I just replaced my speed and cadence sending units with ones that don't use magnets. One attaches to a hub, one to the crank arm. Simple, easy to install, clean looking (no spoke magnets or straps on your chainstay.)
It got me thinking about technology and cycling. I'm an old dude (65 y/o) who raced in the late 60's and early 70's. The equipment we used had actually not changed much for 40 or 50 years. We had no speed indicators, cadence monitors, let alone heart monitors and power meters! There was a little mechanical counter you could attach to under your front axle bolt which, along with a little peg on your spokes would count revolutions and display distance - but none of the cyclists I trained with used them.
I won't detail the primitive state of our equipment - that's not my point. There was at that time, I believe, a higher level of standardization of bicycle parts and equipment. If this is true, it is probably because of the fact that there were fewer bike manufacturers and fewer types of bikes on the road - no mountain bikes, time trial bikes, road bikes, gravel bikes, fat bikes and so forth.
Okay, there have been some real advances: clipless pedals, indexed shifting, decent clincher tires, more gears, lighter bikes, actual protective helmets! And now, the electronic revolution: cycle computers, power meters, electronic shifting.
Personally, I have a negative gut reaction to electronic shifting. Actually, I don't even wear electronic watches - I prefer the so-called "automatic" or self-winding mechanical watch. Come the Zombie Apocalypse, I'll still know what time it is even after all the batteries go dead. But I love cycle computers. For one thing, you can turn them off and still ride the bike.
So my question is, wouldn't it be cool if there was some standardization around the sending units required to communicate with a wireless cycle computer? If there were, bikes could come with attachment points like fender mounts and you could choose your brand of sending unit. Sure there is GPS, but in my experience and where I live, reception depends on staying out of the woods for one thing. And the wheel on a bike will always spin and give a very accurate indication of speed and distance.
I know that there a few bikes that have something like that installed (a magnet?) but sending units from different companies attach to the bike in very different ways. Frankly, I don't even know how standards for bicycles are mediated now. I do know this is an industry driven completely, it seems, by marketing.
That's not a bad thing as long as you we can keep our perspective. No, WAIT - cyclists are obsessive loners and totally lack perspective
It got me thinking about technology and cycling. I'm an old dude (65 y/o) who raced in the late 60's and early 70's. The equipment we used had actually not changed much for 40 or 50 years. We had no speed indicators, cadence monitors, let alone heart monitors and power meters! There was a little mechanical counter you could attach to under your front axle bolt which, along with a little peg on your spokes would count revolutions and display distance - but none of the cyclists I trained with used them.
I won't detail the primitive state of our equipment - that's not my point. There was at that time, I believe, a higher level of standardization of bicycle parts and equipment. If this is true, it is probably because of the fact that there were fewer bike manufacturers and fewer types of bikes on the road - no mountain bikes, time trial bikes, road bikes, gravel bikes, fat bikes and so forth.
Okay, there have been some real advances: clipless pedals, indexed shifting, decent clincher tires, more gears, lighter bikes, actual protective helmets! And now, the electronic revolution: cycle computers, power meters, electronic shifting.
Personally, I have a negative gut reaction to electronic shifting. Actually, I don't even wear electronic watches - I prefer the so-called "automatic" or self-winding mechanical watch. Come the Zombie Apocalypse, I'll still know what time it is even after all the batteries go dead. But I love cycle computers. For one thing, you can turn them off and still ride the bike.
So my question is, wouldn't it be cool if there was some standardization around the sending units required to communicate with a wireless cycle computer? If there were, bikes could come with attachment points like fender mounts and you could choose your brand of sending unit. Sure there is GPS, but in my experience and where I live, reception depends on staying out of the woods for one thing. And the wheel on a bike will always spin and give a very accurate indication of speed and distance.
I know that there a few bikes that have something like that installed (a magnet?) but sending units from different companies attach to the bike in very different ways. Frankly, I don't even know how standards for bicycles are mediated now. I do know this is an industry driven completely, it seems, by marketing.
That's not a bad thing as long as you we can keep our perspective. No, WAIT - cyclists are obsessive loners and totally lack perspective
