Cycle computer for repetitive course

[MikeC]

Folks,

Many of us ride a repetitive course, whether it be to work and back, or
because (like myself) they are on a diet and to make the most of the
exercise, are trying to measure themselves against previous performance.

It strikes me that a cycle computer that measures the course moment by
moment would be a feasible proposition. I have just worked out that with a
28" wheel, it will go around 21608 times during a 30-mile ride. If a
computer was to store a 4-byte timestamp once every time the wheel went
around, it would take about 100KBytes of memory to record a 30 mile trip,
and that's not much memory. My MP3 player is about the size of a cycle
computer, and it has 1GB of memory.

The advantage of such a computer is that as you are following the same
course as when the ride was originally recorded, it could tell you moment by
moment how far behind or ahead you are of yesterday's performance. At the
end of the ride, you could decide whether today's performance is the one to
use as a criterion, hit a button, and it saves today's for furure
comparison.

They say there's no such thing as an original idea (if I thought it was, I'd
consider a patent instead of making it public), so here's my question to you
all - does such a device exist? Where can I find out about it?

Thanks,

MikeC.

--
Mental decryption required to bamboozle spam robots:

mike_best$ntlworld*com
$ = @
* = dot

 

[CoyoteBoy]

On 12 Aug, 23:15, "MikeC" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Many of us ride a repetitive course, whether it be to work and back, or
> because (like myself) they are on a diet and to make the most of the
> exercise, are trying to measure themselves against previous performance.
>
> It strikes me that a cycle computer that measures the course moment by
> moment would be a feasible proposition. I have just worked out that with a
> 28" wheel, it will go around 21608 times during a 30-mile ride. If a
> computer was to store a 4-byte timestamp once every time the wheel went
> around, it would take about 100KBytes of memory to record a 30 mile trip,
> and that's not much memory. My MP3 player is about the size of a cycle
> computer, and it has 1GB of memory.
>
> The advantage of such a computer is that as you are following the same
> course as when the ride was originally recorded, it could tell you moment by
> moment how far behind or ahead you are of yesterday's performance. At the
> end of the ride, you could decide whether today's performance is the one to
> use as a criterion, hit a button, and it saves today's for furure
> comparison.
>
> They say there's no such thing as an original idea (if I thought it was, I'd
> consider a patent instead of making it public), so here's my question to you
> all - does such a device exist? Where can I find out about it?
>
> Thanks,
>
> MikeC.
>
> --
> Mental decryption required to bamboozle spam robots:
>
> mike_best$ntlworld*com
> $ = @
> * = dot


Interesting, im not aware of one but surely it must exist!

 

[Craig Wallace]

MikeC wrote:

> The advantage of such a computer is that as you are following the same
> course as when the ride was originally recorded, it could tell you moment by
> moment how far behind or ahead you are of yesterday's performance. At the
> end of the ride, you could decide whether today's performance is the one to
> use as a criterion, hit a button, and it saves today's for furure
> comparison.
>
> They say there's no such thing as an original idea (if I thought it was, I'd
> consider a patent instead of making it public), so here's my question to you
> all - does such a device exist? Where can I find out about it?

I believe there's a few GPS devices that can do this.
Look at Garmin's 'fitness' range - the Forerunner (wrist mounted) and
the Edge (designed for use on a bike).

They have a "Virtual Partner" mode - I've not used them, but I think it
works something like how you describe.

--
Craig Wallace
http://craig.neogeo.org.uk
http://www.neogeo.org.uk

 

[Martin Dann]

MikeC wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Many of us ride a repetitive course, whether it be to work and back, or
> because (like myself) they are on a diet and to make the most of the
> exercise, are trying to measure themselves against previous performance.

The problem with this idea is that we all take deviations
from our route, e.g. to over take cars, try a different
route, use a different lane etc. So the distance you cycle
on the same route every day varies. It would have to have
some GPS functionality to be reasonable useful.

Also there are things like traffic lights. Some days I
shoot through them at 20mph, other days I have to stop and
wait for 30s. But at the next set of lights it might be
the other way round to normal.

TBH I think this could be better implemented for
commuters, I need to know that absolute time[1] that I am
at a certain point, not the relative time from my journey
start[2].

If I arrive at my halfway point, and the computer says
that I am 1 min. up, but I left four minutes late, then I
might relax a bit, and be late for work.
I think an absolute time function would be useful, as well
as an average journey time for that section, rather than
just comparing to the best time.
Also for commuters, setting a desired arrival time, in
case you have to start an hour early one day.

[1] i.e. GMT/BST
[2] I only look at the journey time when I am nearly there.

 

[MikeC]

"Martin Dann" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> MikeC wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> Many of us ride a repetitive course, whether it be to work and back, or
>> because (like myself) they are on a diet and to make the most of the
>> exercise, are trying to measure themselves against previous performance.
>
> The problem with this idea is that we all take deviations from our route,
> e.g. to over take cars, try a different route, use a different lane etc.
> So the distance you cycle on the same route every day varies. It would
> have to have some GPS functionality to be reasonable useful.
>
> Also there are things like traffic lights. Some days I shoot through them
> at 20mph, other days I have to stop and wait for 30s. But at the next set
> of lights it might be the other way round to normal.
>
> TBH I think this could be better implemented for commuters, I need to know
> that absolute time[1] that I am at a certain point, not the relative time
> from my journey start[2].
>
> If I arrive at my halfway point, and the computer says that I am 1 min.
> up, but I left four minutes late, then I might relax a bit, and be late
> for work.
> I think an absolute time function would be useful, as well as an average
> journey time for that section, rather than just comparing to the best
> time.
> Also for commuters, setting a desired arrival time, in case you have to
> start an hour early one day.
>
> [1] i.e. GMT/BST
> [2] I only look at the journey time when I am nearly there.

Thanks for the reflections on what you would like. I think, for me, that
I'd prefer what I described.
I agree about traffic lights, etc, but if it held you up for 30 seconds, you
would see you were 30 secs (or 200 Mtrs) behind what you had at this point
yesterday - so either you would make it up or you'd try not to drop behind
that. As you were riding along, you. see 30 secs..... 30 secs..... 32
secs - "oh, damn, I'd better try a bit harder"

And I don't believe that on a 10-12 mile route, using a different lane or
overtaking a car would make any appreciable difference to the distance
travelled.

Regards,

MikeC.

 

[MikeC]

"Craig Wallace" <craigw84@fast_NOSPAM_mail.fm> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> MikeC wrote:
>
>> The advantage of such a computer is that as you are following the same
>> course as when the ride was originally recorded, it could tell you moment
>> by moment how far behind or ahead you are of yesterday's performance. At
>> the end of the ride, you could decide whether today's performance is the
>> one to use as a criterion, hit a button, and it saves today's for furure
>> comparison.
>>
>> They say there's no such thing as an original idea (if I thought it was,
>> I'd consider a patent instead of making it public), so here's my question
>> to you all - does such a device exist? Where can I find out about it?
>
> I believe there's a few GPS devices that can do this.
> Look at Garmin's 'fitness' range - the Forerunner (wrist mounted) and the
> Edge (designed for use on a bike).
>
> They have a "Virtual Partner" mode - I've not used them, but I think it
> works something like how you describe.
>
> --
> Craig Wallace
Thanks a lot, Craig,

That chimes with something I came across a while back - I had a Duch
colleague who said he had one that would do it - and it was wrist-mounted.
A big thing - quite a bit bigger than a watch, but he also used it as such.

I'll look it up.

MikeC.

 

[elyob]

"MikeC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Folks,
>
> Many of us ride a repetitive course, whether it be to work and back, or
> because (like myself) they are on a diet and to make the most of the
> exercise, are trying to measure themselves against previous performance.
>
> It strikes me that a cycle computer that measures the course moment by
> moment would be a feasible proposition. I have just worked out that with
> a 28" wheel, it will go around 21608 times during a 30-mile ride. If a
> computer was to store a 4-byte timestamp once every time the wheel went
> around, it would take about 100KBytes of memory to record a 30 mile trip,
> and that's not much memory. My MP3 player is about the size of a cycle
> computer, and it has 1GB of memory.
>
> The advantage of such a computer is that as you are following the same
> course as when the ride was originally recorded, it could tell you moment
> by moment how far behind or ahead you are of yesterday's performance. At
> the end of the ride, you could decide whether today's performance is the
> one to use as a criterion, hit a button, and it saves today's for furure
> comparison.
>
> They say there's no such thing as an original idea (if I thought it was,
> I'd consider a patent instead of making it public), so here's my question
> to you all - does such a device exist? Where can I find out about it?
>
> Thanks,
>
> MikeC.

One of the GPS's does something like this where you can race a previous
time.

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/ProductDetail.aspx?Cat=cycle&ProdID=5360020834

 

[Ben C]

On 2007-08-12, MikeC <[email protected]> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Many of us ride a repetitive course, whether it be to work and back, or
> because (like myself) they are on a diet and to make the most of the
> exercise, are trying to measure themselves against previous performance.
>
> It strikes me that a cycle computer that measures the course moment by
> moment would be a feasible proposition. I have just worked out that with a
> 28" wheel, it will go around 21608 times during a 30-mile ride. If a
> computer was to store a 4-byte timestamp once every time the wheel went
> around, it would take about 100KBytes of memory to record a 30 mile trip,
> and that's not much memory. My MP3 player is about the size of a cycle
> computer, and it has 1GB of memory.
>
> The advantage of such a computer is that as you are following the same
> course as when the ride was originally recorded, it could tell you moment by
> moment how far behind or ahead you are of yesterday's performance. At the
> end of the ride, you could decide whether today's performance is the one to
> use as a criterion, hit a button, and it saves today's for furure
> comparison.
>
> They say there's no such thing as an original idea (if I thought it was, I'd
> consider a patent instead of making it public), so here's my question to you
> all - does such a device exist? Where can I find out about it?

That's an excellent idea. In computer games that's called a "ghost car".
You probably should have patented it like mad before posting the idea on
the internet.