Cycle computers

Paul Rose

Hi All

I've recently taken up mountain biking as a way of building-up my fitness
after a long lay-off from work, and I must say I'm rather enjoying it!

I'm looking to obtain a cycle computer and have been searching the web for
suitable options....there are quite a lot to choose from! I have a question
which I hope some one with a little more knowledge may be able to advise on.

Its regarding whether to go for a 'wired' variety as opposed to 'wireless' ?
I've read that the wireless ones can suffer from 'line of sight' problems
and I was also thinking that they might not be as effective when the sensor
is covered in mud? I've had no experience with these computers so I would
appreciate any advice on the 'pros' and 'cons' of each, before choosing one.
Would I also be right in thinking that VDO, Cateye and Sigma are some of the
better makes to go for?

Regards, Paul (R)
My Lake District walking site:
www.lakelandwalker.co.uk

Steven M. Scharf

Paul Rose wrote:

> Hi All
>
> I've recently taken up mountain biking as a way of building-up my fitness
> after a long lay-off from work, and I must say I'm rather enjoying it!
>
> I'm looking to obtain a cycle computer and have been searching the web for
> suitable options....there are quite a lot to choose from! I have a question
> which I hope some one with a little more knowledge may be able to advise on.
>
> Its regarding whether to go for a 'wired' variety as opposed to 'wireless' ?
> I've read that the wireless ones can suffer from 'line of sight' problems
> and I was also thinking that they might not be as effective when the sensor
> is covered in mud? I've had no experience with these computers so I would
> appreciate any advice on the 'pros' and 'cons' of each, before choosing one.
> Would I also be right in thinking that VDO, Cateye and Sigma are some of the
> better makes to go for?

AFAIK, they are all RF, not IR, so line of sight is not an issue. The
wireless require a battery in the transmitter as well as in the head unit.

I've had the best experience with CatEye. Avocet was not well made, and
the Nashbar brand was terrible.

Simon Brooke

in message <6V3xd.850$U63.642@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>, Paul Rose
('newsgroups@lakelandwalker.co.uk') wrote:

> I'm looking to obtain a cycle computer and have been searching the web
> for suitable options....there are quite a lot to choose from! I have a
> question which I hope some one with a little more knowledge may be
> able to advise on.
>
> Its regarding whether to go for a 'wired' variety as opposed to
> 'wireless' ? I've read that the wireless ones can suffer from 'line of
> sight' problems and I was also thinking that they might not be as
> effective when the sensor is covered in mud? I've had no experience
> with these computers so I would appreciate any advice on the 'pros'
> and 'cons' of each, before choosing one. Would I also be right in
> thinking that VDO, Cateye and Sigma are some of the better makes to go
> for?

Mud isn't a problem. Metal is - it really helps to mount the sensor on
the same side of the forks as the instrument, so as not to have the
metal of the forks and the steering head in between. If you're cycling
off-road wireless is in my opinion definitely better, because wired
systems don't like suspension - the wire has to be loose, and
consequently catches on things, and consequently gets damaged.


--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; All in all you're just another nick in the ball
-- Think Droid

Zog The Undeniable

Paul Rose wrote:

> Hi All
>
> I've recently taken up mountain biking as a way of building-up my fitness
> after a long lay-off from work, and I must say I'm rather enjoying it!
>
> I'm looking to obtain a cycle computer and have been searching the web for
> suitable options....there are quite a lot to choose from! I have a question
> which I hope some one with a little more knowledge may be able to advise on.
>
> Its regarding whether to go for a 'wired' variety as opposed to 'wireless' ?
> I've read that the wireless ones can suffer from 'line of sight' problems
> and I was also thinking that they might not be as effective when the sensor
> is covered in mud? I've had no experience with these computers so I would
> appreciate any advice on the 'pros' and 'cons' of each, before choosing one.
> Would I also be right in thinking that VDO, Cateye and Sigma are some of the
> better makes to go for?
>
> Regards, Paul (R)
> My Lake District walking site:
> www.lakelandwalker.co.uk
>
>
For suspension forks wireless is a lot easier. For rigid forks I'd have
wired, to reduce battery consumption and bulk.

Steve Peake

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:26:42 GMT, Paul Rose wrote:

> Would I also be right in thinking that VDO, Cateye and Sigma are some of the
> better makes to go for?

Best Comp, that cheapo one from aldi! No distance problems, no cold
weather problems(Cateye....spit), works well.

Could be a while before aldi get em back in though.

Steve

Martin Wilson

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:28:55 GMT, Steve Peake <spam@puppet-head.co.uk>
wrote:

>On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:26:42 GMT, Paul Rose wrote:
>
>> Would I also be right in thinking that VDO, Cateye and Sigma are some of the
>> better makes to go for?
>
>Best Comp, that cheapo one from aldi! No distance problems, no cold
>weather problems(Cateye....spit), works well.
>
>Could be a while before aldi get em back in though.
>
>Steve

If you've got a hard tail with front suspension you can use the rear
wheel instead. It might mean extending the cable slightly but no big
deal.

I also recommend the Aldi £3.99 model. Nice big display, plenty of
features and seems well made and reliable. Also its probably wise to
get two anyway in case of breakages or theft and to provide a spare or
two and £8 is better than £40-50.

I'm addicted to mine and always looking at it to see how fast, how
far, how cold etc.

Paul Rose

"Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
newsY8xd.3143$9j5.2650@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> AFAIK, they are all RF, not IR, so line of sight is not an issue. The
> wireless require a battery in the transmitter as well as in the head unit.
>
> I've had the best experience with CatEye. Avocet was not well made, and
> the Nashbar brand was terrible.
>

Hi Steven

Thanks for your reply and info. As for the 'line of sight' question, I
remember reading a report on the web somewhere about this problem but, as I
say, I have very little experience with these so I may well be wrong here.
Thanks again,

--
Regards, Paul (R)
My Lake District walking site:
www.lakelandwalker.co.uk

Paul Rose

"Simon Brooke" <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote in message
news:b15g92-pkb.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk...
> in message <6V3xd.850$U63.642@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>,

> Mud isn't a problem. Metal is - it really helps to mount the sensor on
> the same side of the forks as the instrument, so as not to have the
> metal of the forks and the steering head in between. If you're cycling
> off-road wireless is in my opinion definitely better, because wired
> systems don't like suspension - the wire has to be loose, and
> consequently catches on things, and consequently gets damaged.
>

Hi Simon,

Thanks for the info. Some useful pointers. I must admit I quite like the
idea of wireless but I've also read that they can also suffer from
interference and therefore may not be as accurate.

--
Regards, Paul (R)
My Lake District walking site:
www.lakelandwalker.co.uk

Paul Rose

"Zog The Undeniable" <hrothgar19@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:41c5be4f.0@entanet...

> For suspension forks wireless is a lot easier. For rigid forks I'd have
> wired, to reduce battery consumption and bulk.

Thanks for that. I have suspension forks so it looks like the wireless
option.

--
Regards, Paul (R)
My Lake District walking site:
www.lakelandwalker.co.uk

Paul Rose

"Steve Peake" <spam@puppet-head.co.uk> wrote in message
news:zawdsa37atp4$.1t50gp8qv1vwv.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:26:42 GMT, Paul Rose wrote:
>
> > Would I also be right in thinking that VDO, Cateye and Sigma are some of
the
> > better makes to go for?
>
> Best Comp, that cheapo one from aldi! No distance problems, no cold
> weather problems(Cateye....spit), works well.
>
> Could be a while before aldi get em back in though.
>
> Steve

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the recommendation. I didn't know Aldi had them for sale! I will
have to pop in and ask if they are getting any more in.

--
Regards, Paul (R)
My Lake District walking site:
www.lakelandwalker.co.uk

Paul Rose

"Martin Wilson" <martin.w6@ukonline.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ksncs0ljcm9ventpfirmit5mg656d87bnd@4ax.com...
>
> If you've got a hard tail with front suspension you can use the rear
> wheel instead. It might mean extending the cable slightly but no big
> deal.
>
> I also recommend the Aldi £3.99 model. Nice big display, plenty of
> features and seems well made and reliable. Also its probably wise to
> get two anyway in case of breakages or theft and to provide a spare or
> two and £8 is better than £40-50.
>
> I'm addicted to mine and always looking at it to see how fast, how
> far, how cold etc.


Hi Martin,

Thanks for the info and advice. Another one for the Aldi model! As you say,
I could get two or three for between £8 and £12! I can imagine I too could
become addicted to one ;o)
--
Regards, Paul (R)
My Lake District walking site:
www.lakelandwalker.co.uk

Simon Brooke

in message <agGxd.390$Uz1.175@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net>, Paul Rose
('newsgroups@lakelandwalker.co.uk') wrote:

> "Simon Brooke" <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote in message
> news:b15g92-pkb.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk...
>> in message <6V3xd.850$U63.642@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>,
>
>> Mud isn't a problem. Metal is - it really helps to mount the sensor
>> on the same side of the forks as the instrument, so as not to have
>> the metal of the forks and the steering head in between. If you're
>> cycling off-road wireless is in my opinion definitely better, because
>> wired systems don't like suspension - the wire has to be loose, and
>> consequently catches on things, and consequently gets damaged.
>
> Thanks for the info. Some useful pointers. I must admit I quite like
> the idea of wireless but I've also read that they can also suffer from
> interference and therefore may not be as accurate.

This certainly can happen - I know at least two people who have
unreliable wireless systems. The trick, I believe, is to keep the
transmitter and receiver as close together as possible, and on the same
side of the bike. If you have the transmitter on the left fork, but the
computer on the left hand side of your handlebars, and vice versa. Have
the transmitter as high on the fork leg as practical.

However I have to say on one of my bikes the wireless transmitter is
within a few inches of the hub, and it (a Cat Eye) works fine.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; this is not a .sig

Dave Larrington

Paul Rose wrote:
> "Zog The Undeniable" <hrothgar19@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:41c5be4f.0@entanet...
>
>> For suspension forks wireless is a lot easier. For rigid forks I'd
>> have wired, to reduce battery consumption and bulk.
>
> Thanks for that. I have suspension forks so it looks like the wireless
> option.

So have I (on my Trek 4300), and wrap the wire round the brake line. It has
so far failed to break, fall off or exhibit suspicious political tendencies.

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
World Domination?
Just find a world that's into that kind of thing, then chain to the
floor and walk up and down on it in high heels. (Mr. Sunshine)

Paul Rose

"Simon Brooke" <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote in message
news:b1qj92-97f.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk...

> > Thanks for the info. Some useful pointers. I must admit I quite like
> > the idea of wireless but I've also read that they can also suffer from
> > interference and therefore may not be as accurate.
>
> This certainly can happen - I know at least two people who have
> unreliable wireless systems. The trick, I believe, is to keep the
> transmitter and receiver as close together as possible, and on the same
> side of the bike. If you have the transmitter on the left fork, but the
> computer on the left hand side of your handlebars, and vice versa. Have
> the transmitter as high on the fork leg as practical.
>
> However I have to say on one of my bikes the wireless transmitter is
> within a few inches of the hub, and it (a Cat Eye) works fine.
>
Thanks again, Simon. I will take your advice on board. All I have to do now
is get one!

--
Regards, Paul (R)
My Lake District walking site:
www.lakelandwalker.co.uk