# Which computer to get?



## altlink (Dec 29, 2005)

Looking at the Vetta V100HR WL2X-Vetta or looking at the Cat Eye CD300DW- Cat Eye......

What are you all riding with? One has a HR monitor the other one doesn't. Any other opinions on computers?
Thanks guys..!


----------



## botto (Jul 22, 2005)

had a vetta 100 (IIRC) w/a HRM but it was pretty useless after awhile - it wouldn't pick up the signal.

i'd advise using a HRM to monitor your BPM, not a bike computer.

currently using a cheapo cateye and a polar HRM. just bought a new bike, and had a shimano flightdeck put on. IMO if you have campy or shimano brifters that are compatable, then go for a flightdeck or an ergobrain.



altlink said:


> Looking at the Vetta V100HR WL2X-Vetta or looking at the Cat Eye CD300DW- Cat Eye......
> 
> What are you all riding with? One has a HR monitor the other one doesn't. Any other opinions on computers?
> Thanks guys..!


----------



## Bryn (Jul 9, 2005)

*echowell*

I looked at all the different cateyes and flightdeck computers when i was looking for a comp. My best advice, go with something wireless! I got a echowell W2, its wireless, waterproof, it doesn't have a cadence or HRM function but pretty much anything else. I wouldnt have minded getting a cadence function but the cheapest one was about $100 more than what i payed for mine. I already have a HRM so i can use that. My main advice, go with something wireless and a cadence function and for the HRM, get something different, like a polar, it'll work so much better


----------



## Spintogrin (Sep 23, 2005)

Only My Opinion - worth what you are paying for it.
1. Get a separate HRM. Be sure to get a Coded or digital signal model (like POLAR S210) so that it will work without interfering with a wireless cyclocomputer. 
2. If funds are limited then get a simple wired cyclo computer like a Cateye Velo5. Bullet proof, easy to read, mount and use. This will hold you over until you can save enough for a wireless with cadence model.
3. If you’re a bit more well healed, then get the wireless right off the bat. 

I have both a POLAR S210 and the Cateye Double wireless and I have no issues with cross talk or interference between the two. I'm still getting used to moving around the screens on the Cateye, more info than I need but a nice clean setup. Do a search for info on the wireless Cateye, there can be issues setting it up depending on your type of wheels and the shape of your chainstays. It takes a bit of patience to set it up initially and it also has the reputation of eating batteries a few times a year. I went the HRM and Velo5 route for a year or so and if I had not added another bike would still be using this setup. I’m riding my new bike on a trainer during the winter and the Double wireless reads off the rear wheel so this was the best choice for my application.
.


----------



## altlink (Dec 29, 2005)

Great suggestions. Really helped me out!! Sounds like the best bet is a separate HRM and go wireless. Thank you!


----------



## ballmon (Mar 23, 2005)

*Polar 720i*

Go straight to the Polar 720, you won't be disappointed.


----------



## geraldatwork (Jul 15, 2005)

I have a Cateye Micro Wireless and am very happy with it. Maybe it is my area but I never have a loss of signal or interference. I got a 2nd one for my other bike. They can be had for under $40 (I paid $28 for mine on ebay) and because it is wireless installs in about 20 minutes sans the cursing. As the others have suggested I also use a seperate Polar HR monitor. I haven't used one but Polar sells a seperate mount to put the wrist receiver on the handle bars.


----------



## wankski (Jul 24, 2005)

i have the cateye double wireless (cadence), it's very cool...

dont get the HR one, you can always get one of those watch thingys for that.. if you care...

the top of the range cateye is quality. Made in Japan, very good mounts both in materials and design, it's easy to set up, easy to read with an anti-glare coating, and it works... what more do you need?

i highly recommend it.


----------



## TiBike (Aug 2, 2004)

*What a coincidence...*

I'm returning my Cateye 7 today as it decided to stop registering speed, distance, etc. Battery is fine. Apparently this is a common problem with the 7. (See other threads).


----------



## Bianchiguy (Sep 8, 2005)

altlink said:


> Looking at the Vetta V100HR WL2X-Vetta or looking at the Cat Eye CD300DW- Cat Eye......
> 
> What are you all riding with? One has a HR monitor the other one doesn't. Any other opinions on computers?
> Thanks guys..!


I've been using the CD300DW for the past year and it has performed flawlessly with great accuracy.


----------



## MGSuarez (Jan 27, 2003)

I also have the Cateye CD300DW Works great. I had a lower polar HR monitior I think it was the 120. It caused alot of interference. I just bought a Sigma PC14 for $40 and it all works fine. All I needed was basic HR functions.


----------



## Mr. Versatile (Nov 24, 2005)

I reccommend getting one with large, easy to read numbers, that tells you present, avg, & max speed, total miles, and trip miles. You, IMHO, really don't need anything else. Some of these things that have a built-in compass, altimeter, cadence, are just bling. Next they'll be making them with lean angles and rectal temperatures.

Big numbers - easy to read -simple, not complex. My $.02


----------



## Blue Sugar (Jun 14, 2005)

I had a Vetta C10 that lasted 9 or 10 years, while every Cateye I've ever owned crapped out within a year.


----------



## geraldatwork (Jul 15, 2005)

Blue Sugar said:


> I had a Vetta C10 that lasted 9 or 10 years, while every Cateye I've ever owned crapped out within a year.


Sure hope you're wrong about the Cateye's. I'm happy with both of mine but my first one is only 7 months old the other less than 1 month.


----------



## Blue Sugar (Jun 14, 2005)

Make sure you get one that's sealed against water at the battery cover, or it will likely crap out on the first rain ride. I currently use a Specialized unit and I recommend it. Ones I wouldn't recommend would be any Avocet, Planet Bike, or Cateye model, as I've had no luck with any of those. 

Some helpful hints regarding computers-

-Take the computer off when you wash the bike, but cover the mounting shoe with some saran wrap and a rubber band to keep water off it. Water will corrode the contacts. 

-If your computer stops working after a year or two it could be the magnet- they can lose their magnetic properties in time. You can buy replacements at a bike shop.


----------



## altlink (Dec 29, 2005)

Tons of great info here guys...! Thanks. So found this on the net. I know Polar is best for HRM... How about as a HRM/Cycling Computer? Check it out--> triple wireless CS200cad Polar


----------



## KonaMan (Sep 22, 2004)

Bianchiguy said:


> I've been using the CD300DW for the past year and it has performed flawlessly with great accuracy.


We've got the CD300DW on all our road bikes now. No issues, easy to setup. It's nice and clean, plus the mount is very flexible so that you can put it where you can easily see it and have it still be out of the way of everything.


----------



## ballmon (Mar 23, 2005)

altlink said:


> Tons of great info here guys...! Thanks. So found this on the net. I know Polar is best for HRM... How about as a HRM/Cycling Computer? Check it out--> triple wireless CS200cad Polar


You will not be sorry with this unit or a Polar bike specific watch. I've gone through may different types of cycling computers and I've found Polar to be the most useful. You won't be disappointed.


----------



## Mr. Versatile (Nov 24, 2005)

Blue Sugar said:


> I had a Vetta C10 that lasted 9 or 10 years, while every Cateye I've ever owned crapped out within a year.


AAAaaamen! My experience exactly. I'm using an Avocet 30 that I bought new in 1993. Works perfectly.


----------



## Tlaloc (May 12, 2005)

*Flight Deck*

If you're using Shimano stuff with STI shifters you should consider their Flight Deck Computer because it displays what gear you're in as well as a lot of other stuff.

Tlaloc


----------



## JJCole (Jan 13, 2006)

altlink said:


> Looking at the Vetta V100HR WL2X-Vetta or looking at the Cat Eye CD300DW- Cat Eye......
> 
> What are you all riding with? One has a HR monitor the other one doesn't. Any other opinions on computers?
> Thanks guys..!


I have the Cateye and it has not crapped out on me. In fact, it went through a collusion with a car (the car's fault, not mine) and it is still performing just fine. In fact, it was one of the few mechanical things to survive the collusion. It is also easy to use.


----------



## johngfoster (Jan 14, 2005)

*Second the Flight Deck*



Tlaloc said:


> If you're using Shimano stuff with STI shifters you should consider their Flight Deck Computer because it displays what gear you're in as well as a lot of other stuff.
> 
> Tlaloc


To me the most useful feature on a cyclocomputer is cadence. Sure you can manually count how many pedal strokes per min (or 15sec or 10sec) but for training purposes I really like to be able to look down and see what my cadence is. I also agree with getting a separate HRM. I have a Sigma--works great and is cheap, and doesn't interfere with my wireless Flight Deck.

One of the greatest features of the Shimano Flight Deck to me is being able to operate the computer from the brake lever hoods without moving my hands. This and the cadence feature make it my top pick. Otherwise I would look at something like the Cat Eye Astrale 8 or a wireless unit with cadence feature.

Just my 2c

John


----------



## ampastoral (Oct 3, 2005)

*wires*

why does everybody seem so opposed to wires? is it the difficulty to install? the "ugliness"? i often read about complaints with signals. wouldn't wires be more reliable? just curious. thanks.


----------



## geraldatwork (Jul 15, 2005)

ampastoral said:


> why does everybody seem so opposed to wires? is it the difficulty to install? the "ugliness"? i often read about complaints with signals. wouldn't wires be more reliable? just curious. thanks.


For the same reason most people have cordless phones in their house. Basically they are easier to install, look better and are much cooler. I have no problems with my Cateye Micro Wireless.


----------



## tmanley (Jul 31, 2005)

ballmon said:


> Go straight to the Polar 720, you won't be disappointed.


Ditto. I have mine set up to work on my road and mtn bike. Once you get it dialed in it works great.


----------



## johngfoster (Jan 14, 2005)

ampastoral said:


> why does everybody seem so opposed to wires? is it the difficulty to install? the "ugliness"? i often read about complaints with signals. wouldn't wires be more reliable? just curious. thanks.


I originally went with the wired flight deck but the handlebar mount wouln't accomodate my oversized bars and I had to jury-rig it with a zip-tie. I feel the wired version is simpler and you don't have to worry about crossed signals or dead batteries. However, when my LBS had me come in and voluntarily changed out the mount to one that would work on oversized bars, they ended up changing it for a wireless version at not charge! I haven't had any problems whatsoever with my unit. It works just fine. It is a much cleaner set-up.


----------



## Art853 (May 30, 2003)

I use the Cateye Astrale 8 cyclocomputer. It has cadence on it (wired). The only drawback is that the computer display sometimes pops off because one of the buttons is pushed in the same direction as you would push to remove it from the mount and the lock in is not that strong.

If you buy an inexpensive HR monitor then, with both systems, you have lots of functions for less than $100. 

I think the Polar is a popular HR monitor but my understanding is their low end units do not have an easily replaceable battery for the chest strap. If the battery dies you need to buy a new strap ($50) or mail it back to Polar for a replacement (and they charge you). The higher end models have something called wear link which means you can replace the battery. 

My low end Ciclopuls (Ciclosport) monitor has all the basic functions. You look at it and it tells you your HR. That is the most important function for me. I incorporate it into my training by speeding up or slowing down to stay below a targeted HR. It also has 3 zones, time in each zone, max, and average. These are somewhat interesting but are not incorporated back into my training at all. It also displays the clock time or stopwatch time. An uncluttered display with just two numbers with a big HR display so it is easy to read.


----------



## KonaMan (Sep 22, 2004)

*I really don't understand this...*



Tlaloc said:


> If you're using Shimano stuff with STI shifters you should consider their Flight Deck Computer because it displays what gear you're in as well as a lot of other stuff.
> 
> Tlaloc


why do we feel the need to know what gear we are in? would any of the pros feel the need to look down and say "woa! I'm in xxx gear, need to change that!" It's like having a HUD display on your sportscar so that you know if you're in 4th, 5th, or 6th gear. If I'm pedaling at 130 rpm, then I'm too low (likewise with the car, if I'm running close to redline all the time, I need to learn to drive). I don't even need a cadence monitor to tell me that, but I have cadence for a training tool.

Getting the right computer is about knowing what information you want. What works for me, probably doesn't work for you (just like bikes, shorts, shoes, etc.). I'm working with a trainer this offseason, so for my drills, I have to have cadence (or I spend more time counting than focusing on form and technique). Probably the most important thing about computers that most would agree on is position of the computer. Can you mount it in a manner that allows you to look at it and not get out of "alignment"? And even that will vary person to person. I had one mounted to my stem and it worked for me bacause I could see what I needed to see without getting to far out of form for more than a second or 2. Unless I'm diong specific drills, I rarely even look at it other than to make sure it's running at the start and when I'm done.

The key is to not get dependent on reading the computer for constant feedback, learn to "feel" your speed, cadence by getting more in tune with your body. As a seasoned distance runner, I can tell you without a timer, what my pace is by the way if "feels". The same thing applies to cycling and swimming once you become proficient at it.


----------



## Tlaloc (May 12, 2005)

*Flight Deck*



KonaMan said:


> why do we feel the need to know what gear we are in?


I said that I like the display that shows what gear you 're in. Then you criticize this. So why are you calling us "we"? You should have said "Why do YOU feel the need to know what gear YOU are in?".

After riding with a computer that has this in its display I decided I really liked it because you can compare the gear you're in to the gear you used on other days on the same ride and see how you are doing comparatively. There is a big overlap between the gears on your big and small chainrings. If you just shift down to increase your cadence as you advocate you could end up in eg. 53-25 when you should be on your small ring in eg. 39-21. Usually you're worrying about other things and don't want to try to remember what gear you're in and it's a lot easier to look at the display rather than at your rear axle. Don't knock it until you've tried it. You might like it.

The Flight Deck computer has two wires that go under your handlebar tape into your shifters. This allows it to know what gear your in and since it has your speed as well, your cadence without a cadence sensor. At each shifter there is a small button under the rubber that allows you to shift between display modes with your thumbs with your your hands on the hoods. I don't know of any other device that has these features.

Tlaloc


----------



## johngfoster (Jan 14, 2005)

*I agree*



Tlaloc said:


> I said that I like the display that shows what gear you 're in. Then you criticize this. So why are you calling us "we"? You should have said "Why do YOU feel the need to know what gear YOU are in?".
> 
> After riding with a computer that has this in its display I decided I really liked it because you can compare the gear you're in to the gear you used on other days on the same ride and see how you are doing comparatively. There is a big overlap between the gears on your big and small chainrings. If you just shift down to increase your cadence as you advocate you could end up in eg. 53-25 when you should be on your small ring in eg. 39-21. Usually you're worrying about other things and don't want to try to remember what gear you're in and it's a lot easier to look at the display rather than at your rear axle. Don't knock it until you've tried it. You might like it.
> 
> ...


This wasn't a feature I was looking for when I got mine, but have come to like it and use it from time to time. Sometimes when I'm slogging up a long hill and need to downshift, it's nice to be able to see how many more gears you have below you before you need to change rings up front. To use your car analogy: many budget cars don't have a tachometer. Lets face it, you don't really need it. You should be able to shift just by the feel/sound of the engine, but it's nice to have and know how close to redline you are. Nice feature but not essential.


----------



## crumjack (Sep 11, 2005)

I use a wired Sigma BC1600 w cadence. I chose it because it has a bigger display than cateye and I can swap the head unit to my MTB. I've been very happy with it and it was less than 50 bucks. If I decide to go high zoot down the road, will probably do one of the Polars.

I won't use a Flight Deck because I like to put my hands wherever I'd like on the hoods and not worry about messing up the computer. Also, its not that difficult for my hand to make the 6 inch trip over to the buttons when needed (maybe 3-4 times on a 40 miler) and its easy to look down if I want to check my gear (no worse than looking back for cars).


----------

