Need Bike computer

jjmctag said:

Need a bike computer, which is better the wireless or the wired variety.

I like wireless computers best 🙂

steve said:

I like wireless computers best 🙂

Thanks for the reply Steve, can you give me some pro's and con's.

I like wired best.

This is because it only take a single battery thus greener, I know its only one battery but that is a lot if everyone used an extra battery. I think that the wired connection is simpler and more reliable.

I have no experience with cyclocomputers more than $25. With that in mind, I have found cheap wired models to be much more reliable than cheap wireless models.

jjmctag said:

Need a bike computer, which is better the wireless or the wired variety.

Wireless are more expensive, more sensitive to interference, use 2 batteries. Wired are the opposite. Cateye Strada(either) are great products.

I have used both and both have worked well for me.
Two differences.
1 Cost
2 Wires as opposed to no wires

You can get good wireless bike computers for $30, if you watch for the sale prices on the internet.

I bought a Nashbar Tempo wireless for $24.95 in July and have been very pleased with it. It does every function my Cateye Wireless 7 does and more. It was just as easy to install and is easy to use. I'll have to see how long the Tempo lasts, my Cateye 7 has worked perfectly for five years and I have never even had to change a battery so far.

I've had both wire type and wireless type, and I don't see any difference in performance.

I choose the wireless versions just because there aren't any wires to worry about and they often don't cost 5 to 10 dollars more than the hardwired versions.

One extra battery less than the size of a thimble used in the wheel sensor on the wireless types means absolutely nothing to me.

I haven't had to replace one yet, so I don't see this making any huge enviromental impact...

Edited to add: I paid about $50 for the Cateye Wireless 7 and would have bought another for my Paramount since I really like the Cateye, but Cateye didn't make that model anymore, so I decided to take a chance on the Nashbar Tempo wireless.

I have used both with good success. The following is what I have found.

Wireless Pros: No wires, cleaner appearance

Wireless Cons: Prone to interference, two batteries, transmitter must be aimed corretly to work

Wired Pros: Little or no intereference, only one battery to change

Wired Cons: Long wires that have to be secured to the bike to prevent getting snagged on something and being ripped out.

It seems as though everything is going wireless these days, so it may be difficult in a few years to find a wired computers. The most common way of taking care of the wire is to tape or tie it to the inside or back of the fork blade. At the crown of the fork, the wire is run up the outside if the front brake and wound up the brake cable to the handle bars. You need to leave it a little loose around the brake so that you can turn the front wheel without pulling the wires out of the computer holder. They should make the wires a little shorter in my opinion. I ride large size bikes and there is usually double the length of wire than what I need. It is probably long enough for a penny-farthing with a foot or two left over.

jjmctag said:

Need a bike computer, which is better the wireless or the wired variety.

steve said:

I like wireless computers best 🙂

jjmctag said:

Thanks for the reply Steve, can you give me some pro's and con's.

slowbutnotdead said:

I like wired best.

This is because it only take a single battery thus greener, I know its only one battery but that is a lot if everyone used an extra battery. I think that the wired connection is simpler and more reliable.

Scotty_Dog said:

I have no experience with cyclocomputers more than $25. With that in mind, I have found cheap wired models to be much more reliable than cheap wireless models.

Peter@vecchios said:

Wireless are more expensive, more sensitive to interference, use 2 batteries. Wired are the opposite. Cateye Strada(either) are great products.

jhuskey said:

I have used both and both have worked well for me.
Two differences.
1 Cost
2 Wires as opposed to no wires

64Paramount said:

You can get good wireless bike computers for $30, if you watch for the sale prices on the internet.

I bought a Nashbar Tempo wireless for $24.95 in July and have been very pleased with it. It does every function my Cateye Wireless 7 does and more. It was just as easy to install and is easy to use. I'll have to see how long the Tempo lasts, my Cateye 7 has worked perfectly for five years and I have never even had to change a battery so far.

I've had both wire type and wireless type, and I don't see any difference in performance.

I choose the wireless versions just because there aren't any wires to worry about and they often don't cost 5 to 10 dollars more than the hardwired versions.

One extra battery less than the size of a thimble used in the wheel sensor on the wireless types means absolutely nothing to me.

I haven't had to replace one yet, so I don't see this making any huge enviromental impact...

Edited to add: I paid about $50 for the Cateye Wireless 7 and would have bought another for my Paramount since I really like the Cateye, but Cateye didn't make that model anymore, so I decided to take a chance on the Nashbar Tempo wireless.

kdelong said:

I have used both with good success. The following is what I have found.

Wireless Pros: No wires, cleaner appearance

Wireless Cons: Prone to interference, two batteries, transmitter must be aimed corretly to work

Wired Pros: Little or no intereference, only one battery to change

Wired Cons: Long wires that have to be secured to the bike to prevent getting snagged on something and being ripped out.

It seems as though everything is going wireless these days, so it may be difficult in a few years to find a wired computers. The most common way of taking care of the wire is to tape or tie it to the inside or back of the fork blade. At the crown of the fork, the wire is run up the outside if the front brake and wound up the brake cable to the handle bars. You need to leave it a little loose around the brake so that you can turn the front wheel without pulling the wires out of the computer holder. They should make the wires a little shorter in my opinion. I ride large size bikes and there is usually double the length of wire than what I need. It is probably long enough for a penny-farthing with a foot or two left over.

I would like to thank everyone for their help and advice. I can see their are pro's and con's to both. I plan on checking out both types this weekend and I guess I will get the one that I can get the best deal on.
Being new to this forum and to bicycling I really do appreciate all the help.

jjmctag said:

I would like to thank everyone for their help and advice. I can see their are pro's and con's to both. I plan on checking out both types this weekend and I guess I will get the one that I can get the best deal on.
Being new to this forum and to bicycling I really do appreciate all the help.

Probably of more concern than wired or wireless is what functions you want. Cadence is a valuable function, if you're planning on using it as a training tool.

EoinC said:

Probably of more concern than wired or wireless is what functions you want. Cadence is a valuable function, if you're planning on using it as a training tool.

Thanks EoinC, I do plan on using it to help me get in shape and didn't think of this function, though I really do need to increase my cadence. Thanks again

jjmctag said:

Need a bike computer, which is better the wireless or the wired variety.

Your choice may also depend on the features you want and how you intend to use it. For example, my first one was wired, but it only read speed off of the front wheel. The short wire from the fork to the handle bar did not bother me. However, when I started some indoor spinning on a trainer, I realized it would be nice to get speed off of the back wheel to help pass the time. Separately, I also wanted to be able to monitor cadence. Running a wire to the rear of the bike seemed unpleasant, so I decided to pay the extra for wireless and have been happy with the choice.

My particular choice was the Cateye Double Wireless per the link below.

Cateye - Cc-cd300dw

It has worked well for me (from their web page, it appears that this one has been upgraded to newer models). There was also a model that measured heart rate in addition to speed and cadence. Although heart rate did not interest me a few years ago, my curiosity grew over time, and now I have added a watch made by Polar. Now, one small irritation has been that the cyclocomputer occasionally loses signal, and I suspect it is caused by intereference with the Polar. So, it may be nice to get them all in an integrated unit, where such problems should not occur. However, if you also run, it is nice to have the heart rate monitor separate. Also, the signal loss mainly seems to occur when I am out of the saddle, and I have not yet tried playing around with channel selection to see if it can be improved.

So, speed, cadence, heart rate, how you intend to ride ..... these features may also influence whether you want wireless or not.

I've also used, in the past, the Cateye CD300DW, and it was dead reliable.

As the last two posts have suggested, by your computer based on what you want it to do. If you're unsure, look in your price range at the various computers available and what their features are. You may see some features you hadn't considered.

I think the wired versus wireless debate is dead. Wireless computers are as reliable these days as wired. I believe there may be quite a few more wireless computers than wired available for purchase.

I've found Cateye, Polar, and Garmin computers to be exceedingly reliable.

I have always used the Polar products when running and now with my bike. I find that my bike unit is very accurate for heart rate and speed/milesage. I have the basic wireless unit (four months now) and it works great.