/n/ convince me why I shouldn't buy this bike computer
>$16
>wireless
>backlight
>has thermometer on it
>does all the basic stuff a bike computer does
https://www.amazon.com/Computer-Fineed-Wireless-Speedometer-Waterproof/dp/B01FUDS4RW
>no cadence.
>>972720
>cheap wireless
>>972722
i that a bad sign
>>972720
1. I can't find a webpage for the manufacturer, therefore it's probably cheap Chinese junk
2. What there is about it in your link says nothing about it being Ant+ compatible, therefore I'll have to assume it's not, and works only with whatever cheap shitty Chinese sensor(s) come with it.
3. As someone else stated: No cadence display. DO NOT WANT.
4. Price is too low, therefore more suggestion of it being cheap Chinese junk
5. Unless it's USB rechargeable (doubtful) it'll eat through batteries because of the backlight
6. Who cares if it's got a thermometer built in, really?
If you didn't figure it out already I think it's a piece of crap and you'd waste your money.
If you want wireless get something that's Ant+ compatible so you're not stuck with proprietary sensors you can't replace if something goes wrong with them.
If you want backlight and whatnot it needs to be rechargeable unless you like replacing a battery all the time.
>>972720
dude fuck off we already told you that alienware piece of shit was garbage in the /bqg/ thread
you don't deserve answers
>>972720
>no wattage reading or capacity for it.
no
>>972732
thing is your phone can more or less do that with a handful of free apps like strava, mapmyride, and ride gps. Personally I have a cheap wired cateye velo7 and it is off by about 1.5% when compared to strava on my phone
>>972720
All cheap cyclocomputers essentially use the same base parts. If any of them work (and they do) then all of them work.
>>972807
Assuming you have the tyre circumference set correctly a computer will be accurate, GPS sometimes isn't.
>>972720
It's costs next to nothing, get it and give it a go. It might turn out perfect for you, if it ends up being a piece of shit then it's not a huge loss and you can just get something better.
The concerns that other have mentioned don't matter to a lot of people, not everyone needs a cadence reading or Ant+ comparability (you're not going to be replacing the sensor on a $16 computer, it's probably cheaper to just get a whole new one, and if you've got the money for a power meter you're not considering such a cheap computer).
>>972722
>>cheap wireless
>>972732
>i that a bad sign
Even _good_ wireless is a bad sign.
I've got an insite 9i wireless, and it usually works fine, but it goes to sleep if I stop too long (store break). Then if I don't remember to restart it, I can wind up "missing" a mile or so.
I've also had trouble with it getting signals from other rf sources.
The numbers jump around and your distance and average speed get fucked up.
Plus you need to change one more battery,
Besides, why the hell do you want wireless anyway?
Looks aside, what's the advantage?
>>972720
How does it know speed?
Would like though...
>>972928
>Assuming you have the tyre circumference set correctly a computer will be accurate, GPS sometimes isn't.
the velo7 just has generic settings like 700c and 26inch, there will be some variation depending on whether you have a 23 or a 32c tire. As I have found with mine that it gets more accurate the closer I get to 30c tires... but that isnt a tire I like to ride on road... still does what I want for $20.
>>972935
My Giant Axact 9 cost the equivalent of about $30 and has a custom circumference option down to the nearest millimetre (they even say to measure it yourself by rolling the wheel with your weight on it for the most accurate measurement).
I'm not sure what the max value is (it's 4 digits so perhaps 9999mm), there's probably a value that would make it function as a cadence meter if attached to the crank arm (1 rotation = 1/10/100 km/miles per hour).
>>972935
And a €12 Sigma will allow you to set tyre circumference down to the millimetre.
>>972963
>set tyre circumference down to the millimetre.
>tyre
>millimetre.
What century are you posting from?
>>972968
>all Cateye computers let you set circumference in millimetres as well,
Trek insite too
>>972966
Tyre is the correct spelling in British English and probably some other former colonies, and Britain uses metric measurements for most stuff just like most other countries (there is some shit that we still use imperial units for, some things not consistently like human weight and height).
>>972966
I'll bet you even spell shew as "show".
>>972966
I suppose you think you're hip calling out a native English speaker who coined the fucking language for that?
Holy shit you people are *still* the biggest faggots on the planet.
>>972929
>it goes to sleep if I store to long
They're supposed to do that, until we have cold fusion battery saving functions are going to remain important
>Then if I don't remember to restart it, I can wind up "missing" a mile or so.
O noes, if it's not electronically logged so you can post it on the internet, it means it didn't happen!
>The numbers jump around
Your magnet isn't picking up correctly, move it to another position on the spoke.
>and your distance and average speed get fucked up.
As opposed to my GPS which decides that I wasn't moving for 30 seconds and then I teleported half a mile in under 5 seconds?
>>973167
>until we have cold fusion battery saving functions are going to remain important
The non-wireless version of the same product doesn't need sleep mode.
>O noes, if it's not electronically logged so you can post it on the internet,
I use cue-sheets for navigation, dumbass.
>>The numbers jump around
>Your magnet isn't picking up correctly,
Are you drunk? The numbers jump around when the wireless speedo starts picking up signals from other sources.
This usually happens when I'm stopped.
>As opposed to my GPS
Did you even read my post?
I'm comparing wireless to wired speedometers.
>>973184
Not who you're replying to.
>The non-wireless version of the same product doesn't need sleep mode.
Wired computers should also go to sleep, they still need to conserve battery life. The difference is a wireless computer first needs the sensor module to wake up (by spinning the wheel) which in turn wakes up the computer, a wired one always has the connection to the sensor. Sometimes the sensor modules don't wake up or fail to wake up the computer but it's not a huge issue, just press the button on the computer to wake it up manually before you start riding.
>>973188
>Wired computers should also go to sleep,
Not exactly. As long as there's no backlight and no radio, the CPU and LCD should run on so little electricity the battery's shelf life has more impact on battery life than sleep mode.
>just press the button on the computer to wake it up manually
Sure, that works as long as I do it, but every now and then it's a minor inconvenience.
>>973193
>but every now and then it's a minor inconvenience
I wouldn't even call it minor. There are many things you have to do before you ride, adding pushing one button to that list is nothing.
The only time it becomes an issue is if you forget, personally I always check the time on my computer before setting off so if I see there's no speed readout I push the button. I'm much more likely to forget something like putting my bottle in the cage.
>>973196
>I always check the time on my computer before setting off
And I always reset the trip to zero.
The problem comes in when I leave a store, or more often, fix a flat, but then forget to wake up the thing.
It's really no big deal, but my original point is that there are several disadvantages to the wireless speedo, but no advantages i can see.
On one bike, I have a Trek Insite 9i wired speedo, and on another bike, I've got a wirelss version of the same modelI got as a gift.
All other things being equal, the wired one is better.
>>973198
Cleaner aesthetics, quicker setup, and not having a wire that can get caught are advantages. Perhaps not important ones to you, but then the sleep thing doesn't matter for me.
>>973199
>Cleaner aesthetics,
The wireless sensor is much larger than the wired one.
>quicker setup
A few tie wraps vs pairing the device to the sensor comes out about the same.
Maybe I'm beating a dead horse, but it seems like the main advantage of wireless is the manufacturer can plausibly charge more.
Mostly though as an engineer it just bothers me that the device becomes much more complex and slightly less reliable in an effort to save a meter of wire on a fixed framework.
I guess wireless would be more of an advantage if I had cadence sensors or something.
>>972966
I say, the colonies are at it again. Can't spell colony without colon.
>yfw
>>973200
>as an engineer
is everyone on every board on this website an engineer or computer scientist?
>tfw I have had cheapo Lidl cyclocomputer since like 2010 and it still werks.
Funny thing is it was a hand-me-down from my dad who had it for couple years before that kek
>>973200
>The wireless sensor is much larger than the wired one.
Sure, but some people might prefer that over having a wire wrapped around their fork leg and trailing up to their handle bar. I'm one of those people and I also have white forks.
>A few tie wraps vs pairing the device to the sensor comes out about the same.
Mine came already paired, even if it didn't I'd do that whilst reading the instructions and setting the computer up away from my bike. When it comes to actually putting it on the bike you just have two rubber bands/four cable ties where as with a wired computer you've got to wrap the cable around the fork leg and then coil up and cable tie any excess.
Yes it's not a massive difference in time or effort and it only has to be done the one time (well, unless you replace the computer or fork or get a whole new bike) but it's still a contributing factor.
Another advantage that just occurred to me and is related to these two is placing the sensor on the rear wheel (for trainer use). Even if a wired computer has a long enough wire for that you've then got an ugly wire running the length of the frame and have to spend more time securing it.
>>973273
>having a wire wrapped around their fork leg
The wire is supposed to run down the shift/brake wire to the chainstay. This also allows a single sensor package to measure both speed and cadence.
>>973273
>I also have white forks.
>I care about ascetics
>but I have white forks
kek
>wrap the cable around the fork leg
Jesus, no.
>(for trainer use).
.....
oh, just never mind.
>>973290
My frame is white too.
>Jesus, no.
That's what I see a lot of people doing. What would you suggest instead, bundling it up so you have a coil of wire hanging from the bars?
>oh, just never mind.
I don't use one, but I've heard quite a few people mention that as a reason for sticking the sensor on the rear. I see nothing wrong with that.
>>973296
Using a computer on a trainer and listening to rap are completely different, the latter being personal taste and the former being practically useful.
>>973289
So you need to have cable ties every few inches to hold the wire in place or coil it around the cable housing? Sounds like an even bigger pain in the arse.
>>973302
You misunderstood. Runing the sensor to the front wheel by wrapping it around the fork blade ten thousand times is the biking equivalent of wallpapering your house with Vanilla Ice posters and owning ten pairs of Beats by Dre. Pull your trousers up, "brother."
>>973303
Shit yeah, sorry, I misread.
>>973233
Yes.
That's why everyone is an asshole.
hello /n/ OP here
i went ahead and purchased a cateye velo 9. was gonna get the 7 but i got the 9 for around the same price i woulda gotten the 7 for ($17, no tax or shipping charges) and figured the power save feature on the 9 vs the 7 was worth it
>>973467
yeah but you really need the carbon offset? it's not like any sane person owns a cage anyway, so it's like "here's what I'd be ruining the earth with if I was a vile cager". like, ok...?
>>974205
i was going to either get the 7 or 9. the 9 was basically the same price as the 7, but the 9 has an auto power save feature apparently. i felt it was worth it to spend an extra dollar or so
dont really care aobut carbon offset
>>974391
All cateyes (if not all decent bike computers) have a power save mode, you tard
The difference between those two models is that the "higher" one tells you your carbon offset. Carbon. Offset.
Do you actually have a bike or are you just here to shitpost?
>>974403
I'm not the one who bought the thing. He said it had a power save feature, it is a reasonable assumption that it means that the device turns itself off when not in use.
>>974404
How did you get from "power save feature" to "when people say carbon offset they are talking about battery life"?
