Cycle computers - wired or wireless?

i use a Garmin Fortrex 101 [gps]

has wrist strap that fits on handle bar [with foam]
can also be used while walking, hiking, running

very solid construction
under $100 [ebay]
see much more info www.Amazon.com

waterboy

I've had the same Cateye wireless computer on two different bikes for a
total mileage over 75k miles.
No problems here.

Ken C. M. said:

I rode for a couple of hours this afternoon on the road bike, I have the
cycle computer reading off the rear wheel and the head unit mounted on
the seat post. It's an Ascent wireless model. This isn't the first time
I have notice it, but thought it might make for an interesting tech sort
of thread here, now this was a two and a half hour ride. When I got home
I checked the readings, and clearly it's not getting info from the
pick-up all the time. It said my average speed was about 7.5 miles per
hour, and total distance was 15.5 miles. Now I KNOW that I am slow, but
not even close to being THAT slow. Now the cycle computer in question is
not a very expensive model. and not a GREAT brand, but really now? I
mean enough already. So whats some advice about computers, go with a
wired design like my Cateye Enduro 8 on my other bike, or just get a
better wireless model?

Ken
--
The bicycle is just as good company as most husbands and, when it gets
old and shabby, a woman can dispose of it and get a new one without
shocking the entire community. ~Ann Strong

--
Tp,

-------- __o
----- -\<. -------- __o
--- ( )/ ( ) ---- -\<.
-------------------- ( )/ ( )
-----------------------------------------

No Lawsuit Ever Fixed A Moron...

Stephen Harding <[email hidden]> wrote in news:JlBfh.5223$Li6.2567
@trndny03:

Quoted message said:

The worst (at times) are those darned pace arrows that tell you if
you're falling off your pace...which you generally are if you're
climbing a hill.

Hills or not, since for each moment that you have the "pace arrow"
indicating you are exceeding your average pace, the average goes up. So the
only way to keep the arrow pointing up is to continually increase your
average. I really don't find that "feature" of any use.

Cheers,
David

Doc O'Leary <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I see something like a Garmin Forerunner as a good starting point.
The danger is in looking for too many features that bulk up the size
and price of the unit. I would *love* to find a cheap GPS unit that
did little more than buffer data and Bluetooth it when a
computer/phone/iPod is available. This comes close:

http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/security/8212/

but it's about $200 overpriced for what it does.

Unfortunately this thing is not too useful for bike rides (from the web
site):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The record interval is adjustable to anything between 1 and 15
minutes

I have a Bluetooth GPS that I use with a Pocket PC, but I rarely use it
on the bike (only when I'm riding in unfamiliar areas.)

I haven't found a GPS that's ideal for biking. The Garmin
bicycle-specific units don't offer maps or routes. Ideally, a bike GPS
should allow you to download a route to the unit and then give
turn-by-turn directions to tell you how to stay on the route (or get
back to it when you miss a turn.) It should also have Bluetooth to allow
you to share the route you programmed with others at the start of a club
ride and to upload your ride information to a computer.

Cheers,
David

In article <[email hidden]>,

Solvang Cyclist said:

Unfortunately this thing is not too useful for bike rides (from the web
site):

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The record interval is adjustable to anything between 1 and 15
minutes

It all depends what you want from it but, yeah, a 1 minute minimum is a
bit high. I've since found this, which is a lot better:

http://www.hexten.net/wbt-200/

Quoted message said:

I haven't found a GPS that's ideal for biking. The Garmin
bicycle-specific units don't offer maps or routes. Ideally, a bike GPS
should allow you to download a route to the unit and then give
turn-by-turn directions to tell you how to stay on the route (or get
back to it when you miss a turn.) It should also have Bluetooth to allow
you to share the route you programmed with others at the start of a club
ride and to upload your ride information to a computer.

You're putting too much functionality into one device. I'm still most
interested in a cheap GPS unit that mainly logs data. Bluetooth is a
welcome way to bridge to a display device, since I'm getting pretty
tired of every single device in my pocket having its own screen. That
leaves it up to me to decide if I want to take a fancy mapping PDA with
me.

--
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, 4ax.com, buzzardnews.com, googlegroups.com,
heapnode.com, localhost, x-privat.org

Doc O'Leary <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Solvang Cyclist said:

Unfortunately this thing is not too useful for bike rides (from the
web site):

Quoted message said:

> The record interval is adjustable to anything between 1 and 15
> minutes

It all depends what you want from it but, yeah, a 1 minute minimum is
a bit high. I've since found this, which is a lot better:

http://www.hexten.net/wbt-200/

Quoted message said:

I haven't found a GPS that's ideal for biking. The Garmin
bicycle-specific units don't offer maps or routes. Ideally, a bike
GPS should allow you to download a route to the unit and then give
turn-by-turn directions to tell you how to stay on the route (or get
back to it when you miss a turn.) It should also have Bluetooth to
allow you to share the route you programmed with others at the start
of a club ride and to upload your ride information to a computer.

You're putting too much functionality into one device. I'm still most
interested in a cheap GPS unit that mainly logs data. Bluetooth is a
welcome way to bridge to a display device, since I'm getting pretty
tired of every single device in my pocket having its own screen. That
leaves it up to me to decide if I want to take a fancy mapping PDA
with me.

Obviously we have differing needs/desires for a GPS device. I would
prefer to have only one device on my bike. With the exception of a map
and maintaining a route, everything that a GPS can provide can be done
by a cheap cycle computer. I can always map my routes after I return
using a site such as bikely.com. Instead, if I'm going to add a GSP, I
want it to provide a moving map display. The rest would be simple to do.

Cheers,
David

In article <[email hidden]>,

Solvang Cyclist said:

Obviously we have differing needs/desires for a GPS device. I would
prefer to have only one device on my bike.

So would I, but it's getting to be impossible. I already have my cell
phone with me. I also bring my iPod sometimes. If it's dark, I have
lights. While I could add a big honking GPS display to the mix, I would
much rather use one of the displays I already have with me.

Quoted message said:

With the exception of a map
and maintaining a route, everything that a GPS can provide can be done
by a cheap cycle computer. I can always map my routes after I return
using a site such as bikely.com.

This is where our needs obviously differ. I'm of the opinion that most
of the "instant" feedback is useless, but logging data over time paints
a rich picture. Your cheap bike computer won't be the best device to
tell you how you've been improving, say, on a particularly tough hill.
It won't be at all helpful in trying out different routes and seeing
which sections are faster on average.

Quoted message said:

Instead, if I'm going to add a GSP, I
want it to provide a moving map display. The rest would be simple to do.

While that can be handy at times, would you *really* say you need to be
looking at a moving map 90% of the time you're on a bike? I still think
a simple logger is a great start, and if I'm lost and need to see a map
I could whip out my cell phone.

--
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, 4ax.com, buzzardnews.com, googlegroups.com,
heapnode.com, localhost, x-privat.org

I am using the Polar 720 and Garmin Edge 305 on one bike (these 2 are
wireless).

I am using the Flight Deck on my other bike (wired).

It is clear to me that both systems have problems when the batteries
are weak or if the magnets are out of alignment.

The wireless will also have problems is specific areas such as
electrics at train stations or power lines.

The two wireless systems can download to the computer but only the
Polar will allow you to correct the data and the troubled areas for
more accurate performance/training statistics. The two wireless systems
can also store files for specific exercise.

I am also using the Polar at the gym/Spinning and running.

Main point:
For me the Polar is the main computer as I use it on and off the bike!
It is more about the functionality vs. the wired/wireless question.

Ken C. M. said:

I rode for a couple of hours this afternoon on the road bike, I have the
cycle computer reading off the rear wheel and the head unit mounted on
the seat post. It's an Ascent wireless model. This isn't the first time
I have notice it, but thought it might make for an interesting tech sort
of thread here, now this was a two and a half hour ride. When I got home
I checked the readings, and clearly it's not getting info from the
pick-up all the time. It said my average speed was about 7.5 miles per
hour, and total distance was 15.5 miles. Now I KNOW that I am slow, but
not even close to being THAT slow. Now the cycle computer in question is
not a very expensive model. and not a GREAT brand, but really now? I
mean enough already. So whats some advice about computers, go with a
wired design like my Cateye Enduro 8 on my other bike, or just get a
better wireless model?

Ken
--
The bicycle is just as good company as most husbands and, when it gets
old and shabby, a woman can dispose of it and get a new one without
shocking the entire community. ~Ann Strong

Doc O'Leary <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

While that can be handy at times, would you *really* say you need to be
looking at a moving map 90% of the time you're on a bike? I still think
a simple logger is a great start, and if I'm lost and need to see a map
I could whip out my cell phone.

90% of the time? No. But for organized rides it would be much easier with a
moving map and turn directions than the "classic" routeslips in your jersey
pocket.

Cheers,
David

In article <[email hidden]>,

Solvang Cyclist said:

Doc O'Leary <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

While that can be handy at times, would you *really* say you need to be
looking at a moving map 90% of the time you're on a bike? I still think
a simple logger is a great start, and if I'm lost and need to see a map
I could whip out my cell phone.

90% of the time? No. But for organized rides it would be much easier with a
moving map and turn directions than the "classic" routeslips in your jersey
pocket.

But then why buy a kitchen sink unit for the 5% scenario? Most GPS
units like that are big and expensive and chew up batteries. I still
say there is a lot to be said for having a simple $50 receiver/logger
that will Bluetooth to some other device for whatever extra immediate
use you might have. For example, I'd be *very* interested in seeing
something like the Nike+iPod that is instead based off of GPS data.

--
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, 4ax.com, buzzardnews.com, googlegroups.com,
heapnode.com, localhost, x-privat.org

i've found that the key thing with wireless computers is the alignment
of the sender on the fork (or in your case the seatstay im guessing),
and the receiver. the second thing is the distance between the magnetic
spoke thingy and the sender. I suggest mounting it on the front, at
least for testing, ensuring that the spoke thingy and sender is 5mm or
less apart, and put the receiver on the handlbars, directly above and
inline with the sender, and see how you go. if you find that you go on
a ride and it works, then that was the problem.

good luck

Daniel

, and receiver

Ken C. M. said:

I rode for a couple of hours this afternoon on the road bike, I have the
cycle computer reading off the rear wheel and the head unit mounted on
the seat post. It's an Ascent wireless model. This isn't the first time
I have notice it, but thought it might make for an interesting tech sort
of thread here, now this was a two and a half hour ride. When I got home
I checked the readings, and clearly it's not getting info from the
pick-up all the time. It said my average speed was about 7.5 miles per
hour, and total distance was 15.5 miles. Now I KNOW that I am slow, but
not even close to being THAT slow. Now the cycle computer in question is
not a very expensive model. and not a GREAT brand, but really now? I
mean enough already. So whats some advice about computers, go with a
wired design like my Cateye Enduro 8 on my other bike, or just get a
better wireless model?

Ken
--
The bicycle is just as good company as most husbands and, when it gets
old and shabby, a woman can dispose of it and get a new one without
shocking the entire community. ~Ann Strong