Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets HRM, GPS, MP3, HID. Whether it's got an acronym or not, here's where you'll find discussions on all sorts of tools, toys and gadgets.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-22-11, 09:30 AM   #1
Noonievut
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 297
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Garmin 500

Am I correct that when using this computer on the road you do NOT need the speed/cadance sensor to track speed (because this is monitored via GPS)?

If I were to use this computer on the trainer indoors, I assume the speed sensor would be needed if I wanted to track speed.

Thanks.
Noonievut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 10:03 AM   #2
sd790
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 382
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Use a sensor. You don't NEED it to track speed when outdoors, but the GPS-only calculations are not nearly as accurate compared to when you use the sensor. The sensor is necessary if you are using a trainer or rollers to give you some speed-like measurements.
sd790 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 11:21 AM   #3
HawkOwl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 2,635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noonievut View Post
Am I correct that when using this computer on the road you do NOT need the speed/cadance sensor to track speed (because this is monitored via GPS)?

If I were to use this computer on the trainer indoors, I assume the speed sensor would be needed if I wanted to track speed.

Thanks.
No you do not need the speed sensor whenever the GPS can "see" the satellites. The GPS will give you location within a few feet and speed within some pretty precise limits. Of course while you are going up or down hills the speed shown on the unit will be a bit off. But, over the entire ride is will be more than accurate enough for just about any purpose. Speed sensors have their own inaccuracies that render them less than precise as well.

I would think a cadence sensor would be much more useful for indoor riding since you aren't actually going anywhere and a good workout is the goal.
HawkOwl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 12:23 PM   #4
Looigi
Senior Member
 
Looigi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 8,943
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Here's a relevant article in the New York Times that talks about running with GPS. Basically, at slow speeds and over tortuous routes, GPS errors add up to reduce the accuracy. Can't use a wheel sensor running, but you can on a bike.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/20/he...EXCITE&ei=5043
Looigi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 02:57 PM   #5
HawkOwl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 2,635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The foundation of the article is mis-directed at best. It concentrates on how the GPS is "wrong" and that differenct GPS units are "wrong" to different extents. In fact, what is happening, and which is briefly mentioned, is that the GPS is being used in a wrong way. GPS navigation is extremely accurate and is used in aviation, shipping, military guidance, surveying, etc. But, like all tools must be used correctly. By the way Google Maps is not a suitable reference if a person wants To The Foot accuracy.

In that regard instead of following the time honored Forum practice of arguing the point I suggest that if you are really interested spend some time researching in the areas I mentioned. There is a wealth of material available.

In the end I'll bet you come to the conclusion that for cycling speed and location the 500 gives perfectly adequate data.

People don't tend to criticize wheel speed sensor accuracy because it is seldom evaluated. But, once through the setup and you'll see it has its' own problems.

Me? I've found that over the typical 30-60 mile routes I ride there is an insignificant difference between my 705 GPS input reading and the reading from the wheel speed sensor input.

Last edited by HawkOwl; 12-22-11 at 03:00 PM.
HawkOwl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 03:03 PM   #6
Looigi
Senior Member
 
Looigi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 8,943
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawkOwl View Post
GPS navigation is extremely accurate and is used in aviation, shipping, military guidance, surveying, etc. But, like all tools must be used correctly.

Exactly. The correct way to use it on a bike is to supplement it with a wheel sensor to decrease it's degree of wrongness.
Looigi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 07:00 PM   #7
sjvcycler
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 329
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Here is how gps works. Taken from a website: A GPS receiver's job is to locate four or more of these satellites, figure out the distanc*e to each, and use this information to deduce its own location. This operation is based on a simple mathematical principle called trilateration. So if you drop or have bad signal you suffer erros in data. So just do what Looigi says and supplement with sensors. If you don't care that much don't put the sensors on. I ride with a buddy who never put the sensors on his bike.
sjvcycler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-11, 06:00 AM   #8
JimF22003
Senior Member
 
JimF22003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Northern VA
Bikes: 2008 Trek Madone 5.5, 2009 Cervelo R3SL tdf edition, Cervelo R5 with Di2
Posts: 2,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I never bother with the wheel sensor. GPS is plenty good enough for me. It's easier to swap the unit to different bikes, or swap different wheels on the bike without having to mess around with wheel sensors.
JimF22003 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-11, 12:01 PM   #9
HawkOwl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 2,635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Me too. Once I realized just how little difference there was as related to a recreational rider I stopped worrying about the sensor. If it is a recreational ride GPS is plenty good. If it is training it still is plenty accurate. If it is a competition the course should be surveyed with something more precise than either the GPS or the speed sensor that has its' own inaccuracies.

But, I can remember those bad old days when I, too, got all twisted around the axle with pseudo precision and tracking everything to the knats behind. Then I realized what I was doing was akin to the carpenter who measured with a micrometer, marked with a crayon and cut with an axe.
HawkOwl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-11, 12:13 PM   #10
cyclocommuter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: GTA, Canada
Bikes:
Posts: 313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noonievut View Post
Am I correct that when using this computer on the road you do NOT need the speed/cadance sensor to track speed (because this is monitored via GPS)?

If I were to use this computer on the trainer indoors, I assume the speed sensor would be needed if I wanted to track speed.

Thanks.
You are correct. I use my Garmin 500 on my bikes for commuting (on a cyclocross or a folding bike) without sensors. On my road bikes though I have sensors so it can also measure cadence. As others have noted, there might be a slight increase in speed accuracy when using sensors.
cyclocommuter is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:55 PM.