Watch vs bike computer
daj150
Posts: 815 Member
I have to ask this question, as I never started out as a cyclist. So, my first road bike I had a generic speed sensor to show speed, distance, and time. As a runner, I always had a GPS watch, so I started using that before they started having cycling modes. Fast forward to now and I use my Garmin 920xt, with a neat cycling multi-metric data field add-on I got from Connect IQ. I am not seeing the need to have a separate bike computer like, say, the Edge 520 or 820. However, lots of my friends who are cyclists use both. Can someone explain this, as they have yet to give me any real explanation that makes sense. Not sure I will get one, but would like to know why people see the benefit to that. Thanks!
0
Replies
-
For navigation perhaps?
I download routes to my Edge for cycling events or for rides in areas I don't know.
(Cadence is also useful, don't know if your watch can link to a cadence sensor?)0 -
navigation, cadence, power, the facility to control my Tacx Bushido Trainer without bothering to use either the phone, iPad or PC - not to mention its a bigger display and more securely mounted on the bike...
Main thing though is the power fields, for me it's pretty essential for proper structured training to have my 3s Power up there on the screen.
If you're just using something to record the ride for analysis / sh!ts and giggles later, then a wrist-mounted GPS is fine - my Vivoactive HR works well for "leisure" stuff - rides down to the pub, up to the local shop/ATM - anything where I don't go on one of the "proper" bikes with powermeters, and CBA to strap on a chest-band HRM sensor (the Vivoactive HR uses the less accurate optical sensors, but it's pretty much "good enough" to give at least a reasonable degree of "sanity" to calories burned figures)
1 -
I ride with both a dedicated Edge bike computer and a Garmin GPS watch (Fenix 3). They both have their place. I like the watch more, but it's less useful on the bike.
Some people use a watch mount on their handlebars. I leave mine on my wrist. Obviously where the watch rides influences how easy it is to see. Other considerations are that I can feel it vibrate on my wrist but not on the bars, which is better for getting notifications, and the optical HRM obviously can't work on the bars.However, lots of my friends who are cyclists use both. Can someone explain this, as they have yet to give me any real explanation that makes sense. Not sure I will get one, but would like to know why people see the benefit to that. Thanks!
My watch can only show 4 data fields at a time. I want to see more than that: power, speed, gradient, heart rate, and cadence.
The bike computer is larger, not only can it show more fields, but the text itself is larger and easier to read. It's also located in the easiest possible place to see.
When I'm doing hill repeats and trying to maintain a specific power output, I want to be able to glance down for a split second, see my power, and then look back at the road. I've done this with a dead battery in my bike computer and looking at my wrist just doesn't cut it. If I don't have my Edge for this, I do the workout by perceived exertion and review the numbers later to see how close I came to my target.
Maps.0 -
0 -
So, I do get cadence and speed with the Garmin sensors. I don't have the $$ to get any power sensors. I guess to see a Google Maps-type view would be pretty convenient in unknown areas. I do use the quick release kit for my 920xt. @NorthCascades the data screen I mentioned can display more than 4 metrics at a time on one screen. I use audible alerts, so it being mounted doesn't really matter. I have aerobars attached to my road bike, so the mount is there...super easy to see. @sijomial When I map out routes I can load them onto my 920, but the "map" display just shows turn-by-turn directions. There is an add-on I can download that shows an archaic map, but it's so tiny that I don't find it very useful. Thanks everyone for the feedback. The map view definitely is tempting...I'll have to think about this for next Spring when I get back outside again...I got lost soooo many times, haha.0
-
The map view on my Edge 800 isn't great, I've missed many a turn! The off course warning alert is also very hit and miss.
The more modern ones are a quantum leap forward though.
I use seven screen sections on my usual data view which I find helpful - speed, average speed, distance, elapsed time, time of day, heartrate, cadence.
I also have different profiles for different bikes and audible alerts such as feeding reminders.
It's a useful bit of kit but my model definitely has an old tech feel about it.0 -
Sometimes I use turn-by-turn directions on my Fenix 3. The watch vibrates on my wrist right before I need to turn, and again at the turn to let me know I'm making the right one. But to do that, I have to plan the route out on a computer before I leave, and send it to the watch. Sometimes it's better to be able to pick or change your destination on the fly while you ride.
Because some Edge computers have maps, they can generate good routes for you. They can avoid highways, etc, whereas your watch can't do any of this on its own.
It can be very useful to see if that road you saw a sign for goes where you hope it does or not. Also, they can display topographic maps so you can see at a glance how hilly your different options are.
However many fields you can display on a 920, you can display more on a 520, and they're much easier to read while you're bouncing around on bad pavement.
1 -
By the way it sounds like you probably don't need one. I'm not posting to convince you to buy one, I'm just trying to answer the question of why people would buy a bike computer when there are watches available.0
-
Like others have mentioned the main reason I got a Garmin 810 was for the mapping and navigation capabilities. When I ride I also have a Vivoactive HR on anyway and tend to use that for actually uploading rides to Strava etc, as it has HR built in.0
-
I have a Fenix 3 (non-HR) that's on my wrist 24-7-365. It will occasionally do bike duty if I forget to bring my Edge 820 or something, but otherwise I use the Edge exclusively. The Fenix has most of the features I use on a regular basis but limitation of 4 fields per screen, location on the wrist, and general form factor mean the Edge is my go-to cycling computer. No question in my mind. The Fenix primarily does duty as wrist watch, activity tracker, alarm clock, and data collection for the occasional run or other non-cycling activity.
In my opinion, there's no reason for you to have both if you're happy with the 920xt as a cycling computer. It's really just down to preference. If the 920 has all the features you care about and you're ok with the form factor then you're good. If not, investigate other options.1 -
All really good feedback. @NorthCascades I never even considered on-the-fly-route suggestions that can avoid highways, etc. That would be huge for me as I have stumbled into that situation many times when I have gone off course or just randomly rode. I definitely don't need 7 data points that @sijomial mentioned, but alerts for fuel is pretty cool, as although I have gotten much better at remembering, I still forget on longer rides. Not sure I'll get one, but I definitely see some of the useful reasons for having one. Thanks!0
-
I have a Fenix 3 (non-HR) that's on my wrist 24-7-365. It will occasionally do bike duty if I forget to bring my Edge 820 or something, but otherwise I use the Edge exclusively. The Fenix has most of the features I use on a regular basis but limitation of 4 fields per screen, location on the wrist, and general form factor mean the Edge is my go-to cycling computer. No question in my mind. The Fenix primarily does duty as wrist watch, activity tracker, alarm clock, and data collection for the occasional run or other non-cycling activity.
I record the ride on both. My Edge has crashed on me a couple times and it's really nice to have a backup so I don't lose the data. A side benefit is the calories widget on the watch knows everything so I can check without pulling my phone out. The obvious drawback is having to charge the battery more often.
I have a second Garmin Connect account that my Edge syncs to, so the data is clean and the reports are accurate.1 -
I have a Garmin Forerunner 10 & 15 (G10 less than $100 and the G15 little more). They are made for running but I find they do well recording my ride GPS. I have to go into editing the data on both MFP and Strava and Garmin Connect. I do not have the heart or foot pads for them but Strava does a good job calculation calories based upon the climbs (elevation) and speed (once you put in it was a RIDE and not run). The G15 records your sleep habits, walking, and you do have to connect (down load), to your computer with a wire. They are economical alternatives a poor mans GPS0
-
NorthCascades wrote: »I have a Fenix 3 (non-HR) that's on my wrist 24-7-365. It will occasionally do bike duty if I forget to bring my Edge 820 or something, but otherwise I use the Edge exclusively. The Fenix has most of the features I use on a regular basis but limitation of 4 fields per screen, location on the wrist, and general form factor mean the Edge is my go-to cycling computer. No question in my mind. The Fenix primarily does duty as wrist watch, activity tracker, alarm clock, and data collection for the occasional run or other non-cycling activity.
I record the ride on both. My Edge has crashed on me a couple times and it's really nice to have a backup so I don't lose the data. A side benefit is the calories widget on the watch knows everything so I can check without pulling my phone out. The obvious drawback is having to charge the battery more often.
I have a second Garmin Connect account that my Edge syncs to, so the data is clean and the reports are accurate.
That's a good idea about having a second Connect account.
I've never bothered to double log rides because I haven't had any Edge instability problems since I moved on from the 510. Both the 520 I used all of last year and the 820 I'm currently using have been rock solid. Much more stable than than the 510 was, though truthfully I make it sound worse than it was. My 510 had tons of quirks but it never actually blew up and lost ride data on me.0 -
The club I ride with sends our GPX files of the weekends planned routes and yesterday for the first time I actually bothered to load those onto my 810 (which I'd already followed the DC Rainmaker instructions for loading decent maps on). On the way bike our ride leader needed to head off early as he had a deadline so having the mapping on the 810 meant I could lead the ride home myself - which was quite useful as we were in the midst of the Essex lanes in foggyish conditions at that point. First time having the Edge was an advantage over the watches (I've used a Forerunner 305 for years and am onto a Vivoactive HR now) and it is why I went for one.1
-
Actually, thinking about it, there IS one activity where wearing a GPS logging watch is a better option than the dedicated bike units... Cyclocross Racing - for the simple reason that (certainly in the uk conditions) you're potentially changing bikes every lap (or at least every other one)... so, if there's a watch out there that can pair to a "pool" of sensors - pair it to both bikes powermeters, plus your HRM belt before the start of the race, and you're good to go. It's actually slightly annoying that my Vivoactive HR doesn't support powermeter data at the moment - it's something I'm really hoping that they do at some point in the future.0
-
@TheBigYin don't people using watches in bike races (aka "triathletes") generally put the watch on the bars so it's visible during the race?0
-
NorthCascades wrote: »@TheBigYin don't people using watches in bike races (aka "triathletes") generally put the watch on the bars so it's visible during the race?
Haven't a clue what they do to be honest... I just mentioned the cyclocross thing because it came up in conversation with a friend...
And of course, anyone who's raced cross knows that you really wouldn't get a chance to actually look at the data in race, it's all about recording the data for post race analysis, so it really doesn't matter that the watch is on your wrist.
I vaguely remember a dc rainmaker post where he mentioned putting the garmin head unit inside his swimming cap for the swim leg of events to try and ensure it kept a signal lock... Who knows what else those wierdos in triathlon get up to.
0 -
...I vaguely remember a dc rainmaker post where he mentioned putting the garmin head unit inside his swimming cap for the swim leg of events to try and ensure it kept a signal lock... Who knows what else those wierdos in triathlon get up to.
Hey, I resemble that remark! Wait... But yeah, in triathlon races I have a quick release kit for my 920 so I can put it on my handlebars. However, I don't bother in sprints, and depending on the course, I might not bother for an oly. I find it imperative for 70.3's though, since I have thresholds set to alert me if I am slacking or about to push myself to a burnout. When I get into Fulls I'll be doing the same. However, my friend is so used to looking down at his wrist, that he is fine without bike mount.0 -
And of course, anyone who's raced cross knows that you really wouldn't get a chance to actually look at the data in race, it's all about recording the data for post race analysis, so it really doesn't matter that the watch is on your wrist.
When I've raced, I've wanted to see one piece of information: my power output. Most of the people I've raced against and most of the people I know who race feel the same way. A PM is a lot more precise and accurate than RPE. Occasional glances down help you avoid blowing up too early.0 -
My old Forerunner 305 had a QR mounts for the wrist and bike bars so would have been quick to switch from one to the other.0
-
UPDATE: Garmin just announced the Fenix 5x. I note X because it has mapping features similar to the 820. This definitely makes a viable wrist option for routes now. Although, planning and changing on-the-fly still can't be done with this. Always fun to see how tech evolves.0
-
I'm going to pre-order an F5X as soon as REI will take my money. And sell my Fenix 3 HR when it arrives.
I wonder how useful maps will really be without a touch screen. But it's promising enough and the F3 has been wonderful enough that I'll find out first hand.0 -
@NorthCascades Please post when you have tried it a few times. Also if you can let me know what type of drain on the battery it has, I would appreciate it.0
-
Will do. They're saying 5 to 8 weeks until delivery so don't hold your breath. But I'll come back and share my impressions.
I've been very happy with my Fenix 3 for what it's worth. There are a few areas where the new one looks like a big improvement.
0
This discussion has been closed.