[ 2013 ] Bicycle Computers? Advice, please.

[heathpack]

Any cyclists out there?

I started cycling about 2 years ago after I bought a 20ish year old mountain bike at a garage sale for $37.50. Eventually I went as far as that bike could take me and I decided to buy a road bike. I didn't really know what I wanted in a bike so I googled "entry level road bikes," got a list of 10 reccs from Bicycling Mag and went out and bought one of those about a month ago- the women's version of the Trek entry level bike, the Lexi C.

Totally smitten with the bike. But I bought an inadequate computer- a great buy at $25, I have ave speed, max speed, current speed, time elapsed, time of day, trip meter and odometer.

I very obviously need a computer with cadence and heart rate. Right now I ride mostly flats in town, but eventually would like to track elevation change, so that is a desired feature as well. It is very windy where I ride (sometimes), so I can see the utility of being able to track power, but right now that seems like a feature that is a little more advanced than what I need.

It seems like I will be looking at a Garmin (open to other ideas, but all queries seem to lead that direction). So the question then becomes, do I get the mapping feature or is this unnecessary? The high end Garmin cycle computers are more expensive than the bike itself, about $200 more than the non-mapping version. I have an IPhone, so in theory I don't need the maps on the cycle computer as well. But I'd like to avoid buying a pricey computer only find its not enough and need to get a new one.

I'm not sure what I'll do with the cycling- three of us have the half-formed idea of riding a century next spring, so I will really just be trying to build a solid cycling base over the next year. A friend of mine does some touring, and I could totally see joining her- so maybe the maps are worth it after all? I have almost zero interest in racing, BTW.

Advice?

Thanks,
H

 

[Phydeaux]

Sure.

With 2 years under your belt, you're a beginner. Hope you don't have a problem with that, but how many thousands of miles can anyone log in 2 years?

It's obvious you're taken up in the tech end, and want to add a cool toy. However, you're also interested in the sport with goals of touring and doing a century. Based on my experience, with many thousands of road miles behind me, I'd suggest you focus your attention on improving your cycling.

For example, it took me years to learn the technique of pedaling in circles, efficiently. I'm talking about smooth, pure power generation here. Since you ride in a windy area, this will be even more benefit. Then there's body position. Unless you're an absolute natural, this takes time to develop, and concentration.

So to summarize, there's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting a cool computer. However, it does take a percentage of your attention away. Hate to call it a distraction, but to a certain degree it is. In your developing years of improving your riding technique, you need as few distractions as possible. You need a LOT of concentration and focus. At least the serious cyclists I know did when they were starting out.

Focus when you ride. Pedal in circles, cleanly. Body position.

Good luck and enjoy the sport. And be sure to hang with people with more experience than you.

And if you do pop for a nice computer, do you really want one with a built in heart monitor? I would think you'd want a wrist type to use off the bike.

 

[heathpack]

Sure.

With 2 years under your belt, you're a beginner. Hope you don't have a problem with that, but how many thousands of miles can anyone log in 2 years?

It's obvious you're taken up in the tech end, and want to add a cool toy. However, you're also interested in the sport with goals of touring and doing a century. Based on my experience, with many thousands of road miles behind me, I'd suggest you focus your attention on improving your cycling.

For example, it took me years to learn the technique of pedaling in circles, efficiently. I'm talking about smooth, pure power generation here. Since you ride in a windy area, this will be even more benefit. Then there's body position. Unless you're an absolute natural, this takes time to develop, and concentration.

So to summarize, there's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting a cool computer. However, it does take a percentage of your attention away. Hate to call it a distraction, but to a certain degree it is. In your developing years of improving your riding technique, you need as few distractions as possible. You need a LOT of concentration and focus. At least the serious cyclists I know did when they were starting out.

Focus when you ride. Pedal in circles, cleanly. Body position.

Good luck and enjoy the sport. And be sure to hang with people with more experience than you.

And if you do pop for a nice computer, do you really want one with a built in heart monitor? I would think you'd want a wrist type to use off the bike.

Thanks Phydeaux. I actually do want the computer to meet some specific training goals. To meet the goals I need the data. To get the data I need the computer. So yes I am a beginner. As I stated I'm trying to build a base. Need cadence and HR data to efficiently accomplish that.

Anyone with bicycle computer advice?

H

 

[Phydeaux]

Thanks Phydeaux. I actually do want the computer to meet some specific training goals. To meet the goals I need the data. To get the data I need the computer. So yes I am a beginner. As I stated I'm trying to build a base. Need cadence and HR data to efficiently accomplish that.

Anyone with bicycle computer advice?

H

Sorry I misunderstood. I didn't know you were planning to build your base on a stationary trainer. My bad.

 

[heathpack]

Sorry I misunderstood. I didn't know you were planning to build your base on a stationary trainer. My bad.

Said nothing about a stationary trainer.(??)

Quite simply: asking about a C-O-M-P-U-T-E-R.

H

 

[Elan]

Personally, I'd buy a cycling computer that adds cadence (I have a CatEye Astrale 8), add a watch style HR monitor with bike mount (you want a big display, cuz it's tough to read when riding) and blow off the GPS/mapping feature. Go with that for awhile and see how it works. The mapping thing seems cool, but realistically, you can get the elevation info you need off any topo map. I'd look into the whole mapping/post-processing stuff later if it still seems like a good idea.

 

[heathpack]

Personally, I'd buy a cycling computer that adds cadence (I have a CatEye Astrale 8), add a watch style HR monitor with bike mount (you want a big display, cuz it's tough to read when riding) and blow off the GPS/mapping feature. Go with that for awhile and see how it works. The mapping thing seems cool, but realistically, you can get the elevation info you need off any topo map. I'd look into the whole mapping/post-processing stuff later if it still seems like a good idea.

Thanks Jim.

But a question: Why a seperate HR monitor vs integrated? I swim, lift weights, walk, elliptical and yoga in addition to biking. I don't need a HR monitor for any of those activities (the elliptical maybe but the machines already have that feature), just for the biking. So why a seperate HR monitor? Cheaper? Better in some way?

H

 

[Elan]

Thanks Jim.

But a question: Why a seperate HR monitor vs integrated? I swim, lift weights, walk, elliptical and yoga in addition to biking. I don't need a HR monitor for any of those activities (the elliptical maybe but the machines already have that feature), just for the biking. So why a seperate HR monitor? Cheaper? Better in some way?

H

Nothing wrong with going for an integrated unit. Kind of depends on what you already own and with which other activities you intend to use the HR monitor. Polar makes cycling computers with built in HR sensing, so if you have a Polar strap that might be the way to go.

 

[Ron98GT]

Deleted for lack of interest.

 

[SMHarman]

I also have a Garmin Forerunner 410 GPS Watch (replaced by the FR-210), that I use for running. It uses the same heart rate monitor as my Edge 800. It can also use the Speed/Cadence sensor. You could just buy the watch and the keep it on your wrist or mount it on the handle bars.

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?pID=83274

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=142&pID=83280

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?pID=11078


Garmin has a number of programs that you can upload to:

https://connect.garmin.com/features

http://www.garmin.com/en-US/shop/downloads/basecamp

I don't have a bike / computer but would concur with this recommend this or the forrunner 310xt version as something that is more multifunction. I use mine for running and skiing and if I got a bike would add the cadence etc bit to the frame.

It all communicates with ANT+ a sport related form of bluetooth so even if you change the forerunner / edge etc they other hardware does not need updating

 

[zinger1457]

Since most of the biking I do is within 40 miles of my home the routes are very familiar to me so a GPS feature would not be needed. I use a Cateye cycle computer and a Polar heart rate monitor watch. I'm happy with the Polar heart rate monitor (also use it for hiking/jogging) and know they make a cycle computer with a built in heart rate monitor so it might be worth looking into but I doubt they have the mapping feature.

 

[Ron98GT]

Since most of the biking I do is within 40 miles of my home the routes are very familiar to me so a GPS feature would not be needed. I use a Cateye cycle computer and a Polar heart rate monitor watch. I'm happy with the Polar heart rate monitor (also use it for hiking/jogging) and know they make a cycle computer with a built in heart rate monitor so it might be worth looking into but I doubt they have the mapping feature.

Ok, you got me confused. The GPS is used for mapping. If you don't want GPS, you don't get mapping. If you want mapping, you need the GPS. You can't have it both ways.

The GPS tracks your speed and location. The GPS speed along with with your heart rate gives you a better indication of how how many calories you burnt. The GPS also tracks your elevation. Besides displaying your cadence, it's also stored in the Edge or Forerunner.

The Garmin programs store your work outs, after they are uploaded. I believe you asked for that also. But you get none of it, without the GPS.

So, I'm still confused. Hope You figure it out.

 

[SMHarman]

It is easy in this thread to confuse GPS data logging and analysis for speed, elevation etc with GPS navigation.
You want the former regardless. The latter is not so necessary.

 

[heathpack]

Ok, of the Garmins (the only brand I've looked into before), I guess the Edge 500 would make the most sense. No mapping but I do get cadence, heart rate and can add a power meter. $250, plus $60 for the HR strap and $60 for the cadence sensor.

Wll have to look at some of the other mentioned brands, although I see some were deleted from one post for unknown reasons.

Thanks everybody

H

 

[SMHarman]

Deleted for lack of interest.

I found this interesting though, I even quoted it. Thank you.

Ok, of the Garmins (the only brand I've looked into before), I guess the Edge 500 would make the most sense. No mapping but I do get cadence, heart rate and can add a power meter. $250, plus $60 for the HR strap and $60 for the cadence sensor.

Wll have to look at some of the other mentioned brands, although I see some were deleted from one post for unknown reasons.

Thanks everybody

H

The Edge 500 has GPS. It uses it for elevation, another distance measurement (you need to calibrate the wheel sensor for accurate distance) and the fun of putting your activities up on connect.garmin.com

http://connect.garmin.com/activity/290345211 is a link to me skiing in Sugarbush as gps logged on my forerunner 405.

 

[zinger1457]

Ok, you got me confused. The GPS is used for mapping. If you don't want GPS, you don't get mapping. If you want mapping, you need the GPS. You can't have it both ways.

So, I'm still confused. Hope You figure it out.

It appears all of that banging your head against the wall has made you confused . I know what a GPS does and don't want/need GPS features. Just stating to the OP that the Polar cycle unit probably only has 2 of the 3 features he's looking for.

 

[heathpack]

I bought the Garmin Edge 510 today, along with a cadence/speed sensor & HR monitor strap. The bike shop installed it, I picked it up late in the day and decided to give it a whirl.

The Garmin could detect the cadence/speed sensor but for some reason cadence would not display. So it will be back to the bike shop tomorrow for them to figure it out.

The rest of it worked well. The goal was a ride in which I spent most of my time at 65-75% max HR which for me is between 117 and 135 bpm. Well, that's exactly what I got. Without a cadence sensor, my strategy has been to pedal as fast as I can. Its nice to see that pedaling as fast as I can happens to put me in my target HR zone. This is my basic training ride, the place where I intend to spend a large percentage of my time for the foreseeable future.

It sure will be nice to have the cadence data point as well.

Thanks everybody for the advice!

H

 

[x3 skier]

For those of you who have an iPhone, Core Coders have an App called Bike Tracks. It tracks speed, distance, elevation, etc.

http://www.corecoders.com/CoreCoders/biketracks.html

I use their skiing App called Ski Tracks on my iPhone and it works well. For 3 Bucks, its a pretty good simple bike computer if you have an iPhone. I have no clue if there are similar systems for Andriod but suspect there are.

I would check it out before spending on a biking GPS device.

Cheers

 

[lvhmbh]

Thank you, thank you! Got the app and love it!!! Just what I needed

 

[x3 skier]

Thank you, thank you! Got the app and love it!!! Just what I needed

Welcome. I would note Skitracks recorded me doing a max of 71 and 68 MPH on a couple of days. The rest of the time it was pretty accurate.

After the 68 MPH recording, I calibrated it with my car speedo and it was pretty close but I doubt I hit 68 on skis unless it is a suppressed memory.

Cheers

 

[laurac260]

For what it's worth, I have a HRM elliptical, a HRM on my treadmill, and a HRM watch. All use the chest strap. And the ONLY one that is accurate is the watch. The other ones fluctuate wildly sometimes.

As far as a HRM on a bike, my own personal opinion is anything that takes your eyes off the road and to a downward focus on a tiny computer screen is a bad idea, especially if you are over 40. Once you hit 40, the time it takes for our eyes to adjust from distance to up close focusing on a small screen is long enough that you might find yourself wrecking your bike.

I'd stick watch. Program it to tone when you within your target heart rate, so you have no need to look at it.

 

[heathpack]

Welcome. I would note Skitracks recorded me doing a max of 71 and 68 MPH on a couple of days. The rest of the time it was pretty accurate.

After the 68 MPH recording, I calibrated it with my car speedo and it was pretty close but I doubt I hit 68 on skis unless it is a suppressed memory.

Cheers

I used to use an app like this with the bike and would sometimes get reading like this. I always assumed the phone had briefly lost GPS signal and then picked you up again. My thought was because you had a sudden jump in your GPS data points, the app thought you had moved from point A to point B more quickly than you actually had, hence the sudden change in speed.

Anyway, my phone has lost ability to track my location accurately with GPS for these types of apps. I have MapMyRide and RunKeeper. Neither can follow me accurately anymore (although google maps works fine, so it seems to be app specific)- I get a zig zag course that claims I have ridden way more miles than I actually have.

Im not sure what the issue actually is, and I didn't put too much mental energy into it once I realized I needed the cadence and HR info as well.

H

 

[SMHarman]

Anyway, my phone has lost ability to track my location accurately with GPS for these types of apps. I have MapMyRide and RunKeeper. Neither can follow me accurately anymore (although google maps works fine, so it seems to be app specific)- I get a zig zag course that claims I have ridden way more miles than I actually have.

Im not sure what the issue actually is, and I didn't put too much mental energy into it once I realized I needed the cadence and HR info as well.

H

The Phone is on some energy saver GPS mode which means it gets GPS positions less frequently.

 

[SMHarman]

Welcome. I would note Skitracks recorded me doing a max of 71 and 68 MPH on a couple of days. The rest of the time it was pretty accurate.

After the 68 MPH recording, I calibrated it with my car speedo and it was pretty close but I doubt I hit 68 on skis unless it is a suppressed memory.

Cheers

I know friends that have done gate times of 107kph / 66mph
I know I have GPS readings that show at least 50mph.
http://connect.garmin.com/player/24288299
I know one of the reasons I bought a helmet for skiing was when I got a GPS watch and realised just how fast I was travelling on two planks.

 

[x3 skier]

I know friends that have done gate times of 107kph / 66mph
I know I have GPS readings that show at least 50mph.
http://connect.garmin.com/player/24288299
I know one of the reasons I bought a helmet for skiing was when I got a GPS watch and realised just how fast I was travelling on two planks.

My Daily Peaks are usually around 45-50 MPH but 60-70 is a little suspicious.

Cheers