Wired VS. Wireless

ktate49

Eastway82

If all you want is a speed readout, I don't see the point of wireless when wired is more reliable (I've had two Sigma wireless units fail completely, and my Polar CS200 is hardly a model of reliability), weighs less and can be installed extremely neatly.
On the other hand, it's very very hard to do a neat installation of a wired cadence sensor. So If you want cad, go wireless.

bomber

I own polar CS200 with cad. 5min to set up (and thats slow) and away I went. Best thing since sliced bread! Couldnt go back to wires as its so easy and neat.

Powerful Pete

My polar CS200 CAD works relatively well, and the problems with wireless tx/rx are relatively minor. It is not, however, problem free...

ktate49

Yes that's part of the reason for this poll. Cadence would be nice to have but if it's at the expense of reliability then "fugitabutit".

If all you want is a speed readout, I don't see the point of wireless when wired is more reliable (I've had two Sigma wireless units fail completely, and my Polar CS200 is hardly a model of reliability), weighs less and can be installed extremely neatly.
On the other hand, it's very very hard to do a neat installation of a wired cadence sensor. So If you want cad, go wireless.

Wino Ryder

Wireless has never worked for me. I went through three wireless computers before I finally realized they just simply dont like me, and I dont know why. My last wireless was the VDO C4-DS computer, and I tried hard to like it, but it failed me just like all the others. The highly coveteted digital transmission, which was supposed to eliminate frequency interference for more reliability was a complete "joke". The unit kept zeroing out on me for miles at a time before it would suddenly wake up and start working again. My regular 20 mile loop turned into a 12 mile loop, and the remaining mileage and time were "lost data". What killed me was that I really wanted to like it. It was pretty, and had all kinds of neat features. I was very upset over it, and completely let down because it was a VDO. Finally, I had to re-install my old Vetta wired computer until my new Blackburn 'Delphi' came in. The 'Delphi' is great. Both speed and cadence sensors mount on the chainstay, and I really like this computer with it's big screen and four-line data format. Even has the Blackburn lifetime warranty. Had it about four months now, with over a thousand miles on it and it's great.

I will "never".."ever" go back to wireless.

dhk2

Yes that's part of the reason for this poll. Cadence would be nice to have but if it's at the expense of reliability then "fugitabutit".
To this old cheapskate, wireless is just techo-overkill in the pursue of style. The wired units are cheaper to buy, more reliable, less prone to interference, and use less battery power. I've been running a Cateye Mity 8 since Jan 04 with 12K miles on it now, still on the original battery. It's small, light, cheap, and easy to set up and use.

alfeng

Hello All,
I've been using a Cateye Enduro 8 wired cyclocomputer. I'm very satisfied with it but have been tempted by the clean setup of wireless computers. Reading in various threads about the pros and cons of wireless I thought I'd set up a poll for good experience versus bad experience with wireless cyclocomputers. Feel free to expand on the reasons for your vote.

Regards,
KurtI think ONE bike computer which could probably benefit from a wireless harness is the Campagnolo Ergobrain! Man, what's with the cadence wire having to be lashed to the downtube?!?

Otherwise, I agree that a wired harness is generally better ... based on the various wired & wireless Shimano FlightDeck harnesses ...

For those who don't know -- when the battery in the FlightDeck computer head is weak , it won't read the signal from the transmitter. This is NOT documented (or, I missed reading [b]it in the fine print) ...

Of course, the Pollyannish way to look at that deficiency with the wireless FlightDeck harness is that you actually have an unintended, semi-meaningful weak battery indicator which allows you enough time to change the battery before all the settings are lost ... IF YOU CAN FIGURE OUT THAT THE WEAK BATTERY IS WHAT IS CAUSING THE COMPUTER TO FAIL TO FUNCTION IN THE FIRST PLACE!

BTW. Can someone tell me if they put ANYTHING in the 6502 FlightDeck to maintain the settings when the battery is dead/absent OR is it the same-old-same-old?

bobbyOCR

Sigma BC1606L wired with wired cadence. Best I have ever tried. It never drops out if it is installed correctly, and I have previously used polar cs200, cateye wireless micro, some echowell thing, and i arrived at this. i got tired of the wireless dropping out over every train track so i bought this
It comes with a memory chip so data is never lost

Theblc

Rockslayer

Hello All,
I've been using a Cateye Enduro 8 wired cyclocomputer. I'm very satisfied with it but have been tempted by the clean setup of wireless computers. Reading in various threads about the pros and cons of wireless I thought I'd set up a poll for good experience versus bad experience with wireless cyclocomputers. Feel free to expand on the reasons for your vote.
Regards,
KurtI think this comes down to need and want. Just stick with your Cateye if it works.
I actually needed a computer for the MTB. My mate and I picked up Cateye 10 wireless can't remember model 100W or something. (yes if you have a buy, get a good wireless one)
We use them on our MTB on all trails including techical and some pavement. both units have been reliable and never a problem and easy to set up. Neither of us has had any complaints and we compare readings they are pretty much equal. Cateye 10 does everything the 8 does.
Maybe if you really need an upgrade like cadence it's worthwhile to consider a wireless with cadence.
I think the only problem may be to setup a wired on a MTB front suspension fork, travel and movement of the wire etc. I don't think this will be an issue on a road bike.
I never really think about it wired or unwired. I got better things to worry about like how to tackle the terrain. I geuss on the road where its a smoother surface you can daydream a little. http://www.cycling.net.au/images/smilies/wink.gif
Oh if you are asking preference, yeah I prefer to be unwired. I hate wires every new toy I get comes with minimum two wires to connect to computer, power etc.. wires keep breeding!!! arhhggghttp://www.cycling.net.au/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Peace http://www.cycling.net.au/images/smilies/smile.gifhttp://www.cycling.net.au/images/smilies/smile.gif

RussB

I got a Cateye MC100W Wireless about a year ago. I'm still on the original batteries. And I've never had a problem with it. I've been riding either 30 or 50 mile rides in the suburbs and never had it cut out. My distances from one ride to the next are almost identical when comparing similar routes.

9.8mps2

Wireless has never worked for me. I went through three wireless computers before I finally realized they just simply dont like me, and I dont know why. My last wireless was the VDO C4-DS computer, and I tried hard to like it, but it failed me just like all the others. ....................

I will "never".."ever" go back to wireless.
I too had the exact results from the same VDO. I was also let down because it was a sho nuff made in Germany instrument - not under license to the PRC or something. I sent the POS back - ( did you get it ? ) , and got a Cateye CD300 ( I think) - wireless w/ cadence. It has performed flawlessly for over a year.

1id10t

I've been using a Cateye Microwireless MC100W on my MTB for over a year. For the MTB I prefer wireless; no wires to get tangled and torn on branches etc. It used to be on my commuter and performed very well; only use to drop out for a couple of seconds when crossing a one of the pylons of the Harbour Bridge. I also have a Cateye Mity 3 on another MTB turned commuter and find this to work the way I want as well. No problems with that. My road bike though has a wireless Echowell which I can't seem to get to work right. It doesn't drop out or anything. The problem is I can't configure it right for the wheel size. I've set it according to the manufacturers instructions but it seems to be way out in the readings. I've even tried the rollout method but still get an abnormal reading. I've measured this against the other two computers switching both to the same bike and doing a test ride and have had to set it in increments which is well off what the instructions or even the rollout method suggests. Thinking of getting a replacement for it one day when I could be bothered. Use the road bike for commuting now and the computer is there as a clock; let's me know how late for work I am :p:rolleyes:

Eastway82

I think ONE bike computer which could probably benefit from a wireless harness is the Campagnolo Ergobrain! Man, what's with the cadence wire having to be lashed to the downtube?!?

Agreed - I was thinking seriously about the ergobrain 10 (especially as I can get one from a local sports chain for about 90 euros), but there's just no way to make a neat job of installing it. In the end I went for the CS200 cad because it was an HRM too, so only one unit on the bars.

Pie in the sky

I am planning to fit a wired computer with the wire running down the inside of the fork steerer tube.

The star washer/fork bung will be replaced with a USE Ring-go-Star leaving the inside of the fork clear for the sensor wire. The computer will be mounted on the stem and the wire will be taped to the inside of the fork leg.

This will give the apearence of a cordless with the reliability of a wired computer.

Has anyone tried this yet? What do you think?

Automatic Translations (Powered by

Integration with Google translations by vBET Translator 3.2.2