I use a Specialized basic wired computer on my front fork. At first I didn't know if it helped or hurt because I always try to mess with it and it kept my eyes off the road. Now I just look at it at breaks or stops.

It would be nice if it had a back light. However the little watch battery lasts 3 years, can't complain.

One problem I have is how to be accurate on the circumference entry? The manual says for 700 x 23/25c you use 214cm but I did a rollout on my own and measured 210cm. Does that kill my accuracy if I pick one or the other?

4cm...probably a little, but I wouldn't think very much??...can you change your computer to 210cm ?

My Sigma has preset or you can custom enter settings.

I used Wired Balckburn Delphi 4.0. I just did not like having the extra battery and something else to read on the display for the wireless one. I am sure my next one will be wireless.

Wired is the way to go.

Wireless ones are wacky.

Yup, I'll recheck my numbers. After a couple searches it seems like the best way is to mark a spot on your tire and roll several revolutions to measure the rollout. I only did one rev.

I had to throw away wireless after starting using HRM.
Now I'm waiting for Garmin Edge 500.

Sorry, didn't think the posts were relevant to me. So how good is that Schwinn model?

They are good. I have them on two bikes.

I have a Blackburn Neuro (2.4 GHz) and my Dinotte doesn't interfere with it. ;)

Actually, the light interfered with a Cateye Strada wireless, which I quit using. The Strada can't handle whatever noise is coming out of my dynohub & headlight, either, so it sits in a box.

Now I'm down to one computer (the Blackburn) mounted on one bike out of five. I got it for the different frequency, cadence, and HR, and it's been interesting. I like how it keeps track of intervals and data per lap.

But, man, it's overkill most of the time, too. All the heart rate does is confirm how much I'm hurting, and I'm good enough with tempos that I don't need a computer for cadence. The other bikes don't have computers because I don't care how fast I'm going on them, let alone anything else.

If the Blackburn ever craps out, I'll go back to one of the wired Stradas I've collected.

Actually it's a toss up between that one and the Bell F20. I'd really love to have calories/fat burned. Not sure if the Schwinn 17 function has that...

My wired Avocet has been working like a charm for over 20 years...:)

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b9...e/IMG_2660.jpg

Being a utility transportation rider... I only need to know how fast, how far, and what time.;)

I use a wired computer on the Ibis Ti Road. That's the bike I rig with the lights, and the halogen lights interfere with wireless computers (transmission from fork sensor to head unit stops when the light is on), so I needed a wired computer for that bicycle.

Wow, my just crap out on me last month! It was 20 plus years too.

Well I replace it with wired Specialized Turbo comp.

Sometimes the cheapest simplist ones last the longest.:)

I needed another computer for my other bike and since they don't make the aavocet any more, found an old style wired Cateye Velo 5 is the closest in cheapness ($20) simplicity and function to the old one...



http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/...500_AA280_.jpg
Greg

My SRM is the wired kind, but I also run Specialized Speedzone computers on the other bikes in the family (4 of them). I bought wired ones because back then I found wireless to get interference.

I have a Cateye wireless that I won (guessed Cancellara's victory and avg speed in the prologue of the Tour a couple years ago), and I want to try it out, but I lost it. Arg.

cdr

So what exactly does knowing cadence provide? Sorry for the novice question, just trying to learn.

It's to help make sure that you don't resort to mashing a tall gear at a slow cadence.

You could also tie it with heart rate and speed, trying to figure out whether you need to gear up or down to go faster while not making your heart explode. I tried this out one day on a loop around a small park, with one lap at a higher cadence in a lower gear, and the second lap at a slower cadence in a taller gear. I went faster in the taller gear with the slower cadence, but my heart rate was significantly higher, and I don't think I could've kept it up for much longer.

So, then, If I wanted to get somewhere far away in a hurry, now I know how hard I can push myself while avoiding a major bonk.

Knowing cadence is to cycling what knowing rpms is to driving. Cars work perfectly fine without a tach, but it's harder to know exactly what's happening. A guy who raced some classic (i.e. old) car series said that he knows when to shift when the whole gauge cluster shakes so hard he can't read anything. Apparently he worked out the speed and that's about the limit of the engine.

Work, especially going up hill (since you rarely draft etc) is the same for a given speed/grade/wind/rolling resistance. In other words, if you're lugging along at 30 rpm at 5 mph, you will do the same work if you pedal faster in a lower gear at 5 mph.

Knowing your exact cadence, without counting for 6 seconds and adding a 0 etc, is helpful when trying to optimize your efforts.

Higher cadences tend to load the muscles less, leading to less "dead" feeling legs (lactic acid). A typical racing trick is to use lower gears for the less important parts of a race, then to use bigger gears as the race gets hard. I've done this accidentally, racing in the small ring for all but 1.5 laps of a race, but I got into the big ring too late. A friend does this regularly (he's a much better rider, a Cat 2), and he'll do half of a race in his 39 or 42, then "gear up" into his 53. Averaging 25 or 28 mph, with bursts of 30-35 mph, in a 39 or 42 is pretty tough. However, your legs don't feel as fatigued when you put it in the big gear, and in fact this practice really encourages you to spin.

One old trick you can try is to use a bigger gear for a bit, observe your speed, and then, after you've acclimated to that gear, shift to a lower one. It'll feel easier of course, but oftentimes your speed will actually increase.

At the same time, it can be useful to roll in a big gear at lower rpms (60-ish) to develop strength in less-used muscles, or less stressed muscles.

Of course when you're struggling on a hill and you explode, you end up going at whatever you can go - 45 rpm in some gear for example. But knowing that it'd be better to maintain a slightly higher cadence may encourage you to let go of the gear you're on and shift down.

cdr

I wouldn't be able to count two things at once to save my life :lol: , but I've got enough music lodged in my brain that I could get within 10 rpm of a target cadence pretty easily without computer assistance.

cdr, I've noticed that my cycling cadence is really close to my jogging cadence, if not identical. Is there a biomechanical reason for it?

Wired ones always auto start but in order to extend battery life many wireless computers (eg cateye) will go to sleep after some period of time. Otherwise, the wireless receiver in the computer needs to operate continuously.

Thanks for the info. Learn something new everyday. As far as counting while riding, not a good idea when I commute to/from work on busy streets. Guess I should now look into a computer that does cadence too?

If you're talking about Sigma's wireless units, I have no experience & hence no opinion...but if you're talking about Sigma's wired units, I very definitely do have an opinion:

The Sigma BC906 is the best wired cyclocomputer ever made. Period. End of story. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200. That's it. THE. BEE'S. KNEES.

You read it here first.

Hi I just bought this one:

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/NEW-Cateye-St...item2303a315df

for my new bike - LOL purely for the look of it! (weak, I know!)

I wanted to do away with the cable on the bike.

The unit itself (Cateye Strada RD300W) is working great on the one ride I have had and affixes to the stem nicely.

Yes, heavier unit than with wired and you have the battery issue. One less cable is cool though!

I have a Sigma Rox 9 and my wife a Sigma BC1606 and we have never had a single problem with either...both wireless, both work perfectly.

I've tried just about all brands over the years...but nothing has ever worked as well as the Sigma...fanstatic!

I don't know about the jogging bit - I know next to nothing about running. I'm guessing that you've probably optimized your body for a certain rhythm of pulses (your legs pump blood when they contract).

A related trick (cadence and heart rate) - at the top of climbs, you'll often find yourself blowing up just as you crest. You think "ah, I timed my effort right." Right? I don't think so. You blew up because your cadence increased, and even though your workload decreased, your heart rate went up (this is where my theory on cadence v heart rate comes in play).

Instead of staying in the same gear, shift up aggressively as you crest a climb with the goal being keeping the same cadence. You'll find your heart rate doesn't skyrocket.

However, just like you need to keep a lower HP engine kind of wound up, your legs need a certain level of cadence so you can respond to efforts (whether it be to make a light or to respond to an attack). If you keep your climbing cadence over the top of the climb, and it's typically lower than your normal cadence, then you'll be hard pressed to accelerate briskly.

cdr

I don't know about best but if you want a good solid computer that does the important stuff (speed, distance, av etc.) then I agree, the 906 is great value for money. It doesn't do cadence or anything though which will matter to some.

Matthew

+1:thumb:

It is a real pain to re-adjust the wiring when mounting. If you train using clip-ons and need to reposition, then its downright depressing having to constantly unwrap/wrap all that extra wire. YMMV.

I use a Cateye Strada Double Wireless with a second mount and just swap out the head unit.

I bought a wireless Cateye for a bike that I'm building up. I like the idea of the cleaner look of a wireless. Plus I've had two wires broken when mechanics have worked on my bike. (Separate locations, I don't go to either one any more.) Despite that, after reading this thread, I'm thinking about switching back to a wired model.

I know I'm going on a tangent here.. ;)

I think there's something more to it -- I mean, it's not just me and my legs. Compare Eddy Merckx's cadence in his hour record ride and Olympic 800m and 1500m races -- I counted about 105 rpm in all three videos (the runners' left feet hit around 105 bpm):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-U0g...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWsAACwEki4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ge6_o...eature=related

Or, for sprints, Usain Bolt over 150m and a track cycling sprint race, both around 125 "rpm":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0d69bXakUo&feature=fvst
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ac9H02rYEk