Just wondering, how many of you train without a computer these days? And I don't mean you occasionally ride with a computer and occasionally without one. I want to know what people are doing for training, and how they measure their progress, without any computers (besides maybe a clock/stopwatch). I realize this is fairly person specific but I'm still curious. Also, I'm new to the forum and this is my first post so let me know if I should have posted this some place else.

I use my iphone if I don't use the computer.

I have a Garmin Edge 200, so any indoor training is without a computer. I just pedal on the trainer for 30-60 min, depending on how much time I have. If I'm outside, I use the Garmin though.

On my hybrid I have a Cateye Velo 7. I use it for riding around town...It's on there but not for any reason in particular.

For actual training on my road bike, I use my cell phone with the Mapmyride app. I like that it tracks my ride with speed & elevation changes. It also allows me to ride based on how I feel as opposed to what the computer is telling me.

Looks like WA folks have chimed in!

I have a garmin edge 705. For outdoor use, I like to look at my data ie. speed, heartrate, cadence, while I'm riding. I also like saving my rides for future reference and to keep track of stuff. I also really like the social aspect of sharing my rides on Strava or Garmin Connect.

I train without a computer and love it! I broke my computer early last year and the rest of the ride was so liberating (not staring at my speed constantly, not playing little games to increase my avg speed, etc.) that I decided to continue riding without one. I measure my progress based on my race results (triathlons).

I also have a Garmin Edge 200, with a nice aluminum mount. I took it off to adjust my bars, and it's sitting on my shelf now. Maybe I don't like seeing how pathetic I am on the Garmin after my usual 10 mile morning ride.

Welcome to the forum!

I believe something that will tell you cadence will help you a lot, but without a computer, you would have to ride solely on effort. You can map your ride on mapmyride or ridewithgps, use a stopwatch, and then calculate speed afterwards and try to beat it everytime you go around that loop also.

Try training and nutrition as well for help: https://www.bikeforums.net/forumdispl...-amp-Nutrition

This is a fine place to post.

Use of a computer is optional. If you are a total newbie, you may benefit from a computer with cadence. You generally want your cadence to be 80-100 which seems too fast to many beginners.

That said, I don't use a computer and do fine without one. I do use the strava app in my iPhone, but I only use that to track mileage and only look at it after a ride. Up until last year I didn't even do that.

You probably want a basic computer that gives speed, cadence, and mileage. They are pretty inexpensive. Like anything else, it's a tool. Most folks who are more "serious" about their training make the jump to a Heart Rate monitor, or even a Power Meter.

What are your goals??

A computer is probably a good idea especially if you are just starting out. I will help you keep track of your progress in a much easier manner and give you a feel of where your fitness is.

With that said; it really all depends what kind of riding you do and what your goals are.

If you are just riding with no concern for training then you could probably do without.
If you are wanting to lose weight it might be a good idea to go with a heart rate monitor and computer to keep track of your calories and intensity of rides.

If you end up getting more serious about your training and start racing; then a power meter can be an extremely valuable tool. If you know how to use it.

If you aren't fussy about it, you can train without a computer.

The key is to do intervals, albeit in a very informal way. Ride along for a short period; sprint all out until you reach a specific milestone up ahead or a turn; go back to normal speed; sprint again, etc.

Runners do it all the time, it's called "fartleking." In fact, a lot of runners don't like to use HRM's, they prefer to "trust their feelings."

And of course, you can ride without a computer on your low-effort / recovery days.

Strictly speaking the Joe Friel-type stuff might produce the maximum benefit -- only if you can stick to it. IMO, the "best" system is one that works for you.

OK, I'm old, but I remember when there was no such thing as a cycling computer, or Garmin, or Strava. World-class cyclists trained with nothing more than a watch and maybe a stopwatch. Technology has provided some great tools, but we need to remember they are adjuncts, not replacements for good training strategies and learning to listen to our bodies. Can you train without the latest and greatest GPS, realtime mapping, heart monitoring, cadence counting, watts calculating, technological wonder? Heck yeah. All the technology does is put numbers to things you should already know. They can quantify but they can not qualify your efforts.

I like having at least a basic computer for the majority of my riding but not because I couldn't train without it.

I've been riding a '91 Diamondback cenrurion for a while now that was given to me. Didn't really see the point of a computer, as I just ride for fun and the bike is in crappy condition.

Now that I'm really getting into cycling and plan on getting a new bike, I'm going all out.
A comp with cadence is definitely on the list. Hopefully the additional info and depth that the comp provides will enable me to better myself. I also find all the info fascinating and would like to participate with Strava.

I have been a fairly serious commuter for many years, ~100 miles per week, in any weather and any temperatures (this was in Denver). I use to almost always ride by myself. However, I just started grad school on the East Coast and, as such, am racing collegiate now (last Spring was my first road season). I started in the Cs. Every race was the same: I pulled the pelaton around the course and then got destroyed in the finishing sprint. You'd think I'd learn but I didn't; this was the season's trend. My goals this season are to become a better sprinter and to race smarter. I've been running the nearest 12 story building with a stopwatch, doing some hill repeats, and riding with a group as much as possible. This said though, I could barely afford the used CAAD7 I'm racing with let alone some fancy GPS, power meter, or a Strava supporting device. I am mapping my ride and timing for average speed, but what did the hardys do before there were such things as GPS, Strava, and power meters?

I rode without a computer for all of last year. I use a simple speed-only Cateye now but I basically ignore it. It is useful for pushing yourself when you feel like crap because you can see just how slowly you're going.

Never owned a bike computer in several years of racing/training.
I would use one if given to me, but probably wouldn't go out to buy one.
I've got a really small cycling budget, so I'd rather spend the money on new parts/kits that I know I'll be needing.

Sorry to steal this thread, but I'm looking into buying a computer. I do have both Strava and MapMyRide, but I figured I'd get a computer to measure cadence. The issue is which is more beneficial if you're not training for racing. Rather, more for fitness and stress relief. Do you really need a heart rate monitor? The Bontrager Node 2.1 with the DuoTrap is $200 and it includes the Heart Rate Strap, while the cheaper Node 1.1 with the DupTrap is $130 without the altimeter, grade and monitor. Is having a monitor that important even if you're not going to be racing?

I guess we need a definition of "train". For the only racing I do (cross) I use the gym bikes to do interval-type workouts. For just pushing myself and trying to maintain a target effort/cadence I prefer that.

I don't run a computer on any bike. I will sometimes run Strava on my phone (which stays in the jersey pocket) but only in certain situations. If I stick with this racing thing or do more group rides I may suck it up and get something, but for now I enjoy riding computerless.

I've ridden both with and without a computer, but I think people tend to romanticize the computerless way a little too much. My results for any given type of ride [easy/recovery, hard/fast, etc] tend to be the same regardless of if I am using a computer or not. The psychological effect of computer data ought to be completely under your control, but it can take some time to learn how to manage that and not let the numbers get to you.

While its good to have the computer to know the actual numbers, in the end I think its better to feel it out and "just know" - as this makes for immediate and accurate decision making.

The only problem that you have with this technique is that you won't be able to "just know" without a computer. You can feel and "train" by RPE but you don't really know until you actually have the data.

You will have no luck performing specific targeted intervals with any sort of consistency without the numbers to look at.

I know that there use to be a time where there were no cycling computers Myosmith. But there also used to be a time where there were no computers at all. Both are available now and are valuable for their respective purposes.

You can buy a cycling computer for extremely cheap. If you really want to "train". And I mean training for races to improve your performance, to increase your threshold, then you need a plan that you, personally, can stick to. You would greatly benefit from the numbers and you need to know how to interpret them.

If your happy without a computer then keep riding without on and I'm sure you will be fine, but if you care to get faster I would highly recommend training with at least a speed and cadence device, preferably a heart rate monitor or even better; a power meter.

Ask any educated or trained coach about this question and you will get only one answer. And that is that you need numbers.

Nothing wrong with 'just riding by feel', but for the racers or those really interested in committing to training hard for substantive improvement, objective numbers are the way to go.

You'd be shocked with how much you slack when you 'just ride' - fire up something like TrainerRoad that lays out the intervals and power targets for you to hit, and you'll realize that what you thought was 'hard' isn't even close to what hard is supposed to feel like.

I would imagine that there are a lot of riders for whom not every ride is a training ride anda computer is not reallly a necessity.

I only watch cadence and HR. If I had power, I'd watch that, too. I might glance at speed from time to time, but it's not important. I use a recording HRM or a Garmin so I can download the data and have records. I don't know the stats on the ride until I download the data. I have data on all my workouts in electronic form going back 15 years and it's very useful indeed. I look back at it frequently.

I'd get the version with the HRM. When I started riding a road bike again, a HRM was one of my earliest and most valuable purchases. Going by effort can be deceptive without quite a bit of experience in watching a HRM.