BigonaBianchi
Yes I can, Yes I am, Yes I did...Repeat.
- Location
- Iskele TRNC & Mordor UK
Are there any reasons why a bloke should fit a wired computer these days?
Wireless computers Vs. Wired computers
- Thread starter BigonaBianchi
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
deptfordmarmoset
Full time tea drinker
- Location
- Armonmy Way
Cheaper, only 1 battery, no wireless interference from lights, GPS, etc.
Maybe a bit messy on the front fork, though all bikes make do with cables anyway.
Maybe a bit messy on the front fork, though all bikes make do with cables anyway.
wiggydiggy
Guru
Just £££ for me, if I was more serious on analysing results of rides I'd likely get a very good comp, as it is I just needed time/distance - anything else was a bonus!
OP
OP
BigonaBianchi
Yes I can, Yes I am, Yes I did...Repeat.
- Location
- Iskele TRNC & Mordor UK
me too..all I need is mileage really...cheap as chips and long battery life...oh and waterproof....
Rob3rt
Man or Moose!
- Location
- Manchester
A wired computer is more likely to fail in the wet than a wireless computer.
fossyant
Ride It Like You Stole It!
- Location
- South Manchester
Wires are just messy.
OP
OP
BigonaBianchi
Yes I can, Yes I am, Yes I did...Repeat.
- Location
- Iskele TRNC & Mordor UK
really...that's a big plus for me...im forever trying to dry out the connection points on my wired computer on the tourer
wiggydiggy
Guru
False generalisation. Having used wired and wireless in all conditions, I've not noticed any difference.
Rob3rt
Man or Moose!
- Location
- Manchester
It is not a false generalisation! Most wired units have exposed terminals, cable entry/exit points, a cable which can become damaged easily and allow the ingress of moisture, in some cases even multiple sensor units, all with their cables and cable entry points, possible cable junction points. All of which increase the probability of failure, be it a passing malfunction or a permanent failure.
Wireless units have very few openings, the battery compartment which is easily weather sealed using an o-ring and/or a charger/data connection access point which is not live during use (and is easily sealed).
i.e. Wired units are more likely to fail in such conditions than a wireless unit. This does not mean a wired unit is likely to fail, or that it will fail, it just means the probability of it failing is higher. I have used both wired and wireless units too and have never had a single unit fail on me, but that does not matter! If 1 was to fail under such circumstance, it would most likely be the wired unit. The failure rate of a wired computer may be 0.1% (made up number for example purposes) but that 0.1% is a higher rate than a value of 0.08% you may find with a wireless unit (again made up number for example purposes). Overall, both are very unlikely to fail, but one is still more likely to fail than the other.
wiggydiggy
Guru
Thanks for the info but I stand by my view - buying a wireless as it is 'less likely to fail to in wet conditions' is unfair on the many quality wired comps out there.
Monsieur
Senior member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
Well I've just bought a cateye wireless computer and chuffed with it...no messy wires 
OP
OP
BigonaBianchi
Yes I can, Yes I am, Yes I did...Repeat.
- Location
- Iskele TRNC & Mordor UK
I take it they are both as accurate as each other then?
How does the wireless work..does it need satellite?
How does the wireless work..does it need satellite?
- Location
- Somewhere wet & hilly in NW England.
That's why I don't recommend wireless - the big dish on the back of the saddle causes a heck of a lot of drag.
MrJamie
Oaf on a Bike
Having used both, I'm quite happy with my wired one, but I think it depends what you want out of it. I use a Garmin watch and HRM for all my number geek needs and used a phone app before that, so only really want the computer to show current speed (and cadence) and as it happens the clip things on the downtube that hold my rear mech cable, have a couple of free slots for a very tidy cable routing of the computer cable. 
My first cycle computer from Lidls and my friend's cheapy computer both had backlights, which were amazingly useful. I still cant really see a good reason the more expensive ones almost never seem to do this.
My first cycle computer from Lidls and my friend's cheapy computer both had backlights, which were amazingly useful. I still cant really see a good reason the more expensive ones almost never seem to do this.
Rob3rt
Man or Moose!
- Location
- Manchester
[QUOTE 2367295, member: 45"]Given that the contact fail point is where the computer connects to the mount, and both wired and wireless are detachable, I don't think this is the case. The battery compartments are identical. In fact in most cases the computer is identical and only the mounts are different.[/quote]
I am not sure I understand your point. I can interpret 2 different ways, of which neither may be what you really meant. Possibly a failing on my comprehension skills.
One of the ways I read the above is that you are saying both have external contacts between the computer and mount thus they both have the same mode of failure and the same probabability of failure?
The other way I read it is harder to comment, because it contains its own ambiguities and uncertainties. Something along the lines of a technicality, the mount failed not the computer? Or if it gets wet you can detach it to avoid failure (whilst also giving up all data)?
I don't really want to debate this one too much, I have my opinion on why wireless is better (not solely based on bad weather may I add) and others have theirs, neither are likely to change much in this case and I have little interest in going on a crusade. More so thinking out loud at this point trying to figure out the point you are trying to make.
I am not sure I understand your point. I can interpret 2 different ways, of which neither may be what you really meant. Possibly a failing on my comprehension skills.
One of the ways I read the above is that you are saying both have external contacts between the computer and mount thus they both have the same mode of failure and the same probabability of failure?
The other way I read it is harder to comment, because it contains its own ambiguities and uncertainties. Something along the lines of a technicality, the mount failed not the computer? Or if it gets wet you can detach it to avoid failure (whilst also giving up all data)?
I don't really want to debate this one too much, I have my opinion on why wireless is better (not solely based on bad weather may I add) and others have theirs, neither are likely to change much in this case and I have little interest in going on a crusade. More so thinking out loud at this point trying to figure out the point you are trying to make.
