Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    Senior Member Gotte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,334
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    bike computer question

    I got a wireless bike computer from decathalon in UK, and it works fine. The only problem is that the instructions don;t specify how highut the magnet on the wheel, or the sensor on the fork. THere's a crude diagram that shows it roughly 2/3 up the fork (maybe, it's hardto tell), but I was talking to a guy who said he understood that sensors in genera should go at the centre of the fork.
    Anyone know? I'm guessing it's critical, as if it's too high it'll go too fast, and too low it'll go too slow.

  2. #2
    "Purgatory Central" Wino Ryder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    beautiful "Cypress Gardens" florida
    Posts
    1,757
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You can secure the sensor on the fork anywhere and it wont effect accuracy. But for the sake of arguement place it high up on the fork, in-line with the magnet on the spoke 2-3 inches from the rim. Make sure there is about 2mm clearance from the magnet and sensor.

    Should do you good.

  3. #3
    Faster but still slow slowandsteady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Jersey
    My Bikes
    Trek 830 circa 1993 and a Fuji WSD Finest 1.0 2006
    Posts
    5,979
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Whether you put it 1 mm from the hub or all the way out to the rim, it counts RPMs. Put it where ever you want. The inside of the wheel can't go more revolutions than the outside of the wheel or vise versa. It simply counts the revolutions and multiplies that by the wheel circumference which you input manually.
    "Ride lots." -- Eddy Merckx

  4. #4
    Senior Member Gotte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,334
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ahhh, i see. Thanks for that.

  5. #5
    cab horn
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    My Bikes
    1987 Bianchi Campione
    Posts
    28,295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Whether you put it 1 mm from the hub or all the way out to the rim, it counts RPMs. Put it where ever you want. The inside of the wheel can't go more revolutions than the outside of the wheel or vise versa. It simply counts the revolutions and multiplies that by the wheel circumference which you input manually.
    Everyone knows this, but you also neglect to mention that the speed of the magnet going across the sensor is lower as you approach the hub which may matter.

    Even though that's true here's what Sheldon says:

    With one-magnet cyclecomputers, you usually have a choice of several places on the wheel to attach the spoke magnet, depending on the spoke pattern of the wheel. Generally, it is best to mount the magnet as close in toward the hub as possible. The closer in you mount it, the more slowly it will pass by the sensor, giving the sensor's magnetic switch more time to respond. If the magnet is too far out, the computer may give erratic readings at higher speeds.
    I always place mine near the hub.
    Mes compaingnons cui j'amoie et cui j'aim,... Me di, chanson.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Retro Grouch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    St Peters, Missouri
    My Bikes
    Rans Enduro Sport, Hase Kettweisel Tandem, Merin Bear Valley beater bike
    Posts
    23,989
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've found that the biggest problem in getting bike computers to function properly is getting the spacing between the wheel magnet and the pickup right. Usually (but not always) that works out better when the magnet is closer to the hub.

  7. #7
    Body By Nintendo Psydotek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Videogames ruined my life. Good thing i have 2 extra lives.
    My Bikes
    Giant TCR2, Giant TCX, IRO BFSSFG SE, Salsa Casseroll, IRO Rob Roy.
    Posts
    3,190
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    As close to the hub as possible is also good because it takes less effort to move rotational weight a shorter distance.

    [granted, a wheel magnet doesn't weigh much, but it was my reasoning when i installed my cyclometer]

  8. #8
    Faster but still slow slowandsteady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Jersey
    My Bikes
    Trek 830 circa 1993 and a Fuji WSD Finest 1.0 2006
    Posts
    5,979
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Everyone knows this, but you also neglect to mention that the speed of the magnet going across the sensor is lower as you approach the hub which may matter.

    Apparently the OP didn't know this....that is why I said it. And the difference in speed from the hub to the rim is neglible considering you can be going anywhere from 4 mph to 70 mph and many thousands of rpms. If the darn thing can read it at 50 rpms or at 10,000 rpms you are just fine.
    "Ride lots." -- Eddy Merckx

  9. #9
    jwc
    jwc is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    My Bikes
    Specialized (2) Trek 400, Raleigh 3spd
    Posts
    399
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm just going to throw this out there in case anyone else ever has the problem I had with wireless. It was a cheapie, Axiom A10, but the problem probably could affect any wireless.

    I commute to work and the spot I park my bike, the safe spot, is next to a alarm sensor. Evidently, the sensor would cause the wireless to pickup a signal. I could walk past the bike and the speedometer would be reading 56mph. Ruined my weekly averages. But, impressed my wife.LOL

    I've since switched to a wired Cateye and the problem was eliminated. I actually preferred the Axiom, I could reset it daily, but maintain my weekly mileage count. A feature the Cateye doesn't have. I'm wishing now I would have bought the $19.99 Axiom A08.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,941
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For wireless, the distance from the sensor to the computer is meaningful - the closer it is, the better signal you get, and the less interference.
    Eric

    2005 Trek 5.2 Madone, Red with Yellow Flames (Beauty)
    199x Lemond Tourmalet, Yellow with fenders (Beast)

    Read my cycling blog at http://riderx.info/blogs/riderx
    Like climbing? Goto http://www.bicycleclimbs.com

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Union County N.J.
    My Bikes
    07 Fuji Roubaix Pro, 02 Fuji Sunfire MTB
    Posts
    106
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I had a wireless Sigma and got rid of it for a wired Cateye w/cadence with the speed sensor to the rear wheel. Wired is more reliable and accurate and you don't go through batteries like you do with the wireless. I have mine wired so nice you could barely notice the wire. I have it wrapped around my speed shift cable and it looks awesome. It looks like a solid black speed shift cable. Actually looks better.
    07 Jamis Dakar XAM 2.0
    07 Fuji Roubaix Pro
    05 Jamis Durango SX
    02 Fuji Sunfire

  12. #12
    Senior Member Gotte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,334
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for the input, chaps. Wireless is good for me because I can move it realtively eaisily from bike to bike when I change mount for any period of time.

    But I might try a wired for the cheap MTB I've got hooked up to a trainer - winter's coming and I expect I'll be on more now.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •