Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

Bike Computer Accuracy

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Bike Computer Accuracy

Old 01-16-21, 10:24 PM
  #1  
bikehoco
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 100
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 12 Posts
Bike Computer Accuracy

For rides, I use a bike computer (magnet in the spokes) and Ride With GPS on an iPhone. For distance, both provide similar results (20 miles vs. 19.9 miles). But for speed, the difference is bothersome (14 mph vs. 13.5 mps). Is this typical?

I ride along the road (with some trails) in the suburbs..
bikehoco is offline  
Old 01-16-21, 10:28 PM
  #2  
10 Wheels
Galveston County Texas
 
10 Wheels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In The Wind
Posts: 31,596

Bikes: 2010 Catrike Expedition, 02 GTO, 2011 Magnum

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 884 Post(s)
Liked 321 Times in 162 Posts
Bike Computer set with Roll OUT Measurements is most accurate..
__________________
Fred "The Real Fred"

10 Wheels is online now  
Likes For 10 Wheels:
Old 01-16-21, 11:38 PM
  #3  
Litespud
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Chapel Hill NC
Posts: 1,252

Bikes: 2000 Litespeed Vortex Chorus 10, 1995 DeBernardi Cromor S/S, Nashbar 3sp commuter

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 465 Post(s)
Liked 477 Times in 272 Posts
Originally Posted by bikehoco View Post
For rides, I use a bike computer (magnet in the spokes) and Ride With GPS on an iPhone. For distance, both provide similar results (20 miles vs. 19.9 miles). But for speed, the difference is bothersome (14 mph vs. 13.5 mps). Is this typical?

I ride along the road (with some trails) in the suburbs..
I have two GPS devices that donít agree on distance - my iPhone running Strava consistently reads 0.6% higher than my Garmin head unit. Probably as good as it gets for consumer devices
Litespud is offline  
Old 01-17-21, 12:25 AM
  #4  
aplcr0331
IMHOME
 
aplcr0331's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Inland Northwest
Posts: 655

Bikes: 2016 Cannondale SuperSix Evo

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 253 Post(s)
Liked 142 Times in 80 Posts
Go with whichever is higher.

I actually use a Wahoo speed sensor on my front hub with my Bolt. Is it accurate? Meh...itís consistent so thatís what I go with.

Weíre not in danger of setting any land speed records.
aplcr0331 is offline  
Likes For aplcr0331:
Old 01-17-21, 02:04 AM
  #5  
cubewheels
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Manila, Philippines
Posts: 1,583

Bikes: A really old BMX bike, Phantom 20 kid's MTB, Jackal Mio Gravel Bike

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 697 Post(s)
Liked 301 Times in 241 Posts
Once, a random car tailed for a minute and then called out my speed!
cubewheels is offline  
Old 01-17-21, 08:53 AM
  #6  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 6,273

Bikes: TWO Cinelli superstar disc with SRAM Force AXS

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 602 Post(s)
Liked 263 Times in 212 Posts
The speed and distance on the computer are only as accurate as the value used for the tire circumference. Standard values listed for each tire size are close, but I measure the length of 3 revolutions, several times, then convert my inches measurement to millimeters. Having your weight on the bike will further improve accuracy. The tire will squish and the effective radius will be smaller.
DaveSSS is offline  
Likes For DaveSSS:
Old 01-17-21, 09:03 AM
  #7  
berner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bristol, R. I.
Posts: 4,319

Bikes: Specialized Secteur, old Peugeot

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 648 Post(s)
Liked 477 Times in 289 Posts
Person with two watches never knows the time, so says Confucius.
berner is offline  
Old 01-17-21, 09:55 AM
  #8  
CAT7RDR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Hacienda Hgts
Posts: 1,073

Bikes: 1999 Schwinn Peloton Ultegra 10, Kestrel RT-1000 Ultegra, Trek Marlin 6 Deore 29'er

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 381 Post(s)
Liked 737 Times in 402 Posts
My simple Cateye with a magnetic sensor matches usually within .10 of a mile with the ridewithgps route planner app on 50+ mile rides.
I stopped using Garmin because it grossly inflated elevation gains. It is more accurate to just use the ridewithgps mapping function to figure out elevation gain.
CAT7RDR is online now  
Likes For CAT7RDR:
Old 01-17-21, 10:32 AM
  #9  
10 Wheels
Galveston County Texas
 
10 Wheels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In The Wind
Posts: 31,596

Bikes: 2010 Catrike Expedition, 02 GTO, 2011 Magnum

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 884 Post(s)
Liked 321 Times in 162 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveSSS View Post
The speed and distance on the computer are only as accurate as the value used for the tire circumference. Standard values listed for each tire size are close, but I measure the length of 3 revolutions, several times, then convert my inches measurement to millimeters. Having your weight on the bike will further improve accuracy. The tire will squish and the effective radius will be smaller.
NOPE.
A Roll Out is Necessary as it relates to Tire PSA and Weight of the Rider.
__________________
Fred "The Real Fred"

10 Wheels is online now  
Old 01-17-21, 10:43 AM
  #10  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 2,394

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1088 Post(s)
Liked 857 Times in 565 Posts
The correction for distance Strava uses if you're on pretty well known roads and routes is pretty accurate. However, you "instantaneous" speed shown on the GPS is most accurate if using a wheel speed sensor with accurate info inserted in for that sensor (rollout, tire size, etc...).

One thing I've seen is that if you're a runner, I have the slowest runs by far on curvy greenway/MUP runs where the curves are so small that the GPS mesh coords are much larger than the curves. Thus, you lose a solid amount of distance that it can't really correct for.

I could assume MTB folks also suffer from this and rollout may work better for distance the curvier your route is.

My most accurate distance/times for running pace are on arrow straight streets and roads with really steady curves to them when they do turn.

Either way, I train on rides to time spent in zones combined with overall TSS. I don't really bother looking at the speed or distance as it is irrelevant sometimes. I only went 18mi yesterday in an hour on a 30/30 vo2 workout but went uphill almost 1900ft. I was chasing X sets of 30/30 and an overall TSS score for the workout. I hit my sets, then free-rode at Z2 and tempo till I hit my TSS score. Then went home.

It doesn't really bother me ever unless doing my super nerd time trial equipment testing. Then I care about the details a bit more.
burnthesheep is offline  
Likes For burnthesheep:
Old 01-17-21, 11:16 AM
  #11  
_ForceD_
Senior Member
 
_ForceD_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 1,534

Bikes: Several...from old junk to new all-carbon.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 658 Post(s)
Liked 229 Times in 130 Posts
Originally Posted by bikehoco View Post
But for speed, the difference is bothersome (14 mph vs. 13.5 mps).
Just wondering if this a look at actual current speed sometime mid-ride. Or, if itís the average speed you see after the ride has finished? Just asking because I think the two would likely be different while looking at them mid-ride due to the frequency of how often the speed is determined.

Dan
_ForceD_ is online now  
Old 01-17-21, 04:42 PM
  #12  
Steve B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South shore, L.I., NY
Posts: 4,815

Bikes: Flyxii FR322, Cannondale Topstone, Miyata City Liner, Specialized Chisel

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1840 Post(s)
Liked 550 Times in 363 Posts
In my experience, GPS devices are inaccurate as to speed at that moment. There’s always a few seconds of lag in the display. Is why I use speed sensors.
Steve B. is offline  
Old 01-17-21, 07:42 PM
  #13  
Sy Reene
Advocatus Diaboli
 
Sy Reene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 6,715

Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3480 Post(s)
Liked 707 Times in 486 Posts
I think the OP is saying that speed is pretty accurate between both.. So if the problem is the Avg Speed/Hr, then the problem lays in the difference in how the 2 devices are measuring time (moving, stopped, overall, etc etc.. lots of possible differences).
Sy Reene is offline  
Likes For Sy Reene:
Old 01-17-21, 08:30 PM
  #14  
jaxgtr
Senior Member
 
jaxgtr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 4,865

Bikes: Trek Domane SLR 7, Trek ALR 6, Trek CrossRip, Trek X-Caliber 8

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 118 Post(s)
Liked 237 Times in 146 Posts
Originally Posted by Sy Reene View Post
I think the OP is saying that speed is pretty accurate between both.. So if the problem is the Avg Speed/Hr, then the problem lays in the difference in how the 2 devices are measuring time (moving, stopped, overall, etc etc.. lots of possible differences).
^^ This... I wrote a database app many moons ago that I stored all my ride info in and I noticed that my avg time and speed were always off slightly. Came down to rounding from the computer and my db. I carried out digits 3 places for some off reason and the computer app only carried it out to 1. I changed my coding to only show a single digit east of the decimal and boom.....match.
__________________
Brian | 2021 Trek Domane SLR 7 | 2016 Trek Emonda ALR 6 | 2016 Trek X-Caliber 8 | 2014 Trek CrossRip Comp
Originally Posted by AEO View Post
you should learn to embrace change, and mock it's failings every step of the way.







jaxgtr is offline  
Old 01-17-21, 11:26 PM
  #15  
canklecat
Me duelen las nalgas
 
canklecat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 12,358

Bikes: Centurion Ironman, Trek 5900, Univega Via Carisma, Globe Carmel

Mentioned: 188 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3987 Post(s)
Liked 1,777 Times in 1,139 Posts
Auto pause/resume with most apps and *some* bike computers will also influence readings for speed, distance and time. Some auto-pause/resume settings are adjustable, some aren't.

I've run a dedicated bike computer and two phones with apps (Wahoo Fitness on one, Strava on the other) and they all differ slightly. Not enough to worry about. I was never close enough to a KOM for a 0.5 mph or 1 minute difference to matter over over my favorite routes. It might affect a top 10 position, but as younger, stronger and faster riders use those same routes I'll never be anywhere near a top 10, let alone a KOM. So my best times/speeds will be jockeying for middle of the pack honors, along with almost every other MAMIL.

If I was serious I'd try a wired bike computer calibrated to my wheel/tire diameter, etc., as described above.
canklecat is offline  
Likes For canklecat:
Old 01-18-21, 09:55 AM
  #16  
Altair 4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Along the Rivers of Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,106

Bikes: 2011 Novara Forza Hybrid, 2005 Trek 820, 1989 Cannondale SR500 Black Lightning, 1975 Mundo Cycles Caloi Racer

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 162 Post(s)
Liked 121 Times in 65 Posts
Originally Posted by CAT7RDR View Post
My simple Cateye with a magnetic sensor matches usually within .10 of a mile with the ridewithgps route planner app on 50+ mile rides.
I stopped using Garmin because it grossly inflated elevation gains. It is more accurate to just use the ridewithgps mapping function to figure out elevation gain.
If you ride through an area with high rise buildings, you can get some wildly funny elevation gains. I ride through downtown Pittsburgh while using Map My Ride and Road ID's app. Both sometimes think I'm riding over the rooftops! They also miss datapoints, presumably blocked signal by the buildings, so that'll throw the distance off.

On my Novara, I have a Sigma with mag sensor. It's set pretty accurately - it matches every mile marker around the river trails here and on the GAP even over long distances.
Altair 4 is offline  
Old 01-19-21, 08:55 AM
  #17  
pdlamb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: northern Deep South
Posts: 6,606

Bikes: Fuji Touring, Novara Randonee

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1474 Post(s)
Liked 606 Times in 404 Posts
When I'm feeling obsessive-compulsive over distance and/or speed, the wired (or wireless) cyclocomputer with a wheel sensor is my go-to measurement device. I've got a nice downhill ridge near home I can coast down, and compare the computer's measured distance with the mile markers. If I'm within 1%, it's fine; more than 2%, time to adjust the calibration. I've gotten it within 0.5% some months, and then the tire gets worn and/or replaced, and the next time it's up to 1% match.

A few key features of the above. First, I'm coasting downhill, so there's minimal side-to-side pedal tracking to affect the distance measured. Second, because it's a U.S. highway, I trust the mile markers to be accurate. (Don't try this in Kansas or Missouri -- I think they sell mile markers at Walmart in those states, and farmers pick out a pretty green sign to put up near their farms without regards to location or numbers) Finally, curves are pretty wide, even on the ridge.

GPS devices sometimes match the cyclocomputer pretty closely, as long as the comparison is on a straight, treeless road with no large buildings nearby. On my more typical rides (curvy, trees, hillsides blocking some satellite signals), the GPS distance is off. It's still good if I need help mapping or navigating, but I don't trust the distance the GPS measures. Ergo, I figure the instantaneous speed measurement is in the ballpark, but it's more for entertainment than precise measuring.
pdlamb is offline  
Old 01-19-21, 09:46 AM
  #18  
Moe Zhoost
Half way there
 
Moe Zhoost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 2,399

Bikes: Many, and the list changes frequently

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 765 Post(s)
Liked 533 Times in 318 Posts
I've had a similar ambiguity with GPS vs. my taffrail log.
Moe Zhoost is offline  
Old 01-19-21, 09:53 AM
  #19  
billridesbikes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Posts: 422
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 162 Post(s)
Liked 244 Times in 148 Posts
I use RWGPS post ride to fix the speed and elevation numbers.

Those complaining about a 0.6% difference is kind of insane in my book. That’s 15.00mph vs. 15.09mph, or for most practical purposes ‘the same’ number. The speedometer in your car is often has no better accuracy wise than this.
billridesbikes is offline  
Old 01-19-21, 10:15 AM
  #20  
Paul Barnard
For The Fun of It
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Louisissippi Coast
Posts: 4,674

Bikes: Lynskey Backroad, Litespeed T6, Lynskey MT29, Burley Duet

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1418 Post(s)
Liked 702 Times in 360 Posts
Originally Posted by bikehoco View Post
For rides, I use a bike computer (magnet in the spokes) and Ride With GPS on an iPhone. For distance, both provide similar results (20 miles vs. 19.9 miles). But for speed, the difference is bothersome (14 mph vs. 13.5 mps). Is this typical?

I ride along the road (with some trails) in the suburbs..
I'd be irate if my magnet based bicycle computer was a half mile per hour off at 14 MPH. I'd pick up the phone and call someone's manager.
Paul Barnard is offline  
Likes For Paul Barnard:
Old 01-19-21, 04:29 PM
  #21  
Inusuit
Senior Member
 
Inusuit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: SE Wyoming
Posts: 63

Bikes: 1987 Diamondback Ascent, 1989 Specialized Rock Combo, 2013 Specialized Tarmac Elite

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked 20 Times in 15 Posts
Meh. My Garmin Edge 25 is close enough for me, although it's a bit off from my riding partner's computer of unknown make. I ain't settin' any speed or distance records.
Inusuit is offline  
Old 01-19-21, 07:53 PM
  #22  
Bmach
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 851
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 334 Post(s)
Liked 96 Times in 67 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveSSS View Post
The speed and distance on the computer are only as accurate as the value used for the tire circumference. Standard values listed for each tire size are close, but I measure the length of 3 revolutions, several times, then convert my inches measurement to millimeters. Having your weight on the bike will further improve accuracy. The tire will squish and the effective radius will be smaller.
unless you are using the computers GPS for those features.
Bmach is offline  
Old 01-19-21, 09:26 PM
  #23  
mdarnton
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Chicago
Posts: 111

Bikes: nothing to brag about

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked 83 Times in 46 Posts
You can't ride an hour (or a half, or fifteen minutes) and see how far you've come, calculate your average speed, and know which one is right????
mdarnton is offline  
Old 01-20-21, 10:15 PM
  #24  
bikehoco
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 100
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 12 Posts
Originally Posted by Paul Barnard View Post
I'd be irate if my magnet based bicycle computer was a half mile per hour off at 14 MPH. I'd pick up the phone and call someone's manager.
Bugger off smartass.
bikehoco is offline  
Old 01-20-21, 11:20 PM
  #25  
downtube42
Senior Member
 
downtube42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,643

Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Volae Team, Priority Eight, Nimbus MUni, Trek Roscoe 6.

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 702 Times in 367 Posts
If the sensor and magnet are correctly installed, the wired computer will be virtually100% accurate at counting wheel revolutions. Converting wheel revolutions to distance, measuring time, calculating speed from time & distance, then displaying speed on the screen, are matters of calibration, software, and hardware. There may be calculation inaccuracies and delays updating the display. Generally I think most cyclocomputers are pretty good, but they are not all equal.

Theoretically, if well calibrated, this should be far more precise than a GPS at both instantaneous speed and speed and distance over a long ride.
downtube42 is offline  
Likes For downtube42:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.