Cycle computers, essential accessory or extravagant extra?

[Alex H]

That's cutting edge in my book - wireless sensors on a push bike. Whatever next?

I've never got a wireless computer to work on my bike(s)

 

[DaveReading]

But seriously, cyclists have managed to get around on bikes, and keep themselves fit on bikes, for over 100 years without needing to fit cycle computers, satnavs, or use smartphone tracking devices.
There seems to be this bizarre mentality out there now that you have to:-
1) Buy a new shiny bike when taking up (or returning to) cycling, even though a used one will do exactly the same job.
2) Kit yourself out in costly cycle-specific clothing, even though you are only going to ride 5 or 10 miles.
3) Start obsessing about all sorts of irrelevant nonsense such as heart rate and calories burned data.
Remember it's the old-fashioned bit that involves turning the pedals that gets you fitter, not how new and shiny your bike is, not what you wear whilst riding, and not whether you have a load of GPS data to analyse at home on your computer afterwards.

That's mostly true, but distance travelled is a useful thing to have on an Audax, for example.

In fact I'm seriously considering investing in one of these:

 

[MontyVeda]

I used to have a computer and really liked it... then some scrote nicked my front wheel and the essential magnet, so that was the end of that.

Thing is, I quickly realised that i preferred not having the computer to having it... no more trying to pedal 1mph faster than I was peddling, and no more trying to exceed 40mph on a big downhill.

 

[annedonnelly]

My very basic computer died a few months ago. The sensor drowned when the bike was outside on a very wet day. I've not got round to replacing it yet and I'm not really missing it. I'm not riding any faster, slower or further without it.

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

I'm not against using cycle computers, so long as the cyclist uses them as their servant, not allows the computer/GPS device to become their master. The reason I got a cheap Cateye is I wanted to log my total mileage on the bike, and get an idea of typical riding speeds and averages over different surfaces & road conditions. I now know roughly what a "good" ride looks like in terms of these basics, so I can see if my fitness/speed is getting better; i.e. average trending upwards, same for daily ride distance. However, I don't set myself specific targets to hit X average speed or Y distance, and then half kill myself to achieve them or ride dangerously in traffic to try and prevent congestion and traffic signals dragging my average speed down. Some rides are really good, you hit all-green traffic lights, no-one gets in the way, and you don't have to pull over on off-tarmac tracks to let someone walking their dog pass by. Other rides are the complete opposite, loads of stops and starts and loads of runners/walkers/animals encountered. Oddly though I don't actually encounter that many other cyclists most of the time!

 

[bpsmith]

Is that because the cyclists are avoiding you?

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

Is that because the cyclists are avoiding you?

Maybe it's because I'll get out and ride in places the Carbonistas fear to tread in case they snap something in half!
More seriously though, I really don't see that many at all considering I live in a densely populated city. The few roadies seem to stick to the straighter main roads with the better surfaces, I meet the odd commuter/utility flat bar rider dressed in working gear on shared use paths, but rarely anyone riding on gravel/dirt for pleasure/fitness. Most of the bikes round my way are suspension BSO's used by car-less yoofs to loiter around the town on or fetch a Big Mac - they don't actually do anything like ride them off road or for significant distances.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

I have the Garmin 800 got it as a good deal at Halfords, brand new £120 when at the time they were £399, but I don't use 80% of it's features, I don't use the Sat Nav TBH I can't really make out the screen when I'm bouncing down a bridleway, on the road it was a little better but still not good. I do have a HRM & Cadence sensors, but rarely use the HRM function, the cadence is good to see post ride & I do sometimes look at it when riding but rarely. The lap feature I have never used, the feature where you can ride against the ghost self I have never used, I go out to ride to enjoy not push myself. If I want to see how I did I use Strava afterwards, but I mainly use it to log distance etc. Using a phone is okay but they aren't as accurate as a dedicated unit & I'd rather not drain the phone battery just in case I need to use it as a phone. I certainly wouldn't pay the full price for a 800/820 these days, the 130 appears totally adequate, but it does all depend what you want out of it & where you intend to be in 12 months time.

 

[midlife]

Just had a check and the cateye jobby I have can be had with a cadence sensor..... For a bit over 25 quid.

https://www.evanscycles.com/cateye-...MI07m3oZHs2wIVDbTtCh3DNwCDEAQYAiABEgLEzfD_BwE

 

[Milzy]

If you’re serious about cycling then treat yourself to an element bolt.

 

[FishFright]

If you’re serious about numbers then treat yourself to an element bolt.

FTFY
But if you really do like numbers the Bolt is rather good

 

[smutchin]

So are the cadence and heart monitors a waste of time, are they any use?

They're very good at measuring your heart rate and cadence, but not much else.

Do you feel a pressing need to know your heart rate and cadence?

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

Just had a check and the cateye jobby I have can be had with a cadence sensor..... For a bit over 25 quid.

In the real world, what practical use IS a cadence sensor though? Same goes for a HRM. When we ride bikes, our legs soon tell us when we're slogging too hard and need to change down a gear, and when we're spinning uncomfortably fast and need to change up. Trying to ride at a specific target cadence that falls outside the individual's natural comfortable range merely results in less enjoyable cycling and accelerated fatigue. It's not something that's very useful to know, because even if we do know it, there's nothing much we can do to change it anyway.

 

[midlife]

In the real world, what practical use IS a cadence sensor though? Same goes for a HRM. When we ride bikes, our legs soon tell us when we're slogging too hard and need to change down a gear, and when we're spinning uncomfortably fast and need to change up. Trying to ride at a specific target cadence that falls outside the individual's natural comfortable range merely results in less enjoyable cycling and accelerated fatigue. It's not something that's very useful to know, because even if we do know it, there's nothing much we can do to change it anyway.

I thought it was interesting that they made such a device for not a huge amount of money, I didn't advise the OP to buy it or indeed say that cadence is a requirement. Training aside, I'm with you on this one

 

[Bloodaxe]

I bought a cadence add-on for my Sigma, but the novelty quickly wore off.

As for a heart rate monitor, I'd prefer not to known what my heart is doing.