Cheaper alternative to Ergo computer?

[David Damerell]

Quoting Kovie <[email protected]>:
><[email protected]> wrote in message
>>Frank Drackman wrote:
>>>I am sorry that I don't have an answer to your question and hope that
>>>someone has a useful idea.
>>I hate to point out the obvious, but the only direct and correct answer
>>to his question is "NO".
>The ONLY direct and correct answer? Can you prove this? If not, then your
>assertion lacks credibility. Show me how the reasoning I provided (as
>opposed to lack of any you provided) could not work.

It *could* work, obviously, but your question was actually;

"I was wondering if anyone made a cheaper version of the Ergo that had
this feature?"

The answer to _that_ question is "no", and that answer is direct and
correct. Given that that was supplied early on, I don't see that the
diversion into discussing the utility of such a feature is harmful.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?
Today is Epithumia, Presuary - a weekend.

 

[A Muzi]

-snip; hard to sort-

> "Jeff Starr" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>>>Hi, maybe you could adapt a Shimano optical indicator to your needs. I

Kovie wrote:
>>>As for your suggestion, I have a Campy setup, so I'm not sure this would
>>>work.
-snip much-

> Sometimes it feels like I'm talking to myself. There's no way that the Ergo
> is worth $150 for what it does. It doesn't have heart rate, power or any
> other fancy features. Campy's charging a premium for it because there's no
> competition and there are people rich or foolish enough to pay this much for
> it. I see no reason at all for why a competitor couldn't come out with a
> similar computer for half the price or less, with the same features.


The Shimano gadget runs inline and would work pretty well
in your system

Flite Deck and Ergo ( both made by Cateye) are comparably
priced and popular enough that at least a great many riders
see value in them.

But, hey, if you feel you can produce a bike computer more
efficiently than Cateye, go right ahead! My intuition says
that the cost can't be trimmed by more than a couple %
without changing the return rate, based on comparable products.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 

[Earls61]

Kovie wrote:
So
> unless I'm missing something, I don't see why this wouldn't be possible from
> a technical pov.

Sure its possible. Are you familiar with the world of microcontrollers,
MPLAB and assembler code? This guy used these tools to build his own
bike computer...

http://www.sxlist.com/techref/piclist/biketut/index.htm

I would love to do this. (someday!) I would set it up to display
chianring, cog, and the resulting gain ratio. A means of telling the
microcontroller which chainring you are in might be needed, however.
Granted he didn't include a gear calculator, but it could be done just
as you said. Short of this, my vote goes for the Avocet 45tt, Which,
with cadence sensor, will display gear inches.

http://www.avocet.com/cyclopages/cyclo45tt.html

Developement is really what we're interested in anyway. A quick glance
down would reveal if you are crosschaining. You wouldn't even need to
do this once you become familiar with the setup.

 

[Pat Lamb]

Frank Drackman wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>
>>Frank Drackman wrote:
>>
>>>I totally agree with you. To me it seemed that you asked a simple and
>>>reasonable question and many of the responses are saying that you are
>>>wrong
>>>and should be doing things their way. I don't get it but it seems to
>>>happen
>>>very frequently.
>>>
>>>I am sorry that I don't have an answer to your question and hope that
>>>someone has a useful idea.
>>
>>I hate to point out the obvious, but the only direct and correct answer
>>to his question is "NO".
>
> Are you sure that the only correct answer was "NO", could it have been, "I
> have not seen the solution that you are looking for", or "I am not aware of
> any company that makes a product with the exact features that you wan?"

You're absolutely right. There is, however, the little nit of where
a******brown asked the question. If you want a definitive answer, I can
give it to you. It'll take six months to research, and cost an
estimated $100,000. If you want a quick-look formal report, with
documentation including appropriate disclaimers, I can generate that in
a week for the bargain price of $3,000. I'll even add on a guarantee
that "no" is the right answer, or I'll buy you an Ergo computer, for the
low low price of $750. (This is a limited time offer. Not available in
stores. Work will not begin until after check has cleared. Not
available in all locations. Etc.)

But the question was posted in a usenet group. We have a secret code.
For brevity's sake, most posters abbreviate "I don't believe such a
thing exists. I've never heard of it. I doubt any other company would
produce one with the features of the Ergo for less than Campagnolo,
because there might be patent issues (licensing and/or litigation
expenses) and because, let's get real, if a company were going to
duplicate this functionality for one kind of shifters, they'd be nuts to
do it for Campy when Shimano has the larger market share," by "NO."

Pat

 

[[email protected]]

Kovie wrote:

> The ONLY direct and correct answer? Can you prove this? If not, then your
> assertion lacks credibility. Show me how the reasoning I provided (as
> opposed to lack of any you provided) could not work. It's pretty simple
> math.

I'm sure you are basing your statement on the idea that it is difficult
to prove a negative. In this case, a direct proof would require that we
examine every existing bike computer to see whether one will actually
plug into an Ergo and display the current gear.

There are other ways to arrive at a logical and equally valid
conclusion without relying on such an absurdly formal proof. First of
all, we have to define "cheaper alternative to Ergo computer". Based on
your post, it seems that it means something that will work with the
computer interface of the Ergo shifters. If it doesn't mean this, and
it means "other ways to accomplish the same thing as an Ergo computer",
then you are not justified in criticizing others' ideas for how you
could do the same thing, just because you decided after the fact,
"that's not really what I had in mind".

Secondly, assert that the specifications for any given model will
answer for the suitability of any particular instance of that model- in
other words, we can determine the suitability of the model without
examining each individual example of that model. No reasonable person
would reject this as a reasonable assertion.

Third, and this might be a little more difficult for you, you have to
accept that if someone here knew of a "cheaper alternative to (an) Ergo
computer", they would tell you.

Finally, you have to accept that there is sufficient expertise here to
know whether or not a bike computer model exists that is not Campagnolo
but does interface with Ergo shifters. If you don't accept this, then
maybe you shouldn't have bothered asking the question.

If you find these assertions acceptable, then the only answer that is
correct and direct is "no". Any other answer is either incorrect or
does not answer the question. Since the only direct and correct answer
is no, it is reasonable to expect others to suggest alternatives out of
a spirit of helpfulness.

My advice, BTW, would be to ride more. I think you will become
accustomed to correlating the way you feel physically to a specific
gear, and will also become more comfortable and skillful at taking a
very brief (< 1 sec.) glance at the rear of your bike to see the gear
you are in- you should reach a point where you can identify the gear
without having to actually count the cog position.

 

[David L. Johnson]

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 03:15:21 +0000, Kovie wrote:

> Read my other recent reply. I agree that it would be hard to guess gear
> combinations that have gear-inch duplicates. But even in such cases, an
> educated guess could be made as not all duplicates are precise numerical
> duplicates. For example, I have a 12-25 10-cog cassette matched to a
> 30-42-53 triple chainring. Both 42x 15 and 53x19 result in a 74 g-i ratio,
> rounded. But the first one is actually 73.97, while the second is 73.69, so
> a smart computer could make a pretty good guess as to which combo was in
> use.

I doubt that the measurements of cadence and speed are accurate enough to
separate these two combinations.

> And I'd say there's a wee bit of a difference between looking down AND back,
> away from the direction of travel (and oncoming bikes, cars, trucks,
> potholes, etc.), and looking down and slightly forward, where peripheral
> vision keeps you relatively safe.

There is also a difference between that and looking behind you, which you
need to do as well. I would be concerned about a rider who could not
ride safely while still being able to look down at his/her gears now and
then. But if you really can't, then the suggestion of the in-cable
indicator as used by Shimano should do the trick, if you can find an
exposed bit of cable that is within your view.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | When you are up to your ass in alligators, it's hard to remember
_`\(,_ | that your initial objective was to drain the swamp. -- LBJ
(_)/ (_) |

 

[dvt]

Kovie wrote:
> I like the feature on Campy's Ergo computer that tells you which gear combo
> you're in, but don't think it's anywhere near worth the triple-digit price
> tag (for my needs and budget at least).

This option may be cheaper if you already have a Palm:
http://home5.swipnet.se/~w-51358/pilot/default.htm

I didn't read the details, so I don't know if it calculates gear ratios
or gear inches. But Palms are programmable, so the sky's the limit once
you get the data in.

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

 

[Mike Latondresse]

David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote in
news:+9t*[email protected]:

> I did the End to End on a Brooks
> B-17 Narrow - am I going to save 300 grams to change it for some
> unknown lump of plastic? I think not.

I did end to end too, Vancouver to Halifax on a Selle San Marco
Regal..you think I would change it for some leather sling that would
have stretched out of all recognition on the first few rainy days. I
think not.

PS This is how silly these saddle stories get.

 

[Jeff Starr]

On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:26:41 -0400, "David L. Johnson"
<[email protected]> wrote:


>
>There is also a difference between that and looking behind you, which you
>need to do as well. I would be concerned about a rider who could not
>ride safely while still being able to look down at his/her gears now and
>then. But if you really can't, then the suggestion of the in-cable
>indicator as used by Shimano should do the trick, if you can find an
>exposed bit of cable that is within your view.

David, for me, it isn't a matter of being able to ride safely while
looking down, it is that the times when I might want to know what gear
I am in, is in traffic situations. For example, coming to an
intersection where the light is about to change, I don't want to drop
down to my lowest gear, I am going faster than that, but I don't want
to be in a high gear. What gear am I in? With my optical indicator, I
see that I would like to drop down two cogs. There is cars around me,
a crosswalk coming, I'm lightly on the brakes, I don't want to look
back.
This may be a poor example and I'm sure there are other ways around
it, I'm just saying that there are times when I don't want to look
down and back.

I use the Shimano optical indicator and it works fine. It could be
easily asdapted to the Campy equiped bike.The OP wants something that
doesn't exist, outside of the Ergo brain. I did learn that Cateye
makes both the Ergo and the Flightdeck, so that's something.


Life is Good!
Jeff

 

[Michael Press]

In article <[email protected]>,
Jeff Starr <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:26:41 -0400, "David L. Johnson"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >There is also a difference between that and looking behind you, which you
> >need to do as well. I would be concerned about a rider who could not
> >ride safely while still being able to look down at his/her gears now and
> >then. But if you really can't, then the suggestion of the in-cable
> >indicator as used by Shimano should do the trick, if you can find an
> >exposed bit of cable that is within your view.
>
> David, for me, it isn't a matter of being able to ride safely while
> looking down, it is that the times when I might want to know what gear
> I am in, is in traffic situations. For example, coming to an
> intersection where the light is about to change, I don't want to drop
> down to my lowest gear, I am going faster than that, but I don't want
> to be in a high gear. What gear am I in? With my optical indicator, I
> see that I would like to drop down two cogs. There is cars around me,
> a crosswalk coming, I'm lightly on the brakes, I don't want to look
> back.
> This may be a poor example and I'm sure there are other ways around
> it, I'm just saying that there are times when I don't want to look
> down and back.
>
> I use the Shimano optical indicator and it works fine. It could be
> easily asdapted to the Campy equiped bike.The OP wants something that
> doesn't exist, outside of the Ergo brain. I did learn that Cateye
> makes both the Ergo and the Flightdeck, so that's something.

I have a TGI, a tactile gear indicator. I put my hand on the down
tube shifter and immediately know the gear.

--
Michael Press

 

[David Damerell]

Quoting Mike Latondresse <mikelat@no_spam_shaw.ca>:
>David Damerell <[email protected]> wrote in
>>I did the End to End on a Brooks
>>B-17 Narrow - am I going to save 300 grams to change it for some
>>unknown lump of plastic? I think not.
>I did end to end too, Vancouver to Halifax on a Selle San Marco
>Regal..you think I would change it for some leather sling

No, of course not. That is my point; once you find a saddle that works,
you're not going to change it.

>that would have stretched out of all recognition on the first
>few rainy days.

This is evident nonsense; leather saddles remain popular in the British
climate. They're made out of cows, not sugar; a single drop of water won't
melt them to nothing.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> flcl?
Today is First Tuesday, Presuary.