cycle computers

Ringo · Post by **Ringo** » 23 Jan 2009 19:13

more birthday money to spend so i've decided to get myself a new computer for my racing bike and tt bike. I want one that is wireless and reads cadence as well as speed and was just wondering if anyone could recommend me a particular model. If it's possible i would like one that i could buy spare magnets and sensors for and use it on both bikes, is that even possible?

cheers

Ed Moss · Post by **Ed Moss** » 23 Jan 2009 19:35

powertap wireless <@>

David Cole · Post by **David Cole** » 24 Jan 2009 10:57

Adrian
If you can't afford the recommended "Powertap Wireless" it's useful to have a computer with a HR measurement function. Cateye make some good models

Dave

Ringo · Post by **Ringo** » 24 Jan 2009 11:15

cheers, dave. I already have a HRM so i don't need one woth that built in. After reading various forums and reviews i think it's pretty impossible to find a wireless cadence computer. may have to settle for one with wires

Stats · Post by **Stats** » 24 Jan 2009 11:58

I bought the Cateye Strada which has Cadence The large display is always speed with a smaller display below that can be cycled to show cadence

Max · Post by **Max** » 24 Jan 2009 12:53

Ive been using the Blackburn Delphi 4.0 wireless computer but with wired cadence, Currently on sale £22,95 at Ribble comes with 2 brackets one with & one without cadence wire. Spare magnet available at http://www.sjscycles.co.uk/product-Blac ... -15152.htm it has worked well for me decent mounts all the usual functions.

Even more spares at CRC http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Bran ... randID=200

Ringo · Post by **Ringo** » 24 Jan 2009 13:05

cheers guys, i'm in no real rush to get one so i'll have a bit of a shop around.

Almac · Post by **Almac** » 26 Jan 2009 16:44

Ringo wrote:cheers, dave. I already have a HRM so i don't need one woth that built in. After reading various forums and reviews i think it's pretty impossible to find a wireless cadence computer. may have to settle for one with wires

Here's 2 and a shameless plug

http://www.birminghamcitycycles.co.uk/p ... sp?id=1246
Upgrade kit is £20

http://www.birminghamcitycycles.co.uk/p ... sp?id=1249

Cadence kit £20.00

Use the Mavic Wintech HR and love it

Ringo · Post by **Ringo** » 26 Jan 2009 18:48

cheers al, might try to pop up to the shop over the weekend to have a look.

John Sanderson · Post by **John Sanderson** » 27 Jan 2009 08:24

Controversial post for this thread - but why bother with a computer....

Since my last one packed up (i seem to have the touch of death for cycle computers) i've been using an old HRM (which has long since stopped reading my HR) and just recording the time i've been riding for...

At first I was gutted that I couldn't see my AV speed, or work out how many miles I was doing with each ride, but now I am happy knowing how long i've been on my bike and not having to scribble down a while load of other numbers when I get home from a ride!

Ringo · Post by **Ringo** » 27 Jan 2009 10:57

the computer i'm looking for is going to go on my tt bike so it's quite useful to know how fast your going, what your cadence is and how far you've got left. i've been racing for the last couple of years with no computer and think that it's held me back.

Ed Moss · Post by **Ed Moss** » 27 Jan 2009 12:52

Not one for controversy, but you will go faster without a computer.

Ringo · Post by **Ringo** » 27 Jan 2009 13:05

Ed Moss wrote:Not one for controversy, but you will go faster without a computer.

Explain? Or are you talking purely about the weight issue

Not disagreeing with you ed as alot of people say it's best to race purely on how you feel. But i think that, in say a 25mtt, it would be useful to know your average speed with about 5 miles to go so you can judge how hard to push to get under the hour or beat a pb. You can also work out what your average speed would need to be to go under 23 mins in a 10 and try to stick to that.

I think last season there were times when i finished a tt knowing i could have pushed harder and a computer would show me exactly how hard i need to push to achieve my goals.

Thats why i want to use one this season.

Ed Moss · Post by **Ed Moss** » 27 Jan 2009 13:32

OK, say you are riding a 25 and you get to the turn in 20 minutes, your average speed 37.5mph, what does this mean for the rest of the race?
Most likely you have had a massive tailwind pushing you along so you think easy to get under the hour I only need to average 18.75mph, but the headwind slows you to a crawl so you are down to 12mph for the return leg, meaning you take around 60 minutes to get back....

An extreme example but the same would apply if you did 60 minutes out to the turn.

During a 25 there will be parts where you average 30mph and other bits you average 16mph, so what do you do during the slow bits? Danger is you push too hard to keep the average up and then you can't take advantage of the faster bits of the course.

Look at all the top testers, they don't use any assistance and do it all on feel, it does take a while to work out where you want to be but on the K33 for example I ramp up the power as the race goes on, making sure after the last RAB I can push above 100% for the finishing leg.
For example the outward leg is done at 300W, return leg 310W and the final leg average 335W.

It's an old saying but don't start out too hard and you should be fine....

But then again find what works best for you

Ringo · Post by **Ringo** » 27 Jan 2009 13:54

i get what your saying ed. But i still think that it would be useful. I went all last season going by feel and i think it held me back and stopped me from going as hard as i could because i didn't know how fast i was going. Like you i take it slightly easier on the way out, but if you put in the same effort on 2 days and one day is slightly windier then the other then it will slow you down. It mght only be by about half a mile an hour but over five miles it adds up so i think a computer is useful to allow you to see how fast you are going a adjust your timing to make the most of the conditions.

I hope you understand what i am saying, don't think i've explained it too well.

Philip Whiteman · Post by **Philip Whiteman** » 27 Jan 2009 15:18

Ed Moss wrote: For example the outward leg is done at 300W, return leg 310W and the final leg average 335W.

flippin heck. That would damn near kill me!

Stats · Post by **Stats** » 27 Jan 2009 17:44

Ed Moss wrote:OK, say you are riding a 25 and you get to the turn in 20 minutes, your average speed 37.5mph, what does this mean for the rest of the race?
Most likely you have had a massive tailwind pushing you along so you think easy to get under the hour I only need to average 18.75mph, but the headwind slows you to a crawl so you are down to 12mph for the return leg, meaning you take around 60 minutes to get back....

An extreme example but the same would apply if you did 60 minutes out to the turn.

During a 25 there will be parts where you average 30mph and other bits you average 16mph, so what do you do during the slow bits? Danger is you push too hard to keep the average up and then you can't take advantage of the faster bits of the course.

Look at all the top testers, they don't use any assistance and do it all on feel, it does take a while to work out where you want to be but on the K33 for example I ramp up the power as the race goes on, making sure after the last RAB I can push above 100% for the finishing leg.
For example the outward leg is done at 300W, return leg 310W and the final leg average 335W.

It's an old saying but don't start out too hard and you should be fine....

But then again find what works best for you

Interesting way of doing it Ed how do you know what you are doing without looking also the K33 is a funny course whereby you are generally going up or down a gradient so your power output will be higher when the road rises and lower when the slope is decreasing I do know that it requires approx a constant 270 watts to break the hour

John Sanderson · Post by **John Sanderson** » 28 Jan 2009 08:17

I went all last season going by feel and i think it held me back and stopped me from going as hard as i could because i didn't know how fast i was going.

Isn't the crucial thing here how hard you are going - not how fast you are going? As Ed says - a range of factors can affect how fast you are going...

I can empathise with the issue of not knowing how hard to go - and that was why I started looking at my HR as a measure of effort. As long as I can be confident that I am trying as hard as I can I assume that the average speed will look after itself!

Ringo · Post by **Ringo** » 28 Jan 2009 10:24

John Sanderson wrote:
I went all last season going by feel and i think it held me back and stopped me from going as hard as i could because i didn't know how fast i was going.
Isn't the crucial thing here how hard you are going - not how fast you are going? As Ed says - a range of factors can affect how fast you are going...

I can empathise with the issue of not knowing how hard to go - and that was why I started looking at my HR as a measure of effort. As long as I can be confident that I am trying as hard as I can I assume that the average speed will look after itself!

Yes, but you could ride two different gears at the same effort but they will give you two different speeds. If you know what i mean.

eg, you could ride a small gear at a high cadence or a big gear at a lower cadence and your HR will be almost identical but the speed you are going will be different. That is why i think it's important to know how fast you are going to get the most out of the effort you put in. I've done it before in tt's where i'm struggling a bit on a big gear, i drop down 1, the cadence goes up and my speed increases slightly. All for the same effort.

Ed Moss · Post by **Ed Moss** » 28 Jan 2009 11:09

Looks like you have opened up a real can of worms.....

I know it sounds daft but your speed has nothing to do with Time trialling

The season I dropped the HRM/speedo (before I got the powertap) during races, I went faster.
Your race should be done on perceived effort, it takes practice effort and confidence to do right but after a few races you will get it.
Listen to your breathing and keep the cadence up, there you go, easy

Your body will tell you if you have started out too hard and you can learn from it the next time.

Stats · Post by **Stats** » 28 Jan 2009 12:01

Ringo wrote:
John Sanderson wrote:
I went all last season going by feel and i think it held me back and stopped me from going as hard as i could because i didn't know how fast i was going.
Isn't the crucial thing here how hard you are going - not how fast you are going? As Ed says - a range of factors can affect how fast you are going...

I can empathise with the issue of not knowing how hard to go - and that was why I started looking at my HR as a measure of effort. As long as I can be confident that I am trying as hard as I can I assume that the average speed will look after itself!
Yes, but you could ride two different gears at the same effort but they will give you two different speeds. If you know what i mean.

eg, you could ride a small gear at a high cadence or a big gear at a lower cadence and your HR will be almost identical but the speed you are going will be different. That is why i think it's important to know how fast you are going to get the most out of the effort you put in. I've done it before in tt's where i'm struggling a bit on a big gear, i drop down 1, the cadence goes up and my speed increases slightly. All for the same effort.

Adrian
I would be inclined to lean towards Ed's view on this about perceived effort but I have probably used a computer /HR monitor for the majority of my TT's since my return although the past 2-3 years I have not used a HR monitor and my 58-34 last season was done relatively unfit compared to my fitness a couple of years before without HR and I think my computer wasn't reading accurately so I only used a watch I only missed a pb because of traffic lights but it was a course pb I do have the advantage of having ridden on an I-Magic & Fortius for almost 5 years having all those figures visible you do get to know what sort of power you are generating perhaps not as accurate as powertap but it is all relative to the equiptment you use speed is the same but all things you look at will fluctuate dependant on other factors Terrain & weather conditions being the main 2 most good riders will probably tell you something like go as hard as you can phisically mantain without going over the RED LINE if that is the correct way to phrase it for me if I was to look at in HR terms it would probably be 10-15 beats below max HR but HR varies a lot we should start a topic on this there will be lots of views but at the end of the day it is whatever works for you but it always pays to try other things
Before HR & Computers I used to look at the startsheet course description and work out where I needed to be at what time to achieve the time I wanted so I knew if I was up or down I still do it now

Ringo · Post by **Ringo** » 28 Jan 2009 15:29

Ed Moss wrote: The season I dropped the HRM/speedo (before I got the powertap) during races, I went faster.

yes but that could just be natural progression. i could prob ride a tt now on a normal road bike faster then i could have done on a tt bike a couple of seasons ago. it doesn't mean that riding a road bike is better, just that i'm fitter now then i was then.

at the end of the day i think everyone has got preferences and you have to do whatever your comfortable with. For me i want to see my speed, or at least i do at the moment. even if it only helps me on a psychological level, then it's going to help me go faster as i'll be happier while i'm riding and that'll make me go faster on it's own.

Post by **CakeStop** » 28 Jan 2009 16:09

You'll also need one for your first audax, it makes it easier to follow the routesheet.

Sorry, I'll get my coat..................

Ed Moss · Post by **Ed Moss** » 28 Jan 2009 16:31

CakeStop wrote:You'll also need one for your first audax, it makes it easier to follow the routesheet.

Sorry, I'll get my coat..................

And don't forget your hat and scarf on your way out as well.....

Missiles · Post by **Missiles** » 28 Jan 2009 16:50

Ed Moss wrote:Not one for controversy, but you will go faster without a computer.

That is quite the most ridiculous contribution you have ever made, Ed. Nobody has ever proved that having a computer fitted to your bike makes you ride slower. What you do with it, though............ that's another matter.

Just to take Adrian's side, I like looking at my av speed during a TT. But I do not in any way use a computer to judge my pace - that's all done on feel, as Ed says.

Ed Moss · Post by **Ed Moss** » 28 Jan 2009 17:38

Missiles wrote:
Ed Moss wrote:Not one for controversy, but you will go faster without a computer.
That is quite the most ridiculous contribution you have ever made, Ed. Nobody has ever proved that having a computer fitted to your bike makes you ride slower. What you do with it, though............ that's another matter.

Just to take Adrian's side, I like looking at my av speed during a TT. But I do not in any way use a computer to judge my pace - that's all done on feel, as Ed says.

That's my seasons PB sorted then

Stats · Post by **Stats** » 28 Jan 2009 17:43

Missiles wrote:
Ed Moss wrote:Not one for controversy, but you will go faster without a computer.
That is quite the most ridiculous contribution you have ever made, Ed. Nobody has ever proved that having a computer fitted to your bike makes you ride slower. What you do with it, though............ that's another matter.

Just to take Adrian's side, I like looking at my av speed during a TT. But I do not in any way use a computer to judge my pace - that's all done on feel, as Ed says.

That is also the only thing I really look at when using a computer the average speed although I have cadence as well but can't see it that well as the figures are quite small the only other thing i look at is the stopwatch

Ringo · Post by **Ringo** » 28 Jan 2009 19:14

i think it's all a cunning plan by ed to make me slower this year. me thinks he's worried about his club 10 championship slipping away

Stats · Post by **Stats** » 28 Jan 2009 19:51

Ringo wrote:i think it's all a cunning plan by ed to make me slower this year. me thinks he's worried about his club 10 championship slipping away

If he slows down as much as I have since our 2 little ones arrived he might start to worry mine are 2 & 4 now so I'm on the comeback trail properly again this year now I get to sleep most nights now just got to find a training programme that fits around my life now one of these days I might take it as seriously as I did 5 years ago

George · Post by **George** » 30 Jan 2009 10:18

I agree with Ruth: Ed could have added/removed almost any item of optional kit from his bike two years ago, and his subsequent times would have been faster. A sequential relationship isn't the same thing as a causal relationship. Like Ruth, I think a computer displaying average speed can be handy for keeping you informed and focused, but you should never let it dictate your effort. Your effort at any point has to be what you judge to be only just sustainable for the entire remaining distance, and you can only recognise what is sustainable by experience. Apart from anything else, what you are capable of differs slightly from one occasion to the next. It's no good looking at your computer or power meter or whatever and seeing that you are 2% down on last time, and trying to up the effort, if by doing so you go over your sustainable line for that day, and consequently crack before the finish.

In the very early stages of an event (especially a long event), it is relatively difficult to judge where the sustainable line is; the further you go round, the easier it gets to know how hard you can afford to go without cracking before the finish. For that reason, Ed's power output pattern definitely strikes a chord with me. I always used to err very slightly on the cautious side early on, then crank it up very gradually as I went round. Unfortunately, I think that if I had ever ridden with a power meter, the figures recorded might have shown a similar pattern to Ed's, but would have been about 25% lower. I am a natural time-trialist between the ears, but the rest of me has always refused to cooperate.