r/cycling • u/PTRS • Sep 01 '16
Cycle computer?
I struggle to understand the benefit of a cycle computer over a phone mounted on the handlebars with Strava and a HRM connected to it (assuming battery life is not a factor).
What am I missing here?
13
u/Evil_Bonsai Sep 01 '16
Accuracy. You're missing accuracy. Phones are ok, but a cycling computer actually rolls over the ground, and provided you set it correctly, will give better distance and speed results.
2
u/skaterrj Sep 01 '16
And battery life. The cycling computer can go for hours and hours... the phone will go dead sooner.
1
u/NowFreeToMaim Sep 01 '16
Garmin, hub mounted sensor. for all you get to do with a Garmin bike bundle. I'm sure the very astronomically small diff,if any in accuracy between that and a dedicated wireless computer is ok to live with. And besides the only big problem with using a phone as your "computer" is cell reception. Battery life? Ehhhh. If you're only running your bike app to record the ride you should be ok. I still use a 5s and a 2.5-3 hour ride on cyclometer leaves me with about 25-20% battery after. not bad considering my phone is "old". An iPhone 6 model year or up style phone should give you more battery life just using a cycling app. Especially those droid users who brag about superior battery conservation options. I mean shit, pros barely use dedicated computers any more.
1
u/Squareeyed1984 Sep 01 '16
Wahoo make a several speed sensors that are smartphone compatible. In fact there's several companies out there that do
3
u/Evil_Bonsai Sep 01 '16
Yes they do. They are also more expensive than a Cateye cycling computer.
5
u/Squareeyed1984 Sep 01 '16
Good point, I will mention that cheap cycling computers won't easily upload there data to any kind of cycling app.
-2
u/ZotFietser Sep 01 '16
This is, thankfully, no longer true.
If you're using GPS then performance is comparable to a Garmin (or similar), and if you're using a cadence and speed sensor then provided it's set up correctly (wheel circumference) it will be as good as a calibrated cycling computer.
If you already own a phone, then the cost of a bluetooth speed/cadence sensor is probably about equal to that of a good cheap cycle computer.
1
u/beardjerk Sep 01 '16
that seems very dependent on the quality of your gps unit and the quality of your connection to the satellites.
0
u/ZotFietser Sep 02 '16
Naturally this is going to be the case.
If you've got a phone with a good gps chip, then provided the connection to the satellites is moderate it's going to be fine. Mine can track me almost to the metre - obviously YMMV, but if you can't afford several hundred clams for a Garmin or similar (even their lowest model is only just less than a £100).
It's not even dependent on having a network connection to assist the GPS (my old HTC M8 functions as a makeshift computer for tracking my speed and HR), and GPS location is recorded and I can export it later to whatever service I feel like using in almost any format (thanks to Wahoo Fitness).
Any satellite unit is going to be dependent on the quality of the signal to the sats though, of course - even Fred's precious Garmin unit.
2
u/beardjerk Sep 02 '16
we are talking about the accuracy of speed and distance as measured by a speed sensor mounted on the bike vs that measured by gps. not gps vs gps.
5
4
4
u/jlebrech Sep 01 '16
-
a dedicated battery that'll last 7+ hours is what you'll need for longer rides.
-
the screens are made to be seen with sun glare
3
u/pedunt Sep 01 '16
The deal-makers for me is battery life and keeping my phone safe in the case of an accident.
3
u/fattybob Sep 01 '16
Size, weight, potential damage and theft and of course the big one for most - is battery life
3
Sep 01 '16
I have a cheap and simple Sigma. It just displays speed and distance. I have never changed the battery in the two years I've had it. It just works all day every day, come rain or shine
2
u/shavenut58 Sep 01 '16
Cadence?
3
u/Gnascher Sep 01 '16
You can use any bluetooth speed and cadence sensor with most phone cycling apps.
1
u/shavenut58 Sep 01 '16
I see that now. So do power meters like Stages connect also to a phone app? If so, that saves me a lot of $ initially, can avoid the Garmin 800 cost, I already have a bike computer.
1
u/Gnascher Sep 01 '16
As long as your power meter is Bluetooth 4.0, or if it's Ant+, your phone can handle Ant+ ... many can but it's not enabled by default, there's apps for that. Otherwise, you might need an Ant+ dongle.
Once you have your connectivity issues sorted out, I know for a fact that Strava will consume your power data, I'm sure most other decent cycling apps will too.
2
u/Gnascher Sep 01 '16
I used to have the same thinking. I already have a powerful computer in my pocket, all I need is some sensors. I never wanted to put the phone on my bars though (because phones are expensive and don't react well to water or impacts). However, I thought Wahoo's RFLKT would be the perfect choice. I used that for a little over a year, but with every firmware and/or app update, the performance of the RFLKT and my Android phone just got increasingly glitchy. The app developers stopped trying to fix bugs because Wahoo had basically abandoned the RFLKT and started pushing the ELEMNT. But while it worked, it really was a great solution. I could keep my phone tucked away in my jersey ... with a powerbank if I needed all-day performance ... and still have all the data I wanted on the bars. In the end, I had to ditch it, as it got to the point where it either wouldn't pair with my phone or I'd have to fiddle with it for minutes before I could embark on a ride. I'm pretty pissed at Wahoo ... the RFLKT wasn't a cheap device, but they treated it like a throwaway, and I only got a year out of it.
I replaced that with a Garmin 800. So much simpler ... just pop it in its twist-lock, catch the satellites (usually pretty quick, unless I'm starting from a point far from its last known fix, then it takes a few more seconds) hit "start" and I'm on my way.
2
u/NotDavidWooderson Sep 01 '16
Phone on the handlebar? So you mean I could catch pokemon and submit my TPS report (with the correct cover page) while riding?
Brilliant!
1
u/kickstand Sep 01 '16
I used a simple Cateye cycle computer for decades. Kept a little notebook in which I'd write down my time and distance daily. Then moved to excel. Now I ditched the Cateye and I use Strava on my smartphone. So much easier.
1
u/jlebrech Sep 01 '16
i'd rather have a power meter than a cycle computer, you can pair a stages with wahoo fitness and then get it to tell you your watts via audio.
1
Sep 01 '16 edited Sep 01 '16
Comparing it to a Garmin... Battery, weather resistance, durability and data. To get access to the same levels of data requires a subscription. Depending on how often you upgrade a GPS unit, it will be more or less expensive, but it comes down to pay upfront or pay as you go.
But honestly, if you're a more casual rider and aren't seduced by all the cool toys, your phone is probably enough.
Edit: Strava is $60 a year, an edge 520 is $300, so the break even is in 5 years. I currently use an edge 500 I bought in 2009. Even if I upgraded more frequently, I would still choose to go with GPS for weather resistance, durability, and battery.
1
u/billy_da_goat Sep 01 '16 edited Sep 01 '16
A few things:
-
Battery life is a huge factor. The factor, really.
-
I'm not aware of any quality cadence or power meters that work directly with a phone. Edit: I see wahoo makes some.
-
the GPS in a standalone is far superior to the GPS in a phone. My iPhone GPS only pings every minute. I've seen some pretty crazy routes drawn in strava as a result.
1
-2
u/1123581321345589144s Sep 01 '16
I struggle to see the benefit at all, but nvm explaining it, never going to buy one
10
u/catfromjacksonville Sep 01 '16
pouring rain might damage it, crashing your bike might damage it. customization of data screens, lap button with lap specific data, normalized power, huge phone looks kinda awkward, real buttons are easier to use compared to touch screens with sticky and sweaty fingers. so just for cycling a phone might be enough but for longer rides and training it lacks most of the essential features for displaying power data and various averages.