Cycling computer idea

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by Qui si parla Campagnolo, Feb 5, 2006.

  1. Tell ya what I would like to see. I ride w/o a cycling computer, only a
    wrist watch. I would love to see a SIMPLE, wrist watch based wireless
    computer. A watch most of the time, when ya get on the bike, push a
    button, and now it shows speed and distance. Off the bike, push button,
    it's a watch. Small, simple,

    NOT heart rate, or GPS or power or anything else...anybody heard of
    such a thing?
     
    Tags:


  2. Jeff Starr

    Jeff Starr Guest

    On 5 Feb 2006 07:10:55 -0800, "Qui si parla Campagnolo"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Tell ya what I would like to see. I ride w/o a cycling computer, only a
    >wrist watch. I would love to see a SIMPLE, wrist watch based wireless
    >computer. A watch most of the time, when ya get on the bike, push a
    >button, and now it shows speed and distance. Off the bike, push button,
    >it's a watch. Small, simple,
    >
    >NOT heart rate, or GPS or power or anything else...anybody heard of
    >such a thing?


    What's wrong with leaving a simple computer on the bike? Either way,
    you still need the sending unit on the bike, anyway.

    You could install a wireless computer and carry the head in your
    pocket.

    I don't think you will find what you are looking for, but I may be
    wrong.


    Life is Good!
    Jeff
     
  3. > Tell ya what I would like to see. I ride w/o a cycling computer, only a
    > wrist watch. I would love to see a SIMPLE, wrist watch based wireless
    > computer. A watch most of the time, when ya get on the bike, push a
    > button, and now it shows speed and distance. Off the bike, push button,
    > it's a watch. Small, simple,
    >
    > NOT heart rate, or GPS or power or anything else...anybody heard of
    > such a thing?


    Peter: What you ask sounds so simple, and yet is so difficult.

    The issue is wireless. It takes four times the power to transmit a signal
    twice as far, so the distance between sending unit and your wrist is a major
    issue; every time you remove your hands from the bars, you'd probably lose
    the signal. Plus, they conserve power by attempting to transmit in a
    fairly-narrow beam, and this only works when you have a fixed position for
    the receiver (wrist watch).

    Heart monitors don't have quite as much trouble because the max distance
    from transmitter to wrist watch... well, trying to figure that out now, but
    it's not much more than two feet. Plus, when you lose the signal, you're not
    messing up your distance figures (which may be important to some).

    And finally, perhaps you're a lot younger than I am, or, as an ex fighter
    pilot, have exceptional eyes? I'd have a difficult time reading the numbers
    on a wrist watch. Easier to focus on something that sits in one place.

    I'm going the opposite direction (why don't I think that comes as a surprise
    to you?) and getting one of the Garmin 305s when they come in.

    --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
    www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
     
  4. Jeff Starr wrote:
    > On 5 Feb 2006 07:10:55 -0800, "Qui si parla Campagnolo"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Tell ya what I would like to see. I ride w/o a cycling computer, only a
    > >wrist watch. I would love to see a SIMPLE, wrist watch based wireless
    > >computer. A watch most of the time, when ya get on the bike, push a
    > >button, and now it shows speed and distance. Off the bike, push button,
    > >it's a watch. Small, simple,
    > >
    > >NOT heart rate, or GPS or power or anything else...anybody heard of
    > >such a thing?

    >
    > What's wrong with leaving a simple computer on the bike? Either way,
    > you still need the sending unit on the bike, anyway.
    >
    > You could install a wireless computer and carry the head in your
    > pocket.


    Don't like anything mounted on the handlebars....Like the clean look.
    >
    > I don't think you will find what you are looking for, but I may be
    > wrong.
    >
    >
    > Life is Good!
    > Jeff
     
  5. Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
    > > Tell ya what I would like to see. I ride w/o a cycling computer, only a
    > > wrist watch. I would love to see a SIMPLE, wrist watch based wireless
    > > computer. A watch most of the time, when ya get on the bike, push a
    > > button, and now it shows speed and distance. Off the bike, push button,
    > > it's a watch. Small, simple,
    > >
    > > NOT heart rate, or GPS or power or anything else...anybody heard of
    > > such a thing?

    >
    > Peter: What you ask sounds so simple, and yet is so difficult.
    >
    > The issue is wireless. It takes four times the power to transmit a signal
    > twice as far, so the distance between sending unit and your wrist is a major
    > issue; every time you remove your hands from the bars, you'd probably lose
    > the signal. Plus, they conserve power by attempting to transmit in a
    > fairly-narrow beam, and this only works when you have a fixed position for
    > the receiver (wrist watch).


    A cateye double wireless sends from way at the end of the bike to the
    front and lots of HRM also have a front fork speed pickup, to your
    wrist.
    >
    > Heart monitors don't have quite as much trouble because the max distance
    > from transmitter to wrist watch... well, trying to figure that out now, but
    > it's not much more than two feet. Plus, when you lose the signal, you're not
    > messing up your distance figures (which may be important to some).
    >
    > And finally, perhaps you're a lot younger than I am, or, as an ex fighter
    > pilot, have exceptional eyes? I'd have a difficult time reading the numbers
    > on a wrist watch. Easier to focus on something that sits in one place.


    Well, not younger but I still have good eyes.
    >
    > I'm going the opposite direction (why don't I think that comes as a surprise
    > to you?) and getting one of the Garmin 305s when they come in.
    >
    > --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
    > www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
     
  6. Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:

    > Don't like anything mounted on the handlebars....Like the clean look.
    > >


    I am in the same boat, but I am warming to some of the stem-mounted
    solutions. It's the asymmetry rather than the clutter that bothers me.
    I also like holding the tops close to the stem with my thumbs and
    fingers of each hand crossing sometimes and then all computers get in
    the way.

    Joseph
     
  7. Werehatrack

    Werehatrack Guest

    On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 16:11:57 GMT, Jeff Starr <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >On 5 Feb 2006 07:10:55 -0800, "Qui si parla Campagnolo"
    ><[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>Tell ya what I would like to see. I ride w/o a cycling computer, only a
    >>wrist watch. I would love to see a SIMPLE, wrist watch based wireless
    >>computer. A watch most of the time, when ya get on the bike, push a
    >>button, and now it shows speed and distance. Off the bike, push button,
    >>it's a watch. Small, simple,
    >>
    >>NOT heart rate, or GPS or power or anything else...anybody heard of
    >>such a thing?

    >
    >What's wrong with leaving a simple computer on the bike? Either way,
    >you still need the sending unit on the bike, anyway.


    Perhaps the OP wants the convenience of not having to dismount the
    comp head to prevent it from being stolen every time the bike is
    parked?

    >You could install a wireless computer and carry the head in your
    >pocket.


    OTOH, if there was a wrist strap to mount the head on, that might meet
    the spec, assuming a comp which goes dormant in time-display mode can
    be found.


    --
    Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
    Some gardening required to reply via email.
    Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
     
  8. john

    john Guest

    Peter

    Suunto has a wide range of functions on wrist watches. Fabulous
    quality. They have a watch called: Suunto t6 (1st URL). It woks w/ the
    bike pod. (2nd URL)
    However I'm sure it's overkill for you. Way too many functions, inc
    heart rate, & ~$800 retail. You could overlook all the functions you
    are not interested it. It is one possibility. You might e-mail them for
    a simpler solution. They were a great Co. for customer service for
    scuba dive computers. I doubt much has changed.

    (These two URLs were ~a mile long each & didn't wrap around. So I
    truncated them. You'll have to find the exact products, if you are
    interested.

    http://www.suunto.com/suunto/main/product

    http://www.suunto.com/suunto/main/product

    I'm curious how your search goes, John
     
  9. >> The issue is wireless. It takes four times the power to transmit a signal
    >> twice as far, so the distance between sending unit and your wrist is a
    >> major
    >> issue; every time you remove your hands from the bars, you'd probably
    >> lose
    >> the signal. Plus, they conserve power by attempting to transmit in a
    >> fairly-narrow beam, and this only works when you have a fixed position
    >> for
    >> the receiver (wrist watch).

    >
    > A cateye double wireless sends from way at the end of the bike to the
    > front and lots of HRM also have a front fork speed pickup, to your
    > wrist.


    The Cateye has a fairly-large transmitter, and a different design where both
    the cadence and speed pickups share the same unit. It's the first rear wheel
    unit I've come across that's been reliable, but it's a bit bulky for a front
    fork. The HRMs that attach to your wrist are far more problematic than those
    that attach to the handlebar.

    >> And finally, perhaps you're a lot younger than I am, or, as an ex fighter
    >> pilot, have exceptional eyes? I'd have a difficult time reading the
    >> numbers
    >> on a wrist watch. Easier to focus on something that sits in one place.

    >
    > Well, not younger but I still have good eyes.


    Hope they stay that way! I'm still a young punk, at least for the next two
    months. But after that, it's going to be difficult justifying that I have
    more in common with someone 30 than 50... nor will I look forward to my next
    doctor's appointment (not that I ever have).

    --Mike Jacoubowsky
    Chain Reaction Bicycles
    www.ChainReaction.com
    Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

    "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
    >> > Tell ya what I would like to see. I ride w/o a cycling computer, only a
    >> > wrist watch. I would love to see a SIMPLE, wrist watch based wireless
    >> > computer. A watch most of the time, when ya get on the bike, push a
    >> > button, and now it shows speed and distance. Off the bike, push button,
    >> > it's a watch. Small, simple,
    >> >
    >> > NOT heart rate, or GPS or power or anything else...anybody heard of
    >> > such a thing?

    >>
    >> Peter: What you ask sounds so simple, and yet is so difficult.
    >>
    >> The issue is wireless. It takes four times the power to transmit a signal
    >> twice as far, so the distance between sending unit and your wrist is a
    >> major
    >> issue; every time you remove your hands from the bars, you'd probably
    >> lose
    >> the signal. Plus, they conserve power by attempting to transmit in a
    >> fairly-narrow beam, and this only works when you have a fixed position
    >> for
    >> the receiver (wrist watch).

    >
    > A cateye double wireless sends from way at the end of the bike to the
    > front and lots of HRM also have a front fork speed pickup, to your
    > wrist.
    >>
    >> Heart monitors don't have quite as much trouble because the max distance
    >> from transmitter to wrist watch... well, trying to figure that out now,
    >> but
    >> it's not much more than two feet. Plus, when you lose the signal, you're
    >> not
    >> messing up your distance figures (which may be important to some).
    >>
    >> And finally, perhaps you're a lot younger than I am, or, as an ex fighter
    >> pilot, have exceptional eyes? I'd have a difficult time reading the
    >> numbers
    >> on a wrist watch. Easier to focus on something that sits in one place.

    >
    > Well, not younger but I still have good eyes.
    >>
    >> I'm going the opposite direction (why don't I think that comes as a
    >> surprise
    >> to you?) and getting one of the Garmin 305s when they come in.
    >>
    >> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
    >> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

    >
     
  10. Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:

    > >>
    > >> I'm going the opposite direction (why don't I think that comes as a
    > >> surprise
    > >> to you?) and getting one of the Garmin 305s when they come in.
    > >>
    > >> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
    > >> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com



    Yep. What I would really love is one of those fork mount computers,
    like Fignon used to have, with a magnet on the wheel(not the little
    belt drives), where ya just looked down at your fork to see speed and
    distance-neat!! Avocet? I don't know, I had one about 2 decades ago...
     
  11. sunderland

    sunderland Guest

    Buy a Polar 720i and ignore the HR function. Speed, distance, altitude,
    even optional cadence.

    The main drawback of a wristwatch/computer is the size issue. The Polar
    is on the very large size for a wristwatch, but on the very small size
    for a cycling computer.
     
  12. > Yep. What I would really love is one of those fork mount computers,
    > like Fignon used to have, with a magnet on the wheel(not the little
    > belt drives), where ya just looked down at your fork to see speed and
    > distance-neat!! Avocet? I don't know, I had one about 2 decades ago...


    I remember those! Just barely. Don't recall who it was, but know that it
    wasn't Avocet. Kind of an electronic version of the Huret Multito (the
    belt-driven one).

    --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
    www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
     
  13. On 6 Feb 2006 05:53:56 -0800, "Qui si parla Campagnolo"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >
    >Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
    >
    >> >>
    >> >> I'm going the opposite direction (why don't I think that comes as a
    >> >> surprise
    >> >> to you?) and getting one of the Garmin 305s when they come in.
    >> >>
    >> >> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
    >> >> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

    >
    >
    >Yep. What I would really love is one of those fork mount computers,
    >like Fignon used to have, with a magnet on the wheel(not the little
    >belt drives), where ya just looked down at your fork to see speed and
    >distance-neat!! Avocet? I don't know, I had one about 2 decades ago...


    I saw a guy riding with a Huret Multito a few weeks ago...

    JT

    ****************************
    Remove "remove" to reply
    Visit http://www.jt10000.com
    ****************************
     
Loading...
Loading...