# ANT+ on the way out?



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

ANT+ is owned by Garmin. Polar, Look and others don't want to promote a competitors product. 
Bluetooth is totally open... and appears to be the way things could be heading. Look's new KeO Power pedals will not be ANT+ compatible. They'll use Bluetooth. SRM, Quark and others are allegedly looking at Bluetooth Smart for future models.

Although I have a Garmin computer and new SRM crank... I hate to admit it... but the Bluetooth route makes sense. Kind of seems like the HD-DVD vs BlueRay wars... and I bought the HD-DVD player. 

Can the cycling world support two systems? Will Garmin cave and go Bluetooth Smart - or are too many companies/consumers already too invested in ANT+... will SRM convert my crank when my 500 craps out?


----------



## beston (Jul 4, 2008)

I hadn't heard of Bluetooth smart before! Really versatile concept that will be built in to most devices with bluetooth capabilities. Although, I'd hate to think that my ANT+ gear is not going to be future friendly 

Polar has generally used their own transmission system. I believe their current Pedals transmit through the W.I.N.D technology, which is neither ANT+ nor Bluetooth


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

ANT+ isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Plenty of products out there use it already. I was under the impression anyone could use ANT+ as well..


----------



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

ZoSoSwiM said:


> ANT+ isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Plenty of products out there use it already. I was under the impression anyone could use ANT+ as well..


Yeah, Garmin did set up (spin off?) an "alliance" to allow for this. But ANT+ is still owned by Garmin. And, Look (for one) has made it clear they don't want to support a direct competitor's product. I hope it all works out, e.g. all the gear plays nicely together.


----------



## dcorn (Sep 1, 2011)

I feel like Look is kinda killing a big part of their market for the power pedals by not making them ANT+ compatible. Lots of people out there have Garmins and a lot more will with the new Edge 200 unit driving the price even lower. I'd consider a power crank or hub as a chance to upgrade my bike and I'd get to keep my Garmin (if I had one). With the Look setup, all you are 'upgrading' is your pedals and then you have to swap to a lesser computer.


----------



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

dcorn said:


> I'd consider a power crank or hub as a chance to upgrade my bike and I'd get to keep my Garmin (if I had one). With the Look setup, all you are 'upgrading' is your pedals and then you have to swap to a lesser computer.


This is a good point. At least with my SRM, they "threw in" a Dura Ace crank for that hefty price - an upgrade from my Ultegra. I guess the other side, is that a lot of guys taking the power meter plunge already have high-end stuff... That's kinda hurt to pull a Dura Ace crank off the bike to put another one on.

There's something about having $2,000 pedals in a crash too... the crank and hub rarely get damaged in a crash. 

But we digress...


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

ANT+ will not go away yet. So big deal that Garmin owns them. How many other "competitors" use the ANT+ protocol for their products? Many. ANT+ is open source and free, correct? If not, Garmin better make it.

Yes, Bluetooth SMART or Bluetooth v4.0 is a new lower power BT protocol and device, that will eventually take over. Its open and free and would be compatible with ANT smart phone or device that adds the low power Bluetooth S.

With so many people using their Smartphones as their cycling/running, etc computer, its going to happen VERY fast. Why would I want a ANT+ dongle in my phone, when I can use Bluetooth?

Garmin WILL build this protocol in. I thought POLAR was a dead company with ANT+ taking over, but if they move to Bluetooth S on all their products, they will stick around.


----------



## onthebottom (May 4, 2011)

DIRT BOY said:


> ANT+ will not go away yet. So big deal that Garmin owns them. How many other "competitors" use the ANT+ protocol for their products? Many. ANT+ is open source and free, correct? If not, Garmin better make it.
> 
> Yes, Bluetooth SMART or Bluetooth v4.0 is a new lower power BT protocol and device, that will eventually take over. Its open and free and would be compatible with ANT smart phone or device that adds the low power Bluetooth S.
> 
> ...


For me this is the key point... I think Garmin's bike computer business is on it's way out (charging for maps in an era when everyone uses google maps on their phone is crazy backwards), bluetooth simply builds in the wireless standard in the phone removing the need for an expensive dongle or case (I have the wahoo). iPhone apps are VERY cheap and functional and you have to bring your phone anyway....

OTB


----------



## ClayFranklin (Dec 12, 2011)

The iPhone 4s has Bluetooth 4.0 as I understand it. I've been holding out buying ant+ duo trap device for my Trek, but would get a bluetooth low power unit.
I've just been using the iPhone 4.0 with motion gps to track my rides.
Also considering a iPhone handlebar mount instead of a bike computer. 
IMO ant+ is going to go away as the smart phones put GPS mfg out of biz.
I still listen to records on a record player using vacuume tube amplifiers, so old technology is sometimes better than new but not as convient.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

onthebottom said:


> For me this is the key point... I think Garmin's bike computer business is on it's way out (charging for maps in an era when everyone uses google maps on their phone is crazy backwards), bluetooth simply builds in the wireless standard in the phone removing the need for an expensive dongle or case (I have the wahoo). iPhone apps are VERY cheap and functional and you have to bring your phone anyway....
> 
> OTB


The new Wahoo thing is great. I won't use my iPhone a bike computer, mounted on my handlebars. One crash it it could be gone. I would have to remove it form one case to another to do this as well. I will stick with my Garmin 500, as it all I need.

But Garmin will move to BT, watch.


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

I shake my head in wonder at people the push using their iphones as their cycling computers. I mean, have you actually tried this? Not only is the phone huge and looks bad mounted on the bike, but the battery life is awful. I can get about 2 to 3 hours ride time out of the phone. And then, I don't have a phone or computer. I'd rather keep my phone in my back pocket for emergencies and use the Garmin for the ride data.

I suppose if you only ride a few hours at the longest, the phone is an okay alternative. But for serious cycling? I don't think it is a good choice.


----------



## Undecided (Apr 2, 2007)

DIRT BOY said:


> With so many people using their Smartphones as their cycling/running, etc computer, its going to happen VERY fast.


Not that I disagree that there's a good opportunity for Bluetooth to gain traction, but I'm not sure I buy the presumption that "so many people" are using their phones as you suggest. Even here in Silicon Valley, where there are disproportionate numbers of people who (i) are relatively technologically savvy, (ii) race bikes, (iii) have power meters and (iv) have meaningful discretionary income, I don't know anyone who uses a power meter and uses a phone as a primary cycling computer. Once you're willing to devote the time and money to training and a power meter, buying a cycling-specific computer isn't hard to justify.


----------



## Stogaguy (Feb 11, 2006)

*+1 for Preferring a Separate Device.*

I agree that a separate device makes more sense. The short battery life coupled with the inherent dangers to the phone are reasons enough for me. 

As an anecdotal aside , a friend was proudly showing off his new iPhone mount on a recent ride. On a rough section his swanky white brand new iPhone 4 popped off and went skipping down the road at 20+ mph. The phone survived, but is scarred for life. I think my friend will be getting a Garmin...


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

You know what, most everything in cycling is on the way out. Two years from now, all that old 10-speed Shimano gear will be on the way out to be replaced by the 9000 series 11-speed group. After that, all those rim brakes and expensive non-disc wheelsets will be obsolete.

Just use what you have, enjoy it, and don't worry about what may change in two or more years time. Not worth worrying about.


----------



## Travisk (Dec 31, 2011)

I hope it all goes to Bluetooth...seems like it would simplify a lot of data exchange processes.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

Undecided said:


> Not that I disagree that there's a good opportunity for Bluetooth to gain traction, but I'm not sure I buy the presumption that "so many people" are using their phones as you suggest. Even here in Silicon Valley, where there are disproportionate numbers of people who (i) are relatively technologically savvy, (ii) race bikes, (iii) have power meters and (iv) have meaningful discretionary income, I don't know anyone who uses a power meter and uses a phone as a primary cycling computer. Once you're willing to devote the time and money to training and a power meter, buying a cycling-specific computer isn't hard to justify.


I saw numbers from a developer on how many cycling pas were download by iPhones users.
On a given ride, in 2-3 hrs, I will see at least 20-40 people out of a few hundred using their iPhones. Its getting more popular.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

Travisk said:


> I hope it all goes to Bluetooth...seems like it would simplify a lot of data exchange processes.


Correct. Very easy to upload to your computers this way to. No cables.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

nightfend said:


> I shake my head in wonder at people the push using their iphones as their cycling computers. I mean, have you actually tried this? Not only is the phone huge and looks bad mounted on the bike, but the battery life is awful. I can get about 2 to 3 hours ride time out of the phone. And then, I don't have a phone or computer. I'd rather keep my phone in my back pocket for emergencies and use the Garmin for the ride data.
> 
> I suppose if you only ride a few hours at the longest, the phone is an okay alternative. But for serious cycling? I don't think it is a good choice.


I am with you. I can get 3-4 hrs on my iPhone 4, but then my battery is low for the rest of the day. That's why I have a Garmin 5oo. I do use my iPhone to tracy my runs and my iPod Touch is my HRM/Cyclocomputer for spinning class that I teach. I have my HR and Cadence right there. Uploads to Training Peaks to.


----------



## meat (Aug 10, 2006)

nightfend said:


> I shake my head in wonder at people the push using their iphones as their cycling computers. I mean, have you actually tried this? Not only is the phone huge and looks bad mounted on the bike, but the battery life is awful. I can get about 2 to 3 hours ride time out of the phone. And then, I don't have a phone or computer. I'd rather keep my phone in my back pocket for emergencies and use the Garmin for the ride data.
> 
> I suppose if you only ride a few hours at the longest, the phone is an okay alternative. But for serious cycling? I don't think it is a good choice.


I have spent time on rides twice now looking or iphones that managed to leave their bikes. We found one after a brief search but the glass was cracked. The last time I stopped on a climb to help look we did not find the phone. Hopefully his insurance was paid up.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

nightfend said:


> I shake my head in wonder at people the push using their iphones as their cycling computers. I mean, have you actually tried this? Not only is the phone huge and looks bad mounted on the bike, but the battery life is awful. I can get about 2 to 3 hours ride time out of the phone. And then, I don't have a phone or computer. I'd rather keep my phone in my back pocket for emergencies and use the Garmin for the ride data.
> 
> I suppose if you only ride a few hours at the longest, the phone is an okay alternative. But for serious cycling? I don't think it is a good choice.


This. No clue how long my 500 lasts, but I've gone on several long rides and was still somewhere betwene 70-80%. Normally it gets charged up since I gotta download when I'm done, anyway.


----------



## dzurutuza (Jan 30, 2012)

*Joule 2.0 manual zero*

Hi,

I am trying to manually zero my joule 2.0 but cannot do it. The torque raw & offset show very different values, and when i click the joistick button on the manual zero line, it doesn't do anything... am I doing something wrong?? 

thanks


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

spade2you said:


> This. No clue how long my 500 lasts, but I've gone on several long rides and was still somewhere betwene 70-80%. Normally it gets charged up since I gotta download when I'm done, anyway.


I've gotten 12-14 hours out of my 705.. You'll never get that out of an iphone or other smart phone.


----------



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

Travisk said:


> I hope it all goes to Bluetooth...seems like it would simplify a lot of data exchange processes.


Says the guy who didn't just install an SRM - an ANT+ based SRM. 

Oh, I know... it's not like if every company shifted to Bluetooth, my ANT stuff (Edge, SRM) would cease to function. And someone would still make ANT stuff... And I bet SRM would retrofit the crank... but still... There is a bit of that feeling that I just bought an HD-DVD just as BlueRay "wins" the war.


----------



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

ZoSoSwiM said:


> I've gotten 12-14 hours out of my 705.. You'll never get that out of an iphone or other smart phone.


Yeah, but with our 705 (and my 500) doing the same route is boring. When I use the iPhone, the same route is different every time! Different distance. Different elevation gain/loss. ;-)


----------



## onthebottom (May 4, 2011)

I've been tempted to get a Garmin but I think it will be more clunky than the iPhone software I use today (digifit) and I'll have to bring two devices. I've not had the battery issue - my rides max out around 60 miles (over 3 hours) and I have plenty of battery left when I'm done, nor has my Wahoo bike mount case gone flying when I hit a rough patch...

I also like the wireless synching - no need to plug it in to a computer....

To each his own...

OTB


----------



## chuckice (Aug 25, 2004)

Polar/Look is doing a great job of supporting ANT+ by pricing their pedal power system at $2200.


----------



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

chuckice said:


> Polar/Look is doing a great job of supporting ANT+ by pricing their pedal power system at $2200.


Solid point!


----------



## whichway (Mar 25, 2011)

Unless phones can sort out the battery issue (including using backlight), garmin will continue to dominate the sports GPS market. It is unlikely that iphone will release a special model with a long life battery, however ti is possible that one of the many andoid phones will come out with a long life battery. Even then, would one model of phone threaten Garmin - not likely. The issue is that Garmin's in car GPS market will decline, due to phones, and then it will be left with the sports and recreational market. Can Garmin survive just on that?

Answer that question and the future of Ant+ will follow - I can't see that Garmin would go to a blue tooth based system.


----------



## sp3000 (Jul 10, 2007)

re: iPhones as bike computers. I for one think it's a really bad idea. Apart from the fact that calls, sms and e-mail will pop up and distract you, I for one want my phone to WORK after a crash so I can call an ambulance! I also ride MTB and a few hours into the bush you need all the battery in the phone in case there is an emergency, if my Garmin dies, no big deal. Not to mention products that are designed for a specif use generally work best for that. The garmin is light and has survived multiple crashes no worries.


----------



## onthebottom (May 4, 2011)

While I use my iPhone as a bike computer (as I've stated above) there is a hybrid solution that a buddy of mine uses... he turns on digit on his iPhone and tucks it in a pocket - it logs all the ride details. He also has a cheap computer on the handle bars to track speed, cadence, distance, time.... 

OTB


----------



## Mshubert (Feb 8, 2011)

I use my iPhone 4s for my bike computer, mtb and road , it's a lot easier to sync all my data to emails facebook and whatnot , I have the phonesuit battery case which will keep my phone charged up to 8 to 10 hrs after my iPhone battery goes ! So I don't have to worry about the battery going dead , then when I'm at work or a friends house I can show my routes to them without having to get my cycling computer , I use the new Bluetooth heart rate monitor from wahoo and it works great!


----------



## BearSquirrel (Mar 30, 2011)

DIRT BOY said:


> ANT+ will not go away yet. So big deal that Garmin owns them. How many other "competitors" use the ANT+ protocol for their products? Many. ANT+ is open source and free, correct? If not, Garmin better make it.
> 
> ...


There are licensing fees. You will only find a few cycling computers with ANT+ and that is for the sake of being compatible with power meters that were built to be compatible with Garmin.

The new Edge models were just announced and for now Garmin is sticking with ANT+ for Power/Heartrate/Cadence (They have adopted Bluetooth3 for data transmission with cell phones). They have a competitive edge in the area of connected devices. Garmin is the market leader in data enabled cycling computers. I would not expect them to give up that edge against potential competitors looking to get into GPS/data enabled units.




> Garmin WILL build this protocol in. I thought POLAR was a dead company with ANT+ taking over, but if they move to Bluetooth S on all their products, they will stick around.


It's probably daunting to adopt a competitors technology in your product. This is likely why Garmin purchased ANT+ in the first place.

I suspect you'll see a lot of Bluetooth Smart products to communicate primarily with phones. Hopefully bike computer companies (Polar, Cateye, Sigma, etc...) will adopt for compatibility with those devices to build new platforms for data enabled products.


----------



## BearSquirrel (Mar 30, 2011)

Stogaguy said:


> I agree that a separate device makes more sense. The short battery life coupled with the inherent dangers to the phone are reasons enough for me.
> 
> As an anecdotal aside , a friend was proudly showing off his new iPhone mount on a recent ride. On a rough section his swanky white brand new iPhone 4 popped off and went skipping down the road at 20+ mph. The phone survived, but is scarred for life. I think my friend will be getting a Garmin...


For rides on or off road, smart phones are best left in a waterproof hardcase. They are typically more like $600 off contract, more than a cheap laptop. Would you strap your laptop to a rear rack with a bungie cord?


----------



## ratherBclimbing (Apr 2, 2007)

BearSquirrel said:


> For rides on or off road, smart phones are best left in a waterproof hardcase. They are typically more like $600 off contract, more than a cheap laptop. Would you strap your laptop to a rear rack with a bungie cord?


I never go on a ride without my laptop.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

Interesting dredge, especially with the newest set of Garmins out and doing ANT+.

I think there's a certain amount of hysteria in worrying about this stuff. For those who can justify a power meter, it's usually the most expensive part of the constellation of sensors and the head unit. I decided a power meter is too expensive for now, so I didn't worry about future-proofing with the ForeRunner I got recently. I figure when I feel comfortable paying for a power meter, if I need another head unit, it won't kill me to get another head unit. Buying power meters to match existing head units reminds me of buying cranksets to match existing bottom brackets.

If anything is a barrier to the adoption of LOOK's pedals, it's going to be that they're more expensive than a Quarq or Power Tap, or that less expensive power meter that attaches to the left crank arm.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

BearSquirrel said:


> There are licensing fees. You will only find a few cycling computers with ANT+ and that is for the sake of being compatible with power meters that were built to be compatible with Garmin.
> 
> The new Edge models were just announced and for now Garmin is sticking with ANT+ for Power/Heartrate/Cadence (They have adopted Bluetooth3 for data transmission with cell phones). They have a competitive edge in the area of connected devices. Garmin is the market leader in data enabled cycling computers. I would not expect them to give up that edge against potential competitors looking to get into GPS/data enabled units.
> 
> ...


Rumor has POLAR working on BT computers.


----------



## ratherBclimbing (Apr 2, 2007)

Is there any benefit to ANT+ over BT4.0? Unless there's a significant benefit I can't see why any company outside of Garmin wouldn't move over. I'm assuming it's feasible to put both protocols/hardware in computers for a generation until the ANT+ phases out.


----------



## StillKeen (Oct 4, 2005)

ANT+ on the way out. Yes. I think Garmin will eek it out another generation or two, but I see everyone else going Bluetooth LE for the next ten years. Garmin, to me, seem to be at a point where the market might move away from them with everyone having smart phones.

Much like aftermarket dash-top GPS devices for cars (which will decline in sales as more cars come with factory GPS, like what's happened for aftermarket car CD players) I think Garmin will have to work to keep the market share, as smartphone and similar universal devices which talk to separate sensors (bluetooth) will become the norm. You'll buy a cadence/speed sensor (like my Wahoo), and then that will connect to your smartphone, a simple bike computer display or whatever you want. You upgrade the head unit or have many options, and keep a collection of various manufacturers bluetooth sensors.


----------



## AtomicMoose (Aug 15, 2012)

I'm against using my smart phone as the primary head unit on my bike for 2 reasons.

1: If I'm out on a 5 hour ride tracking my stats with my phone and I need to make an emergency call, I want my battery to be up to the task. Chances are around the 5-6 hour mark, your phone is close to dead.
2: I've seen friends with the Wahoo mount (and others) skip their nice new smart phones across the pavement when hitting a rough patch. No thanks. My phone is tucked safely in my back pocket.

Now I understand that this alone is not a reason to save ANT+, but it is a consideration against the argument that smart phone will take away Garmin's (et al) market share.


----------



## StillKeen (Oct 4, 2005)

The smart phone battery life is going to (hopefully) become less of a problem as the battery life of phones improves. Mounts will surely only get better too.

I see someone making something like this Pebble Kickstarter Video on Vimeo as a bike computer. A small head unit (like the Nike+ watch and wrist band) that will talk (most likely bluetooth LE) to anyones bluetooth sensors. Your smart phone can be in your pocket running Strava (or similar) if you want to record GPS data, the pebble-like bar mounted display gives you the details you want and the ability to pause strava etc, and some wahoo-like speed/cadence sensors record stuff too.

Now if you're navigating from the Garmin, then you would need a smartphone bar mount ... but I would say that most rides people do do not require them using their garmin to navigate.


----------



## ewitz (Sep 11, 2002)

dcorn said:


> I feel like Look is kinda killing a big part of their market for the power pedals by not making them ANT+ compatible. Lots of people out there have Garmins and a lot more will with the new Edge 200 unit driving the price even lower. I'd consider a power crank or hub as a chance to upgrade my bike and I'd get to keep my Garmin (if I had one). With the Look setup, all you are 'upgrading' is your pedals and then you have to swap to a lesser computer.


Garmin has removed wireless capability from the Edge 200 so there is no capacity for heart rate, cadence, or power output.


----------



## AtomicMoose (Aug 15, 2012)

StillKeen said:


> The smart phone battery life is going to (hopefully) become less of a problem as the battery life of phones improves. Mounts will surely only get better too.
> 
> I see someone making something like this Pebble Kickstarter Video on Vimeo as a bike computer. A small head unit (like the Nike+ watch and wrist band) that will talk (most likely bluetooth LE) to anyones bluetooth sensors. Your smart phone can be in your pocket running Strava (or similar) if you want to record GPS data, the pebble-like bar mounted display gives you the details you want and the ability to pause strava etc, and some wahoo-like speed/cadence sensors record stuff too.
> 
> Now if you're navigating from the Garmin, then you would need a smartphone bar mount ... but I would say that most rides people do do not require them using their garmin to navigate.


Even GPS tracking with the screen off and the phone in your pocket is a drain.

And I'll agree to a point... with phone getting more sophisticated, battery life has the potential to improve. However, with emphasis on smart phones getting smaller and thinner, batteries have to get smaller and thinner which in turn really cuts into battery life.


----------



## ratherBclimbing (Apr 2, 2007)

AtomicMoose said:


> Even GPS tracking with the screen off and the phone in your pocket is a drain.


It's a drain, but not significant for the average cyclist. A four hour ride will maybe eat up 20% of my battery. The BT communication may eat a little more, but it's certainly within reason. 

I was going to look around to see if anyone was doing something like that Pebble thing listed above. Seems a reasonable step in technology, especially if it's all a universal language (e.g. Bluetooth) so your cadence sensor could speak to a standalone comp or your phone. It allows people to get in at a low cost and get a heavy case of upgrade-itis as they get the independent computer screen, HR monitor, power meter, etc.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

AtomicMoose said:


> I'm against using my smart phone as the primary head unit on my bike for 2 reasons.
> 
> 1: If I'm out on a 5 hour ride tracking my stats with my phone and I need to make an emergency call, I want my battery to be up to the task. Chances are around the 5-6 hour mark, your phone is close to dead.
> 2: I've seen friends with the Wahoo mount (and others) skip their nice new smart phones across the pavement when hitting a rough patch. No thanks. My phone is tucked safely in my back pocket.
> ...


1. Reason 1 is very valid and a concern. I did a 5hr plus century (127.3) ride with my iPhone 4 running as a computer in the back pocket. Went form 100% to 19% for that ride. Plenty of life yet. But a very simple extra battery pack that is cheap and light can be carried in a small saddle back or jersey pocket. It would recharge in 2 hrs or allow you to make any call. But a concern anyhow and batteries will improve as will the GPS apps.

2. If they are in the Wahoo mount, then there phone is PROTECTED by a fall. I have a Lifeproof cases on my iPhone 5 and falling on the road is NOT a concern, unless a car runs over it. Then again, I have full insurance on it.

Now, Have you seen the Wahoo RFLKT? 










These will be more common. Phone ail stay in my jersey. I can't WAIT to get one.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

AtomicMoose said:


> Even GPS tracking with the screen off and the phone in your pocket is a drain.
> 
> And I'll agree to a point... with phone getting more sophisticated, battery life has the potential to improve. However, with emphasis on smart phones getting smaller and thinner, batteries have to get smaller and thinner which in turn really cuts into battery life.


what drain? I go 12-18 hrs with it on during a normal heavy use work day.


----------



## Srode (Aug 19, 2012)

Before getting my Garmin 500 I used my phone as a bike computer - Motorola Razr Maxx - never came close to running the battery down even on 8 hour rides. On those long rides I may have have had 60% left when I got back, and that's with the screen displaying on all the time. That said, after switching to the Garmin 500 I wouldn't go back since the phone won't pick up my powertap wheel or speed / cadence sensors. The phone did work with my Zephyr BT HRM though which was enough for me till I got more serious about riding. The Garmin package is very complete and haven't found anything that competed with it in the way of a phone app yet.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

I don't see head units dropping out any time soon.

Maybe some more capable small and inexpensive ones to compete with the Edge series. But I think that for a lot of cyclists, enough to maintain a market, having a head unit that's a head unit and a phone that's a phone will appeal enough for them to keep buying dedicated head units.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

Srode said:


> Before getting my Garmin 500 I used my phone as a bike computer - Motorola Razr Maxx - never came close to running the battery down even on 8 hour rides. On those long rides I may have have had 60% left when I got back, and that's with the screen displaying on all the time. That said, after switching to the Garmin 500 I wouldn't go back since the phone won't pick up my powertap wheel or speed / cadence sensors. The phone did work with my Zephyr BT HRM though which was enough for me till I got more serious about riding. The Garmin package is very complete and haven't found anything that competed with it in the way of a phone app yet.


Not sure if Wahoo does Power, but the Digifit App would display it if you used an iPhone with ANT+ adapter.


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

StillKeen said:


> ANT+ on the way out. Yes. I think Garmin will eek it out another generation or two, but I see everyone else going Bluetooth LE for the next ten years. Garmin, to me, seem to be at a point where the market might move away from them with everyone having smart phones.


Have you tried to do a smart phone GPS and app like strava in the city with tall buildings, or a DH canyon ride? Not very good at all. I'm not trying to be difficult, but I had a buddy that used his Samsung G3 for Strava and I heard a lot, "Let's just go, it will lock in at some point". This statement as my Garmin 800 was locked in 20 seconds.

Garmin's (most of them) do "bike compter" and GPS rather well, with small size, and minimal weight. 

I have yet to see anyone's smart phone strapped to their bars or stem. I see many Garmin's and bike computer strapped to bars and stems.


----------



## ratherBclimbing (Apr 2, 2007)

ziscwg said:


> Have you tried to do a smart phone GPS and app like strava in the city with tall buildings, or a DH canyon ride? Not very good at all. I'm not trying to be difficult, but I had a buddy that used his Samsung G3 for Strava and I heard a lot, "Let's just go, it will lock in at some point". This statement as my Garmin 800 was locked in 20 seconds.
> 
> Garmin's (most of them) do "bike compter" and GPS rather well, with small size, and minimal weight.
> 
> I have yet to see anyone's smart phone strapped to their bars or stem. I see many Garmin's and bike computer strapped to bars and stems.


I have a friend with a Samsung who gave up with Strava because the GPS just sucks; it's well documented for his phone, and not just for biking applications. But it's the only phone that I've heard problems with. Both HTC phones I've own had no problems at all, and they're a helluva lot faster at locking GPS than my Edge 500. I haven't tested my Garmin without a speed sensor, but I've read they're not very good in trees either without that calibration. What we're talking about above would add speed/cadence to a phone app, and I don't see why it wouldn't be just as good as an independent device.


----------



## StillKeen (Oct 4, 2005)

The phone GPS will improve, and I believe that the GPS architecture is not something the phone makers do all themselves. So maybe Apple don't buy the best chips and Garmin do? I'm not saying ANT+ (and therefore Garmin) will go in 12 months, just that I see them finding it harder and harder to sell full featured GPS headunits (like my 705).

A headunit like the Pebble iphone control one, that displays the fields you'd set (like I can do on the 705), but that is just a display for what is coming from the smartphone. Some really good possibilities for integration of systems etc.

If Garmin werent the inventors/patent owners for ANT+, I would think that they'd go to Bluetooth LE. 

As for Strava in the city, I've not done a comparison, but have used both a fair bit (although the last two times it's crashed due to some incompatibility ... need to look into that). I havent had GPS issues with either the Garmin or Strava on iPhone though. I far prefer the auto upload of rides from Strava than the 705's need to be plugged in and uploaded. I prefer the fact my Polar Bluetooth HR strap and Wahoo speed/cadence sensor can work with other apps, other phones and soon (now?) other bike computers. 

So at the moment I have both, but in the future I won't be buying a replacement to the 705, and will probably just run a smartphone app and will add a display like the Pebble when/if someone makes one.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

ziscwg said:


> Have you tried to do a smart phone GPS and app like strava in the city with tall buildings, or a DH canyon ride? Not very good at all. I'm not trying to be difficult, but I had a buddy that used his Samsung G3 for Strava and I heard a lot, "Let's just go, it will lock in at some point". This statement as my Garmin 800 was locked in 20 seconds.
> 
> Garmin's (most of them) do "bike compter" and GPS rather well, with small size, and minimal weight.
> 
> I have yet to see anyone's smart phone strapped to their bars or stem. I see many Garmin's and bike computer strapped to bars and stems.


Tell him to get a better phone! My iPhone GPS locks faster than my Garmin 500 and my Nuvi car GPS. Just as accurate as well.


----------



## AtomicMoose (Aug 15, 2012)

I've never had an issue with my 500 locking in...


----------



## ratherBclimbing (Apr 2, 2007)

AtomicMoose said:


> I've never had an issue with my 500 locking in...


It's never been unable to lock in, but I have had to sit and wait for it. It usually takes 15 - 30 seconds, and I've seen it go much longer. My phone is pretty much instantaneous when I open the Strava app.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

ratherBclimbing said:


> It's never been unable to lock in, but I have had to sit and wait for it. It usually takes 15 - 30 seconds, and I've seen it go much longer. My phone is pretty much instantaneous when I open the Strava app.


Your phone was probably already turned on (cell phones are always turned on) and already knew where it was. But even when acquring positions totally from cold a cell phone has an advantage - it can get an approximate position from the cell phone tower(s) as soon as it has signal, and then narrow it down using GPS with a high speed processor. The Garmins have to solve a huge bunch of floating point equations on an antiquated embedded processor and that's a lot of work from a cold start. If you are close to the last known position it can speed it up a lot.

It'll be interesting to see how Garmin versus phone, and BT versus ANT+ plays out in the long term. Garmin has had a free run in this market for a long time, but it is so competitive and open now it is hard to see how it will play out over time. Based on some of the reports from CES there are a lot of innovative new fitness products with interesting/unusual/bizarre features and many new players - I predict that few of these companies will make it for the long run. But I think that Garmin will stay the market leader for several more years for smart cycling computers.


----------



## iRant (Jan 14, 2013)

This thread was an interesting read, but most of it is about dedicated bike computers vs smartphone apps, not ANT+ related at all. I found myself disagreeing with what people were saying a lot more than I was agreeing, so here's some points that void a lot of the discussion:
* ANT+ vs GPS only covers a small section of what is possible with ANT+ (or the theoretical Bluetooth Smart devices) - basically just the speed and distance sensor. GPS while mountain biking is useless (when not going in a straight line).
* ANT+ can wireless sync all my recorded data to my PC (been doing it with my FR60 for years). This isn't a new concept for Bluetooth Smart.
* Bluetooth Smart is not going to just work with anything that has Bluetooth. They are far less similar than a Suunto ANT watch and an ANT+ heart rate strap (which won't talk to each other).
* ANT+ is available in smartphones (built in to Android). The waterproof ANT+ Sony phones are basically made to be a bike computer.
* ANT+ USB sticks are supported by many Android phones without ANT+ built-in, and there is an iOS ANT+ dongle (ie many more phones support ANT+ than Bluetooth Smart).
* Bluetooth Smart is lower power than Bluetooth, not ANT+.
* Almost every point that was a positive/negative for ANT+/Bluetooth Smart applies to the other.
- Garmin owning the company that controls ANT+ is no more restrictive on people creating ANT products than the Bluetooth SIG. The ANT+ alliance has over 300 member companies. Anyone can get access to the ANT+ info (for free), so us app developers can mess around with ANT super easy.
- I would hope Bluetooth Smart has certification fees - how else do they make sure products talk to each other? Anyone tried simply getting heart rate data from a Wahoo Blue HR strap to a MOTOACTV?
* If people are buying Bluetooth Smart sensors for their bikes, then I imagine Garmin will support those with its head units. However why would they stop supporting all of those existing (and new) ANT+ sensors? These products look to be the first example of providing both and letting the user decide what accessories to use: engadget.com/2013/01/07/4iiii-viiiiva-heart-rate-monitor-wireless-ios-smartwatch/ and engadget.com/2012/08/31/wahoo-kickr-power-trainer-lets-iphone-cyclists-feel-the-burn/

I see a lot of "Bluetooth Smart is the new technology which will be the future". I also heard the same thing about Windows Vista. I am still waiting for someone to tell me something about Bluetooth Smart which ANT+ devices don't already do.


----------



## ratherBclimbing (Apr 2, 2007)

iRant said:


> I see a lot of "Bluetooth Smart is the new technology which will be the future". I also heard the same thing about Windows Vista. I am still waiting for someone to tell me something about Bluetooth Smart which ANT+ devices don't already do.


It doesn't have to do anything that ANT+ can't do, so long as it can do everything it can do. Bluetooth has name brand recognition, and extremely powerful marketing tool. Add in that BT isn't owned by the competition, and I think it's a strong motivator for the switch. 

I can access BT on my phone, computer, and tablet. There's no way I'm buying a dongle to attach to my phone. Sure, they could make phones that use ANT+ instead, but they won’t since BT was here first and it does what’s needed. Take the average (uneducated) consumer and put him in a store with two HR monitors, one says “Now with Bluetooth” in big letters on the side, the other says something about ANT+. I’m willing to bet more people would choose the former. Even though the majority of BT out there is the old 'dumb' kind it doesn't matter. People see something they recognize and they'll lean towards that. Besides, give it a year or two, which is a generation in phone life, and it'll all be BT Smart.

Is that reason enough to switch, no. But if development costs are more or less the same, and the capabilities of the two technologies are the same, then yes, I think companies would move to BT. The only argument I see for ANT+ in your post is the comment on battery life, depending on the values that could be a reasonable argument. As I stated previously, the fact that the majority of the market is currently ANT+ means nothing when it comes to electronics of modest cost. The conspiracy theorist in me would almost argue the opposite, ‘they’ love switching up technologies so that everyone has to go buy something new.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

BT will be ubiquitous on smartphones. Garmin doesn't want ANT+ in the phone - anyone using a smartphone for fitness is a lost Garmin head unit or watch sale. I see it splitting into general fitness where the smartphones and apps will win, and athletes who will pay for a dedicated product. It all depends on how the sales volume gets drawn between these two as to how much market Garmin will have left once this has played out. Widgets that cross the boundary between the two - e.g. a simple head unit (maybe still with ANT+ as well as BT) that relays data to/from your phone could really put the squeeze on Garmin.


----------



## B_arrington (Jan 4, 2013)

Interesting read. I'm fairly new to road cycling, and have yet to choose a bike computer for my new Domane 4.5. 

I have a Bontrager Trip 4W onmy mountain bike, and I had planned to get a new mount and move the head unit between bikes. But I haven't gotten and new mount yet and the MTB mount is too small from the road bike. I didn't have a smartphone yet, but had been eyeing the Wahoo Fitness case for iPhone. I thought this would be an interesting option with a Duotrap sensor: very clean install and ANT+ only. But without an iPhone the point was moot

Then I got an iPhone 5. Both the Strava apps and Wahoo bike apps are really nice, in my opinion. The aspect I like best about Strava is the ability to load your ride up to the website to log it and compare against other local riders. Yes, Garmin can do this too - but I find the real advantage to a smartphone bike app is the instant, wireless connection. I've gotten lazy and won't upload my rides very often if I have to fire up the PC and plug in the bike computer. Also, I ride ALOT at night - and being able to see the computer screen at night is big for me. 

So, back to Bluetooth vs. ANT+ and computer vs. phone app. I really like the Duotrap sensor for my bike - that's only ANT+ and is driving my decision there. And I simply don't want to buy another "smart" device like the Garmin Edge, when I prefer the upload capabilities of the smartphone. I'm willing to try out a Wahoo bike case with ANT+ dongle, but it's not developed yet. The RFLKT display may be an option when it's available - but I'll still need the ANT+ dongle for the phone. So I guess what I'm saying is - I'm not sure what I'll use for a display, but it's going to be smartphone-based.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

B_arrington said:


> Interesting read. I'm fairly new to road cycling, and have yet to choose a bike computer for my new Domane 4.5.
> 
> I have a Bontrager Trip 4W onmy mountain bike, and I had planned to get a new mount and move the head unit between bikes. But I haven't gotten and new mount yet and the MTB mount is too small from the road bike. I didn't have a smartphone yet, but had been eyeing the Wahoo Fitness case for iPhone. I thought this would be an interesting option with a Duotrap sensor: very clean install and ANT+ only. But without an iPhone the point was moot
> 
> ...


If you lie wahoo, look into he Digifit app. Much better IMO. You mean Wahoo case with BT built in? Because aWahoo case with ANT+ doe sexist. Wahoo makes them for Digifit as well. As I have a few. Fits the 3GS, 4 and 4S. You mean for the iPhone 5? Not happening with ANT+ form what I hear form Digifit. Wahoo will not make a new case with ANT+. iPhone 5 case is coming, but you need to use BT as they have BT Speed and Cadence now.


----------



## B_arrington (Jan 4, 2013)

Yes, I meant the Wahoo bike case for iPhone 5 with ANT+. I sent in a question to Wahoo last month about the case for iPhone 5 with ANT+, and they said it would be ready by the spring. Of course plans change....

If they end up only supporting BT, that will change the equation. I'll look at the Digifit app. Right now I'm just using Strava with the phone in a jersey pocket. One feature of the Wahoo bike app that sounds trivial but is quite helpful - and not on Strava - is the count down before start to let you get gloves on, clipped in, etc.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

B_arrington said:


> Yes, I meant the Wahoo bike case for iPhone 5 with ANT+. I sent in a question to Wahoo last month about the case for iPhone 5 with ANT+, and they said it would be ready by the spring. Of course plans change....
> 
> If they end up only supporting BT, that will change the equation. I'll look at the Digifit app. Right now I'm just using Strava with the phone in a jersey pocket. One feature of the Wahoo bike app that sounds trivial but is quite helpful - and not on Strava - is the count down before start to let you get gloves on, clipped in, etc.


Hmm, when did they mention this? When I was speaking with Digifit, I was not Wahoo was not making an iPhone 5 case with ANT+. Maybe to to the Lighting licensing with Apple? Digifit is also no longer selling the ANT+ dongle that wahoo made for them.
I was told to refer anyone to the Wahoo key if they ask me about it. I have a Lifeproof case for my iPhone 5, so i cant use a Wahoo case. Plus that that size phone on my stem is a pain. That why I am waiting for the wahoo RFLKT.


----------



## B_arrington (Jan 4, 2013)

I asked Wahoo about the iPhone 5 case in late November; they said they were working on it and it would be ready by the spring. 

I have a basic case on my iPhone that comes off pretty easily, so the Wahoo case would be OK for me. The size of the phone may still be an issue for me; I have a short stem - 90mm, I think?0 - so there's not much room there. I would be nice if it Wahoo created a mount to push the phone further out, similar to the aftermarket Garmin mounts. 

I'm still open to using the RFLKT - it will all depend on what cases and protocols Wahoo ends up supporting for iPhone 5. I'm hoping it includes a good ANT+ integration so I can use the Duotrap sensor. Of course, if there were a Bluetooth 4.0 Duotrap, it would make the decision easier.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

B_arrington said:


> I asked Wahoo about the iPhone 5 case in late November; they said they were working on it and it would be ready by the spring.
> 
> I have a basic case on my iPhone that comes off pretty easily, so the Wahoo case would be OK for me. The size of the phone may still be an issue for me; I have a short stem - 90mm, I think?0 - so there's not much room there. I would be nice if it Wahoo created a mount to push the phone further out, similar to the aftermarket Garmin mounts.
> 
> I'm still open to using the RFLKT - it will all depend on what cases and protocols Wahoo ends up supporting for iPhone 5. I'm hoping it includes a good ANT+ integration so I can use the Duotrap sensor. Of course, if there were a Bluetooth 4.0 Duotrap, it would make the decision easier.


I would love a mount that puts the phone sideways in front of the bars for my iPhone! Waiting for works from Wahoo to. I will see if Digifit can give me more info, as they partner with Wahoo


----------



## normcorriveau (Apr 5, 2010)

Another option to consider is the 4iiii Viiiiva heart rate strap. It supposedly takes data from ANT+ sensors and pushes it via BT Smart to your iPhone. I've got one on order but I don't believe they shipped any yet.


----------



## RRRoubaix (Aug 27, 2008)

nightfend said:


> You know what, most everything in cycling is on the way out. Two years from now, all that old 10-speed Shimano gear will be on the way out to be replaced by the 9000 series 11-speed group. After that, all those rim brakes and expensive non-disc wheelsets will be obsolete.
> 
> Just use what you have, enjoy it, and don't worry about what may change in two or more years time. Not worth worrying about.


This year old post from Nightfend -or should I say "Nostradamus"?- nails it; DA-9000 is here, Shimano is 11-speed now, don't worry about your equipment, something newer and better is always just about to be released.
Just get out and ride.


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

Interesting discussion. Have any of you seen the new Garmin units? These things are now designed to talk to your smartphone, with corresponding apps for iPhones and Androids. Smart move by Garmin, in my opinion, which renders part of the discussion in here moot. I have no first-hand experience, and limited knowledge of the details, but a dedicated bicycle computer that talks to my smartphone seems to be the best of both worlds to me.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

normcorriveau said:


> Another option to consider is the 4iiii Viiiiva heart rate strap. It supposedly takes data from ANT+ sensors and pushes it via BT Smart to your iPhone. I've got one on order but I don't believe they shipped any yet.


Really? I need to look this up!


----------



## NWS Alpine (Mar 16, 2012)

normcorriveau said:


> Another option to consider is the 4iiii Viiiiva heart rate strap. It supposedly takes data from ANT+ sensors and pushes it via BT Smart to your iPhone. I've got one on order but I don't believe they shipped any yet.





DIRT BOY said:


> Really? I need to look this up!


This is a great option for people who have integrated Ant+ sensors in their frames. 

There is a second version of the RFLKT that Wahoo will be releasing (no ETA) that includes the same Ant+ pass through feature. It is said to be a small up charge over the base RFLKT releasing next week.

I have a RFLKT on pre-order and have a BlueSC on the way to replace my Wahoo Ant+ SC sensor. Only thing I feel is a big let down is no backlit screen on the RFLKT. That being said I believe the screen will be readable in dark due to the high contrast and size of the screen. Minimal ambient light should be enough.


----------



## normcorriveau (Apr 5, 2010)

> This is a great option for people who have integrated Ant+ sensors in their frames.


Or for someone who has ANT+ power (PowerTap).

The RFLKT is interesting but every picture I have seen of it makes the screen look awful. I look forward to DC Rainmaker's revue of it. I think that type of device is definitely the future (App on phone with dumb display that is programmed by the app).


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

normcorriveau said:


> Another option to consider is the 4iiii Viiiiva heart rate strap. It supposedly takes data from ANT+ sensors and pushes it via BT Smart to your iPhone. I've got one on order but I don't believe they shipped any yet.


I should have one of these in a few weeks. Can't wait.


----------



## NWS Alpine (Mar 16, 2012)

normcorriveau said:


> Or for someone who has ANT+ power (PowerTap).
> 
> The RFLKT is interesting but every picture I have seen of it makes the screen look awful. I look forward to DC Rainmaker's revue of it. I think that type of device is definitely the future (App on phone with dumb display that is programmed by the app).



I think the RFLKT will really take off once software companies realize how flexible the display is. It will certainly evolve in the future both from both a hardware and software standpoint. As a developer I will be taking a look at what is possible through the wahoo API.


----------



## davidof (May 9, 2012)

The advantage for BT is more widespread support in the industry. ThisIsAnt is all very well but unless you are developing on a mainstream platform: Android, Ios or Windows .net/c++ they don't know anything or have any real support beyond a description of the protocol. If you want to develop on Linux, or Java say their response is "we dont have the resources, we don't know nothing" even when there are some solutions out there. They simply don't have the resources to push Ant in the face of BT.

So if BT can be as low power as Ant I would say Ant should die.


----------



## looigi (Nov 24, 2010)

Before software, the hardware needs to be able to support the specific radio communication, and cell phones don't have the hardware capability. New protocols will likely take over; Bluetooth SMART, NFC,...


----------



## OldChipper (May 15, 2011)

nightfend said:


> I shake my head in wonder at people the push using their iphones as their cycling computers. I mean, have you actually tried this? Not only is the phone huge and looks bad mounted on the bike, but the battery life is awful. I can get about 2 to 3 hours ride time out of the phone. And then, I don't have a phone or computer. I'd rather keep my phone in my back pocket for emergencies and use the Garmin for the ride data.
> 
> I suppose if you only ride a few hours at the longest, the phone is an okay alternative. But for serious cycling? I don't think it is a good choice.


+1,000

Most folks who report no problems with phone battery life must live in large east coast or west coast cities. My iPhone 5 battery lasts 1.5 days in Washington, DC and much less than ONE day in Denver, CO and that's WITHOUT GPS use. My wife uses Strava on her phone for running and it barely lasts a modest length run of 8-10 miles. Coverage matters a LOT when it comes to battery life.


----------

