We’ve spent years following interesting high-tech developments in the e-bike industry, often while the more traditional non-electric cycling industry has...
Slightly tongue in cheek but it’s actually fascinating.
Features include GPS connectivity for mapping as well as 5G and Bluetooth support, integration with common cycling sensors, long battery life, built-in lighting, and more. A rearview mirror camera had originally been planned, though any rear-focused plans are currently on hold.
That seems a little silly to me. It could be lower cost if it relied on the user’s smartphone for some of this hardware. But I’m not a cyclist, so perhaps there are reasons that aren’t obvious to me.
I believe this is what those handle bars are trying to replace I couldn’t be bothered to go wake the rest the sensors up or load a route so half the data fields are blank. It also can show a route map (and reroute while offline), alert for cycling specific hazards, show Strava segments (assuming you have that set up), and a bunch of other stuff that I honestly don’t know because Garmin crams so much stuff into their stuff that I’m not sure anyone actually uses it all at the same time. There’s really no reason that a phone can’t do what this thing does since most sensors have the option of connecting through Bluetooth instead of ANT+ now. But a phone won’t do it as well, or nearly as long. The 840 I pictured has something absurd like 25 hours of battery while running navigation on multiband GPS if I remember right.
Yeah, but I was only commenting on things like GPS and 5G. I know that my phone doesn’t track my heartrate (by default) and so on. I see no reason not to have those functions in the handlebar computer. I just don’t see why actual phone features would be duplicated, making the whole thing more complex and more expensive.
From experience with FitBit that kind of GPS usage absolutely eats phone battery. Also, phones are not the most accurate things with GPS. I would have weird meandering paths and cut corners everywhere since it piggybacked off the phone. And this was nearly ideal, dead flat, open area, I can’t imagine how wonky it would have gone with bridges and tunnels and such.
The Garmin on the other hand is so absurdly accurate that I can tell where in the lane I rode even under bridges and through short tunnels, and it will keep that accuracy going literally all day without any battery concerns. I really only need about 16 continuous hours of battery at the most for the riding I do right now, although my wife has been trying to talk me into trying bike packing where the couple days of battery the Garmin should be able to do might be useful.
Phone service, I kind of agree can be tethered from a phone (actually, thats exactly how my bike computer does it for live tracking and emergency alerts if I crash). I’m not that fussed about my phone’s weight, so I just stick the phone in a jersey pocket and kinda forget it’s there. The human body makes for a decent enough shock absorber that the vibrations that kill phone cameras on handle bars don’t really get to your phone in a pocket.
You want them all in one place so that they can be uploaded in one go to your fitness tracking site. That lets you see what your HR, power and cadence all where on that specific hill for example.
I used to have a Fitbit that used my phone for GPS and it was awful and drained the batteries on both devices. I guess the idea of having 5G is that you don’t actually take your phone with you, one less thing to have to force into your pockets.
The obvious is that it doesn’t require your phone, given the size (having a phablet can be awkward…), many exercisers prefer forgoing their phone when exercising - it’s why smartwatches will also have GPS and 5G
I understand the watch having these features more than a I do with the bike. My sis-in-law runs marathons. I get why a phone is undesirable when running. I don’t get why when cycling, as it can just be attached to the frame of the bike.
That seems a little silly to me. It could be lower cost if it relied on the user’s smartphone for some of this hardware. But I’m not a cyclist, so perhaps there are reasons that aren’t obvious to me.
I believe this is what those handle bars are trying to replace I couldn’t be bothered to go wake the rest the sensors up or load a route so half the data fields are blank. It also can show a route map (and reroute while offline), alert for cycling specific hazards, show Strava segments (assuming you have that set up), and a bunch of other stuff that I honestly don’t know because Garmin crams so much stuff into their stuff that I’m not sure anyone actually uses it all at the same time. There’s really no reason that a phone can’t do what this thing does since most sensors have the option of connecting through Bluetooth instead of ANT+ now. But a phone won’t do it as well, or nearly as long. The 840 I pictured has something absurd like 25 hours of battery while running navigation on multiband GPS if I remember right.
Yeah, but I was only commenting on things like GPS and 5G. I know that my phone doesn’t track my heartrate (by default) and so on. I see no reason not to have those functions in the handlebar computer. I just don’t see why actual phone features would be duplicated, making the whole thing more complex and more expensive.
From experience with FitBit that kind of GPS usage absolutely eats phone battery. Also, phones are not the most accurate things with GPS. I would have weird meandering paths and cut corners everywhere since it piggybacked off the phone. And this was nearly ideal, dead flat, open area, I can’t imagine how wonky it would have gone with bridges and tunnels and such.
The Garmin on the other hand is so absurdly accurate that I can tell where in the lane I rode even under bridges and through short tunnels, and it will keep that accuracy going literally all day without any battery concerns. I really only need about 16 continuous hours of battery at the most for the riding I do right now, although my wife has been trying to talk me into trying bike packing where the couple days of battery the Garmin should be able to do might be useful.
Phone service, I kind of agree can be tethered from a phone (actually, thats exactly how my bike computer does it for live tracking and emergency alerts if I crash). I’m not that fussed about my phone’s weight, so I just stick the phone in a jersey pocket and kinda forget it’s there. The human body makes for a decent enough shock absorber that the vibrations that kill phone cameras on handle bars don’t really get to your phone in a pocket.
Thanks for clarifying.
You want them all in one place so that they can be uploaded in one go to your fitness tracking site. That lets you see what your HR, power and cadence all where on that specific hill for example.
I used to have a Fitbit that used my phone for GPS and it was awful and drained the batteries on both devices. I guess the idea of having 5G is that you don’t actually take your phone with you, one less thing to have to force into your pockets.
The obvious is that it doesn’t require your phone, given the size (having a phablet can be awkward…), many exercisers prefer forgoing their phone when exercising - it’s why smartwatches will also have GPS and 5G
I understand the watch having these features more than a I do with the bike. My sis-in-law runs marathons. I get why a phone is undesirable when running. I don’t get why when cycling, as it can just be attached to the frame of the bike.
Wasn’t there a spate of phone camera stabilisers being broken/worn out because they were strapped to bikes?
Quadlock literally designed a new mount because this was enough of an issue.