How much technology on a bike is "too much"?

[screenman]

Dynamos haven't made that much progress in recent years. And then you've different voltages to work with. Put wires into what should be a wireless system in some cases.

Wind?

 

[pjd57]

All these brackets/ mounts that let people put their phone on the handlebars should in my opinion be banned.
A major distraction for any cyclist.

 

[classic33]

Wind?

How do you sort the different voltages out. Every manufacturer seems to favour their own, even connection.

 

[screenman]

How do you sort the different voltages out. Every manufacturer seems to favour their own, even connection.

I give in.

 

[classic33]

I give in.

On lights alone, I've "D's" to "AAAA's", three seperate connectors for those with internal fixed batteries, two seperate sized external batteries(6V & 12 V). Backup lights that use CR2032 & CR2035 button batteries.

Sort the power supply problems and it may just be possible.

 

[MontyVeda]

the only bit of tech i've had is a cheap little computer... i don't regret taking that off so in my book, any tech is too much.

 

[Globalti]

One of my cycling buddies is big on Strava and keeps deriding my Cateye computer, saying "If it's not on Strava it didn't happen" which is quite irritating really.

 

[raleighnut]

I suppose the front wheel motor on my trike is quite high-tech, it's a 3 phase brushless 'Hall Effect' motor that freewheels when not powered.

 

[Nonethewiser]

Whilst I'm generally not anti-tech I'd prefer bicycles to remain relatively simple, wholly mechanical, machines that remain within my ability to service myself. Unlike cars, which I gave up on home servicing years ago.

 

[Smokin Joe]

Whilst I'm generally not anti-tech I'd prefer bicycles to remain relatively simple, wholly mechanical, machines that remain within my ability to service myself. Unlike cars, which I gave up on home servicing years ago.

They still will, because most people who ride a bike just want something they can hop on once a week or month and just ride for short distances. The demand will always be there. But the choice will also be there for those who like to take advantage of the new tech.

 

[Randy Butternubs]

It's not actually that exciting, and not a particularly big jump from just having a GPS computer. A lot of it is integration into a single head unit of various sensors like cadence and power, which largely already exists, but maybe not such a smooth integration. And really that's only of interest to that subset of sports cyclists who train with power meters and/or cadence which is a pretty niche

Then there's connection to lights, and radar, indicators, which all seems a bit gimmicky. And most of the above sports cyclists who want super integrated power meters and sensors only cycle in the daylight anyway, unless they go through a tunnel in an alp. Anyway, lights drain power very fast compared to computers. So bigger, heavier batteries would be needed, further putting off those sport cyclists.

And lastly there are added features for electronic shifting. It's easy to sniff at the fancy shift patterns, I've never ridden a bike with electronic shifting so I can't really comment. If you already have electronic shifting then it might sense to have it automatically do a double change for you when you change rings. Seems logical to me.

+1. Some people will love this kind of thing and there's nothing wrong with that. If you use a fancy cycle computer it makes sense to integrate it with any extra gizmos you have that could do with a screen. It seems firmly aimed at very wealthy sports cyclists. The radar thing might make sense to those who can't bear the thought of using a mirror. They could do with making it look less like an altoids tin though.

Integration with electronic shifting seems a bit like it's trying too hard. Setting up shift patterns sure, but that's not something you are going to want to do mid-ride surely? And I struggle to imagine indicators ever catching on seeing as you'd need some kind of horizontal bar on the back to space out the left and right indicators enough to be useful.

The biggest disappointment is that you buy a £500 computer and a £140 light and £350 special shifters with buttons so you can control said light without moving a hand...and it doesn't even have separate dip/main beams - the one thing that would actually be useful. Instead you get to turn the light on and off without the indignity of moving your hand 6 inches.

The comparisons to cars are a bit naff. They chuck loads of gimmickry into high-end cars that serves no purpose other than to add weight, cost and complexity. Examples include: boot doors that will open themselves with a motor, electrically operated curtains and self-folding wing mirrors.

Also, have you ever seen an older car where the integrated GPS is still functioning? Every one I've seen has broken and, rather than pay a fortune for a new official unit to be installed, the owners have chosen to spend less money on a better, more up-to-date separate GPS device. Being able to change elements as needed is a distinct advantage of non-integration. Given the cycling industry's love of ever-changing "standards" that fact has to be more relevant than ever.

 

[jefmcg]

All these brackets/ mounts that let people put their phone on the handlebars should in my opinion be banned.
A major distraction for any cyclist.

Why I can't use my phone for sat nav?

 

[pjd57]

Why I can't use my phone for sat nav?

I just think if you are looking at the phone / satnav / gadget , who is watching the road ?

 

[Joey Shabadoo]

I just think if you are looking at the phone / satnav / gadget , who is watching the road ?

The speeds I go, I don't think this is an issue.

 

[Milzy]

Old steel bike with campag any day.