedastic, whereby the Vector pedals increasingly overestimated values at higher power outputs; however, "t" tests did not identify any significant differences between power meters (p > 0.05). Using linear regression, Vector data were fit to an SRM equivalent (slope = 0.99; intercept = -9.87) and TEE produced by this equation was 3.3% (3.0%-3.8%). While the data shows slight heteroscedasticity due to differing strain-gauge placement and resultant torque measurement variance, the Vector appears acceptable for measures of power output across various cycling efforts.