iPhone or Cateye?
Gabble Ratchet
Posts: 17
First post ... looking for some real world advice. I'm relatively new to road cycling, looking to do some proper training with the aim of doing some sportive type events next year. To that end I need a way of monitoring heart rate, cadence, and so on. A top of the range Garmin gps type thing would be lovely but is out of the budget, so I'm looking at two options - either buy some sensors for HR and cadence (e.g. the Wahoo ones) and link them to Strava on my iPhone, or buy something like the Cateye Strada. I've already got a bike mount for the phone, so the cost of either option works out about the same.
Plus points with the iPhone option is that the data would go into Strava, which is nice, plus it's one less device to fiddle with and I would have my phone with me anyway. Minus point might be if there are issues pairing the sensors to the phone, don't really want to faff about but if that kit works smoothly then fine.
Plus point for the Cateye is weight and size plus simplicity. It's also more aerodynamic than having my phone on the bars but that's not a major concern as I'm not exactly aerodynamic myself. Minus point is that the data doesn't go into Strava, but that's not the end of the world, it would still record speed and so on in the phone anyway.
On balance I'm probably leaning toward the Cateye option, just wondered what the real world experience of both is, and if there's another way I haven't thought of.
Plus points with the iPhone option is that the data would go into Strava, which is nice, plus it's one less device to fiddle with and I would have my phone with me anyway. Minus point might be if there are issues pairing the sensors to the phone, don't really want to faff about but if that kit works smoothly then fine.
Plus point for the Cateye is weight and size plus simplicity. It's also more aerodynamic than having my phone on the bars but that's not a major concern as I'm not exactly aerodynamic myself. Minus point is that the data doesn't go into Strava, but that's not the end of the world, it would still record speed and so on in the phone anyway.
On balance I'm probably leaning toward the Cateye option, just wondered what the real world experience of both is, and if there's another way I haven't thought of.
0
Comments
-
The argument has been expressed numerous times before, but you don't want your expensive phone stuck on your bars where it is likely to get damaged by a crash, the weather or just falling off. Get a cycling computer of some sort. If you're not bothered about mapping, Garmin 500s can be picked up reasonably cheap as well as older generation models that do mapping like the 705 which still work perfectly well.I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0
-
What you want is a second hand Garmin 500. The unit, hrm strap and cadence sensor all sell together new for about £120 now. A second hand head unit would be £50-£60 if you look around and hrm straps are dead cheap.
This way, battery life is never a problem (using an iPhone it would be), data can be looked at in Garmin Connect and in Strava.
Keep your eye in the classified forum.
EDIT: See, bloke above suggested the same thing before I'd finished typing.0 -
Thanks guys, Garmin sounds like a good option, will look out for that.0
-
I used an old phone for the last 4 years with Endomondo running on it. Zero cost apart from HRM chest strap. I used on old defunct SIM card in it so it wouldn't nag me about there not being a SIM card present.
Worked flawlessly on rides up to 1.5 hours long. The only issue was that I had to ensure the phone was fully charged before a ride and all updates done (it's an Android phone so loads of app updates every day).0 -
So ... liking the Garmin 500, will probably go that way. One question I'm planning to do a few tape/sportive type events next year, is there any restriction on using GPS-enabled units such as these during a race?0
-
Since I have to carry my phone anyway, I may as well use it. I don't see the crash damage as an issue. Apps are way better than any bike computer.
I designed and made the mount to work with an iPhone6 and UnU battery case. It is good for about 4.5 hours of GPS use.
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1060563
0 -
I cant think of a worse solution... mounting a smartphone on the bike... plug ugly as well phones are really designed for the pissing rain ... even if they are covered with an even uglier box... your choice.
If you need a headsup display then go for a cheaper Cateye.
I used their Stealth ... to record ride data gps and ant+ sensors
I have now picked up a Garmin 520 as having the mapping display makes for solo rides outdoors a little easier on the navigation front if I want to do detours. Its super quick picking up GPS.. easy to connect to laptop/smartphone.. easy to export tcx data into Golden Cheetah and will synch with Strava.
It also has that 90 day free Strava premium, so am trialling the segment alarms.. ok gimmick, every one shouts.. but at least it is a plus point on the motivation front when you are on the bike every single day in winter.0 -
So ... liking the Garmin 500, will probably go that way. One question I'm planning to do a few tape/sportive type events next year, is there any restriction on using GPS-enabled units such as these during a race?
No. One point though; a sportive is not a race.I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
Since I have to carry my phone anyway, I may as well use it. I don't see the crash damage as an issue. Apps are way better than any bike computer.
I don't see your point? We probably all carry phones during rides, mainly for emergency contact reasons, which doesn't mean we have to then have it stuck on the front of the bike looking pig ugly and risk having to shell out another wad of money for a new phone when it smashes to smithereens in a crash or gets soaked in a downpour. As for a phone app being better than a dedicated gps device, again I can't see your logic. Weather resistance, crash resistance, gps speed and quality, barometric pressure for elevation, mapping, battery life, ANT+ and or Bluetooth connection for power meters, HR, speed and cadence, umpteen editable screen view options, no loss of signal etc and simply disconnected from the bike at a stop if you need one.I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
Since I have to carry my phone anyway, I may as well use it. I don't see the crash damage as an issue. Apps are way better than any bike computer.
How is a device emulating a bike computer better? Of all the information a Garmin can give you when out riding you really only need to know a handful. Speed, Distance, Cadence, Heart rate plus maybe a few others depending on your training. If you want to spend your entire ride glued to the screen like Chris Froome and his power output then you cannot process it all. Its best to stick with the information thats useful at that moment. The more readings the more clutter the harder it is to actually get any usefulness out of them. Anylize them all you like when you get home but not while riding. Added to this, staring at a small screen is more likely to mean you are not concentrating on the road. If we as cyclist are going to vilify drivers who look at phones while driving we can hardly do the same can we? A glance at a garmin is similar to a glance at a speedo. reading an screen full of nonsense on an iphone is not.0 -
If you care about grams, the weight of the phone is already with you. I do care about grams, as much of the reason I paid more for a fancier bike is for it to weigh less. One monetary unit per gram is often a cited value of grams.How is a device emulating a bike computer better? Of all the information a Garmin can give you when out riding you really only need to know a handful. Speed, Distance, Cadence, Heart rate plus maybe a few others depending on your training.
If you care about the cost of repairing an iPhone if the screen breaks in a crash, it is less than half the cost of a Garmin 520.
If you don't need mapping and turn by turn directions with routing on bike-safe roads, then a bike computer is better. If you want advanced features like turn by turn directions with routing on bike-safe roads, then the iPhone should be better as it has google maps with a bike setting.
But as people have said, the iPhone is larger, more vulnerable, not as good looking, not dedicated to the bike, and not as waterproof. I would like to try a Garmin 520 and would already have one if I didn't have a 3D printer because I could not find an iPhone bike mount that would hold the phone with a battery case and be low profile and secure. I have had my iPhone bounce out of even expensive RAM mounts more than once, which is why I designed my own mount.
Battery life has not been an issue - I get over four hours with GPS. I have had two people riding with me have their Garmins die (though they probably did not charge them before the ride).
If someone gave me a 520, I would use it and stop using the iPhone, so arguably I am just trying to save the money of it.
There are also iPhone apps that give live Strava segments without needing a premium membership.0 -
If you care about grams, the weight of the phone is already with you. I do care about grams, as much of the reason I paid more for a fancier bike is for it to weigh less. One monetary unit per gram is often a cited value of grams.How is a device emulating a bike computer better? Of all the information a Garmin can give you when out riding you really only need to know a handful. Speed, Distance, Cadence, Heart rate plus maybe a few others depending on your training.
If you care about the cost of repairing an iPhone if the screen breaks in a crash, it is less than half the cost of a Garmin 520.
If you don't need mapping and turn by turn directions with routing on bike-safe roads, then a bike computer is better. If you want advanced features like turn by turn directions with routing on bike-safe roads, then the iPhone should be better as it has google maps with a bike setting.
But as people have said, the iPhone is larger, more vulnerable, not as good looking, not dedicated to the bike, and not as waterproof. I would like to try a Garmin 520 and would already have one if I didn't have a 3D printer because I could not find an iPhone bike mount that would hold the phone with a battery case and be low profile and secure. I have had my iPhone bounce out of even expensive RAM mounts more than once, which is why I designed my own mount.
Battery life has not been an issue - I get over four hours with GPS. I have had two people riding with me have their Garmins die (though they probably did not charge them before the ride).
If someone gave me a 520, I would use it and stop using the iPhone, so arguably I am just trying to save the money of it.
There are also iPhone apps that give live Strava segments without needing a premium membership.
1. How much water do you take on a ride? 1 litre = 1kg You probably sweat out the weight of an Garmin 510 on a decent ride.
2. Even if the cost of a broken screen was cheaper the garmin is less likely to break beyond repair than an iphone.
3. "If you want advanced features like turn by turn directions with routing on bike-safe roads, then the iPhone should be better as it has google maps with a bike setting" Ever heard of the 800, 810 or 1000?
4. I take a phone with me on rides. And it aint an iphone or any other smart phone. Its a cheap samsung with rubber keys so I can make a call if I need to in an emergency. I wouldnt take my smartphone which could get damaged from a fall if it was in my pocket or on the stem. Screen breaks and I cant make a call then I may as well not have bothered. (btw samsung phone cost £15 including PAYG credit)
Overall weight of garmin and samsung is less than an iphone and means I have a dedicated device which will not die on me reducing my ability to use the other if needed in an emergency.
If an iphone is all you have and can afford go ahead and use it. But if you can afford and want a dedicated GPS then a Garmin will always be better than using a smartphone.0 -
Always interesting to read this sort of crap, primarily because the same people who think their phone does everything the best are the sort that will stream music from it via Bluetooth and say the sound quality is as good, will take pictures and video with it and say that it's as good as a camera etc.
It's horses for courses, if you want cycling information presented as reliably and sensibly as possible then buy a cycling computer of some description. And yes, I own a Garmin 800 and a camera and a decent hi-fi set up.Trail fun - Transition Bandit
Road - Wilier Izoard Centaur/Cube Agree C62 Disc
Allround - Cotic Solaris0 -
Yes, and 810 could replace my iPhone on the handlebars. I would like one, and it just comes down to spending 400 vs using the device I already have. All of the issues you raise are real ones, and I have tried to work through them. For example, I solved the battery life issue with having a battery case, and get over 4 hours of GPS use. I don't have the ability to use it in the rain. If I wanted to, I could get an Otterbox or other waterproof case. I may end up with whatever comes out after the 810 as the 810 does not even have all of the features of the 520.0
-
I have a Meridian Digital Theatre and only stream music with Wifi. The main problem with using a phone as a camera is that you only always have a wide-angle lens which is horrible for people photographs (the best kind of photographs), otherwise they can be good.0
-
I solved the battery life issue with having a battery case, and get over 4 hours of GPS use. I don't have the ability to use it in the rain. If I wanted to, I could get an Otterbox or other waterproof case.
I thought you were trying to cut weight wherever possible? Lithium battery packs are not light and neither are otterboxes.
In fact an Otterbox alone weighs about 100g 20% more than a Garmin 510 (about 85g) thats without an extra battery.0 -
I put a piece of plastic wrap over the phone once when rain was possible.
An iPhone does not have enough battery life for what I do to last a day without a battery case. My phone with battery case is 226 grams. It is good for over 4 hours with GPS mapping.0 -
I have a Meridian Digital Theatre and only stream music with Wifi. The main problem with using a phone as a camera is that you only always have a wide-angle lens which is horrible for people photographs (the best kind of photographs), otherwise they can be good.
Never mind.Trail fun - Transition Bandit
Road - Wilier Izoard Centaur/Cube Agree C62 Disc
Allround - Cotic Solaris0 -
I have a Meridian Digital Theatre and only stream music with Wifi. The main problem with using a phone as a camera is that you only always have a wide-angle lens which is horrible for people photographs (the best kind of photographs), otherwise they can be good.
Yeah them phone cameras optimised for selfies can be crap at photgraphing people can't they :?0 -
You are making the case that a wide-angle lens is a optimised for portraits, which is, of course, the opposite of true. It is optimised for general use. Wide angle distorts facial features and so would never be used by a portrait photographer unless they were trying to be artsy.0
-
You are making the case that a wide-angle lens is a optimised for portraits, which is, of course, the opposite of true. It is optimised for convenience.
What about that other camera that faces you? BTW I own a Nikon D40 which was not cheap so I know about camera lenses. The rear facing cam is for wide angle shots and the front facing camera which apple started putting on their phones for face time and selfies is not a wide angle. it is actually very shallow in its aperture angle. In fact is probably on par with a 50mm standard lense0 -
The camera that faces you is usually a lower-grade camera that is good enough for FaceTime but noisier and with less dynamic range and resolution, and shouldn't normally be used for taking still photos.0
-
The camera that faces you is usually a lower-grade camera that is good enough for FaceTime but noisier and with less dynamic range and resolution, and shouldn't normally be used for taking still photos.
8 megapixel on the iphone 6. Not too shabby and probably better than a lot of handheld digital cameras out there.
Besides. Anyone who knows anything about digital cameras knows its not about the lens its about the CMOS sensor. This is what makes the better cameras what they are and not the lenses0 -
The iPhone 6 main camera has an angular field of view of about 63.54° which would be like a 35mm focal length on traditional 35mm camera. That is wide angle, and typical of snapshots with a point and shoot.
Yes, MP is not that important. My old Nikon D7 was 2.7 MP and would probably take better photos that most phones up until very recently.0 -
I may end up with whatever comes out after the 810 as the 810 does not even have all of the features of the 520.
The 810 and 520 are completely different devices not aimed at the same type of user. But the 810 has mapping which the 520 doesn't. The 520 has a bread crumb trail rather than true mapping like the 810. The 520 has live Strava segments, which will work on the 810 if you really want them. Personally, I don't. The 810 will do turn by turn prompts following a course and the mapping can be set to avoid certain roads if you really want to follow cycle paths only.
You're not convincing anybody other than yourself that a mobile phone is better than a dedicated cycling computer.I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
You can tell that I see the benefits of a dedicated computer because I said: "I would like one, and it just comes down to spending 400 vs using the device I already have." A dedicated device is better in some ways, and worse in some ways. It is mostly better, but then there is the cost.You're not convincing anybody other than yourself that a mobile phone is better than a dedicated cycling computer.
In fact that is why so many people are no longer buying dedicated GPS in their car now when they have in the past. They would like it, but they balance spending the additional money vs just using the phone they already have.
A 520 with turn-by-turn mapping would be good. I do want live Strava segments, but I want them without paying for Strava Premium because I just don't like subscription-based services. I want to pay for something once. My iPhone does that, a 520 does not.0 -
You can tell that I see the benefits of a dedicated computer because I said: "I would like one, and it just comes down to spending 400 vs using the device I already have." A dedicated device is better in some ways, and worse in some ways. It is mostly better, but then there is the cost.You're not convincing anybody other than yourself that a mobile phone is better than a dedicated cycling computer.
In fact that is why so many people are no longer buying dedicated GPS in their car now when they have in the past. They would like it, but they balance spending the additional money vs just using the phone they already have.
A 520 with turn-by-turn mapping would be good. I do want live Strava segments, but I want them without paying for Strava Premium because I just don't like subscription-based services. I want to pay for something once. My iPhone does that, a 520 does not.
You can pick up an 800, 810, 500 or 510 for sub £200 by shopping around. For the cost of Strava Premium to get your live segments you want, you're still way under your estimate of £400. I'm an 810 user but folks I ride with have managed to pick up unmarked 2nd hand 800s for £120 with mapping included.I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
Yes, you are right. 300 USD or 196.02 GBP. And for $315 USD it comes with one year of Strava Premium. It is the 1000 which costs more.0
-
I have just bought a Garmin Edge 1000
Cant wait to test it out at the weekend. 0 -
Since I have to carry my phone anyway, I may as well use it.
I have to carry mine too, and I most certainly use it.............as a slave to my Garmin (for connected features and text/call notifications), because thats all its good for on a bike ride!
You iPhone guys are so funny with the lengths you will go to, to make your iPhone (half) work as a bike GPS rather than just buy a bike GPS
If the iPhone had not come out, most of you would still be using a Nokia 6100.
Why are so many iPhone owners so hellbent on them doing things that are much, much better done by other devices?
If you went for an ECG or an ultrasound or an eye examination, and they had an iPhone with leads and stuff attached to it (it can do all those things), would you think, hey cool, or, get me the fook outa here?0
