Questions about purchasing bicycles and parts
So, Ive decided on getting a GPS computer, rather than using a bulky wireless computer. Really, I would like to keep track with my speed and distance. Cadence and heart rate, I dont really care about atm. There are 5 options Ive found:
The Garmins. Theres the $110 Garmin 200, which will serve my purposes well enough. Tracks speed and distance, and maps the ride as well. Dont really have any gripes with this.
But for an additional $40, I could get a Garmin 500. It looks better, and will add a couple more functions. But I wont be using those functions now, however, Ill have the chance to utilise them later on if needed. For $40, would it be worth it to grab the 500, over the 200?
And the other brand, Navig8r. This is some unknow brand from Laser(the IT products), but looking at the price($90), and its functions, I can see that itll do everything I want it to do.
The first option from them is the Navwatch S20, which comes in green or orange. Useful as I can wear it as a watch as well.
http://www.navig8r.com.au/products/fitn ... WATCHS20-G
From the site, it says that it has Google Map Tracking review software, but doesnt have a screenshot or something of it. Garmin's LiveConnect site looks established, etc, and dont know how this will fare. Anyone know? It really is a running watch, but they say itll work for cycling, which I see no problem with. Im actually liking this a lot.
And the other option is the NAVBIKEGPS, which is also $90. Its a proper bike GPS, so whatever finctions I need are there.
http://www.navig8r.com.au/products/fitn ... AVBIKE-GPS
Info can be found here:
http://www.laserco.com.au/brochure/Navi ... preads.pdf
Both these Navig8r products can be purchased locally, and I would have the chance to return them if they are unsatisfactory. To you, should I spend the extra $20 for the Garmin 200 over these? Or are these fine for my uses?
Last option is my 3Gs. Its my old phone and has no sim in it. It still has GPS capabilities and Ive got a couple apps(Strava and Runtastic). I have not tried it out yet, so I dont know. Any good offline bike apps to track speed and distance? Or could what Ive got currently work?
These is also the Xplova E5, $99 from Torpoedo 7.
Or for $149 there is the recently released Magellan Cyclo, a true competitor for Garmin.
+1 Garmin 500. HRM and Cadence sensor will be useful as you get more into cycling and whichever allows you to get info onto Strava. I use both my android strava app and the Garmin 500 and today my android phone didnt register my 3 hour ride...so luckily i had my garmin to record the ride
Edge 500 too, this is the best price ive found for one new.
http://blackmanbicycles.com.au/shop/gar ... hr-monitor
Currently debating between getting my wife the 500 or upgrading my 500 to a 510...
I'd stick with the 500. IMHO the only difference I've personally found between both units is the 510 locks on satellites straight away (Glonass) and the touch screen. Hardly deal breakers..
I initially upgraded to the 510 for the Bluetooth, but its hit and miss. I'm still waiting for strava upload via bt to my tablet too which is why I guess I bought it, but not sure if that's available for a while..
Both these things are good, but not worth paying the higher price for..
Proudly "a hater of academics with helmet cams"
Before buying a Garmin i'd check this thread out viewtopic.php?t=63195 .
My brother has a Garmin 200 and has had a bit of trouble with it not registering his position properly, or in some cases, at all.
I've had a Bryton rider 20 since mid last year and am not happy with it, several times it has got water inside it (despite supposedly being water resistant), several instances of not registering my position correctly (so no time for the strava segment I was training on) and the website/upload software was the opposite of user friendly, though it has improved a bit recently.
Among the alternatives, the navig8r bikegps only claims an 8 hour battery life, which is pretty crook unless you are only going to do short rides and recharge after every ride. The watch is only 7 hours.
By comparison the Xplova has a 14hour battery and will record 110hrs of data, but like the Magellan, there's not much info on it yet (although the xplova looks to have been around for a while, can't find any reviews).
EDIT: forgot to mention 'smart' phones (I hate trying to text or answer a call with a touchscreen ). I have once used strava on my wife's HTC phone and on the one segment I was chasing it didn't record properly. My brother used his iphone (I think a 3g) before he got his garmin and hated it, constantly dropping out or showing him riding 30m or more to the side of where he actually was. I've seen plenty of people using iphones who have sections missing from rides, or straight lines to nowhere, or one very memorable one which averaged 200kmh while doing loops 5 km off the coast.
I have heard of other people who use iphones with no problems though.
When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.
So any ride under 8 hours is "short".
2009 Giant CRX2
2010 Malvern Star Oppy C6
Well I might have a slightly different perspective than most .
When man invented the bicycle he reached the peak of his attainments- Elizabeth West.
Watch is a stupid idea unless you are going to do triathlon/ironman/running races. They tend to cost a lot more the good ones compared to the Edge Garmins.
Ignoring full ANT+ functionality is a stupid idea because HR, Cadence and possibly Power is really important for training in the long term. Much more than distance and speed, as someone already said. If you can't spend an additional 40 bucks to get a 500 instead of a 200, you should not be paying for a GPS unit - stick with the computer because while it's not ideal, any decent tracking program will allow manual inputs. Ignore this if you are just trying to get your feet wet... however you've got the 3GS, why bother with being a tightwad when you can get your Strava tracking done for free already, no investment required?
I'd get a Garmin Edge 500, or 510. 810 if you need navigation. It's the standard for Strava. I got a Bryton 35 a couple months back, and I'm not prepared to upgrade to Edge 510 right now only because there are more pressing things to get like HRMs or shoes for my children or bike fits. This does a job and that will be ok. But I have a Nokia 3210? or something, no smartphone GPS or anything, and Garmin's had not plummetted just yet.
Ok after some thinking, the Navig8r and 3GS are out.
Now looking at the remaining options, its gonna be either the Magellan Cyclo 105 or the Garmin 200 or 500. Anyone use the 105 yet? Still relatively new and there's not much info on them. And for the mount, I'd prefer an elastic band sort like for the Garmin, but I think that those SRAM mounts work(as can be seen in DCRainmakers post). Does that mean it has the same mount as a Garmin, meaning I can get an elastic mount?
Oh, and I've found the 105 for only $125 locally, which is making it stand out. Otherwise how'd it fare with the 500?
For the 105 I'd be going for the Sram Cyclo Bike Mount.
Very easy to read in this position.
Oh well. Will go for the 500, as its known and widely used.
Thanks for all the suggestions.
As for the mount, Ill see how the normal elastic one goes. Are there many issues with it breaking or working its way loose on a ride? If its crappy, then Sram mount it is. But do they do em for 25.4mm bars.
Where? I'll get one for that price.
Careful with some of the cheaper watches then, many are splash proof but not waterproof.
I have a Foretrex 401 I use for hiking and stuff, it's almost indestructible. Mate has one with a 5.45 through the side of the casing and it still tracks and logs just fine (display is partially bung though)
I tried a Magellan 105 (loaned from the distributor) at the Wombat 100 MTB race a few weeks ago, mounted alongside my Bryton Rider 50 for comparison. I've had the Bryton long enough to compare against other devices, and am pretty confident in its accuracy to use as a benchmark. The Magellan read consistently lower speeds (up to 10 km/h at times!), even in open areas with good signal coverage, recorded the course at about 93km (vs 100.7 on the Bryton), yet recorded a longer riding time by several minutes. Both units were paired to common HR & cadence sensors, and achieved the same readings, as one would hope. At a little over six hours riding, both units still had some power in reserve. Although only based on one ride, the fairly substantial deviations in accuracy (~7% distance, at times ~20% speed) were a little disappointing. To be fair, more testing in different conditions would be needed to be sure it wasn't just different GPS sensitivity under tree cover, of which there was plenty. The Bryton is not without its failings, but on the whole I'm pretty happy with it.
I had a thought, but it got run over as it crossed my mind.
Who is online