Cycling Watches vs Computers
#1
The Jeweler
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8
Bikes: Trek Domane SL 6 Disc
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Cycling Watches vs Computers
So my girlfriend has been asking me for Christmas ideas so I have been wanting to get either a watch or computer to star tracking my stats. She is a marathon runner and has a Garmin watch that tracks heart rate and distance, avg speed, and all of that good stuff. I have been looking at the Wahoo BOLT bike computer but I would also like something to measure my heart rate and possibly cadence (Wahoo sells a package deal for all of this). My questions is what does everyone use and what do they prefer or if they like a combination of the two (watch and computer)? TIA!
#3
I have both, but I only use my bike computer (Garmin 820) for bike stuff. If I'm going hard on the bike, it's easy to look at my numbers on the Garmin 820. I just glimpse down. Looking at the watch requires twisting my arm around and taking my eye away from where I'm going.
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Liked 3,110 Times
in
1,418 Posts
I use a Garmin 500. It does GPS and it collects data from my HR strap and power meter. As for a watch, I have a Fortis B-42. All it does is tell time.
#5
Senior Member
I used to have a bike specific computer, I got a GPS watch, no longer have the bike comp, and really don't miss it. It's not as ideal on the bike but more than makes up for it in versatility.
#6
If you’re into multi-sports, go watch. Cycling only? Go computer. I have suunto spartan ultra. For cycling, I have small piece of pipe insulation on my handlebar for the watch. If it on your wrist when riding you’ll have trouble just like Fast Fred above does.
My my wife does a lot of tri. She had many problems with Garmin Watch. Buttons stop working after a couple of months. Send it in for repair. Same problem after a couple of months. Switched to Suunto. No problems. I’ve had no problems with mine either.
My my wife does a lot of tri. She had many problems with Garmin Watch. Buttons stop working after a couple of months. Send it in for repair. Same problem after a couple of months. Switched to Suunto. No problems. I’ve had no problems with mine either.
#7
Senior Member
I've got both. I use the Garmin 1000 as my "Heads Up Display" as I'm riding but, use the Garmin Forerunner 935 to upload all of my data to Garmin Connect because, the watch strings the entire day together.
FYI - Not everyone gets great results with wrist heart rate monitor (I do) so, I actually use a chest heart rate monitor and pair it with both the 1000 and 935.
FWIW - The Forerunner gets awesome battery life (over 24 hours with the GPS running and over two weeks without).
FYI - Not everyone gets great results with wrist heart rate monitor (I do) so, I actually use a chest heart rate monitor and pair it with both the 1000 and 935.
FWIW - The Forerunner gets awesome battery life (over 24 hours with the GPS running and over two weeks without).
#8
Senior Member
I have a Bolt with the Wahoo speed/cadence sensors and an older Garmin HR strap. About 5 years ago I used a Garmin watch strapped to the bars to do a big climb, with that same HR monitor.
I much prefer the Bolt.
I much prefer the Bolt.
#9
I use a Garmin Edge 510 for the bike, and Fenix 5x for everything else. I find the watch display too small to read at my age.
Its nice to have both Garmin devices so that they upload to the same app, as oppose to a Wahoo for your bike, then some other watch for everything else and they upload to different apps.
Its nice to have both Garmin devices so that they upload to the same app, as oppose to a Wahoo for your bike, then some other watch for everything else and they upload to different apps.
#10
Senior Member
I have a Fenix 5 I use for running and occasionally record a bike ride. I use a 520 on the bike. If I'm using the watch I don't usually look at it so it's useless for navigation. I find the wrist HR is useless for running or cycling. It provides a general idea but is very slow to react and doesn't always go in the right direction with changes in intensity. I like the 520 for the bike. It's a decent size and has everything I need.
#11
Full Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 466
Bikes: Trek Domane 4.3
Liked 50 Times
in
35 Posts
So my girlfriend has been asking me for Christmas ideas so I have been wanting to get either a watch or computer to star tracking my stats. She is a marathon runner and has a Garmin watch that tracks heart rate and distance, avg speed, and all of that good stuff. I have been looking at the Wahoo BOLT bike computer but I would also like something to measure my heart rate and possibly cadence (Wahoo sells a package deal for all of this). My questions is what does everyone use and what do they prefer or if they like a combination of the two (watch and computer)? TIA!
#12
The Jeweler
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 8
Bikes: Trek Domane SL 6 Disc
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
That's what I was thinking since I will be using this for cycling only, I don't run or do any other exercise so the Bolt is such a great option plus the Bontrager built in cadence/speed sensors into my Trek bike seem like a good duo that will handle everything.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 2,190
Bikes: Ti, Mn Cr Ni Mo Nb, Al, C
Liked 527 Times
in
349 Posts
I use an ELEMNT Bolt and have been super super happy with it. Not only does it connect to all my sensors for the stats, I can also control my Smart Trainer with it (manually).
You will have people on both sides of the fence in terms of brand. I would advise you to watch comparison videos on YouTube and make up your own mind on what features/capability/real world use, or lack thereof are important to you.
You will have people on both sides of the fence in terms of brand. I would advise you to watch comparison videos on YouTube and make up your own mind on what features/capability/real world use, or lack thereof are important to you.
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 1,992
Bikes: Argon 18 Gallium, BH G7, Rocky Mountain Instinct C70
Liked 512 Times
in
306 Posts
I have a Garmin Edge 520 and a Garmin 235. I've used both for cycling and prefer the Edge hands down. The Edge just mounts nicer on my bike and provides more information in an easier to read format.
The 235 is great for running and other activities. If you're planning to just cycling from time to time, but will spend most of your time running, hiking, doing weights, etc. I'd go for the 235. Otherwise a dedicated bike computer it is.
The 235 is great for running and other activities. If you're planning to just cycling from time to time, but will spend most of your time running, hiking, doing weights, etc. I'd go for the 235. Otherwise a dedicated bike computer it is.
#15
Full Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 466
Bikes: Trek Domane 4.3
Liked 50 Times
in
35 Posts
That's exactly what I have, and it's worked well for me. I previously used a Garmin Edge 25, and that also worked well, although it's more limited in what it can do. As to brand, I think Garmin and Wahoo are both very good. DC Rainmaker has comparisons on his site. One benefit of Wahoo I think is that it's designed to play well with more other websites than Garmin, which seems to be more of a closed system (you can upload data but not share so easily with other sites). That may or may not matter to you.
#16
Senior Member
I have a fitbit with gps and heart rate. It's good as an activity tracker. The HR monitor sucks compared to my Wahoo Tickr. I think optical wrist HR is less accurate and definitely less accurate when I'm doing anything active because it's effected by movement of my wrist. Maybe Garmin is better then Fitbit but I know my readings on Fitbit vs Tickr can be vastly different. I'm currently using Wahoo Tickr, speed and cadence sensors with my phone
#17
Senior Member
Bike computer. I used a Garmin watch for a few years and didn't think I needed a bike computer. I was wrong. I got an Element Bolt about about 14 months ago and will never got back to a watch. The bigger screen allows me to see more while I'm riding. Maps for uploaded routes are a very convenient.
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,296
Bikes: Colnago CLX,GT Karakoram,Giant Revel, Kona Honk_ Tonk
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
I'm a runner and cyclist and I keep them separate.
Garmin Forerunner for running and a Lezyne Super GPS for the bike.
i like looking down at my handlebars while on the bike. The watch is a pain. Plus I can see speed, cadence and distance on the same screen. If money is an issue go with the watch. If not, get both.
Garmin Forerunner for running and a Lezyne Super GPS for the bike.
i like looking down at my handlebars while on the bike. The watch is a pain. Plus I can see speed, cadence and distance on the same screen. If money is an issue go with the watch. If not, get both.
#19
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,638
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Liked 2,004 Times
in
1,423 Posts
I used to use a Polar watch with bike and HR sensors. Now I use a Garmin Edge for the bike and a Polar watch for everything else: running, gym, skiing, hiking, etc. That's a big improvement, but more money. The Garmin maps and ability to follow a route are a big deal.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#20
Senior Member
GF's watch can count laps in the pool and reps in the weight room. Bike computer can't do everything the watch can. That stuff may or may not be useful to different folks, but it's not accurate to say an Edge or Bolt has all of the functionality of a watch.
#21
Senior Member
That's exactly what I have, and it's worked well for me. I previously used a Garmin Edge 25, and that also worked well, although it's more limited in what it can do. As to brand, I think Garmin and Wahoo are both very good. DC Rainmaker has comparisons on his site. One benefit of Wahoo I think is that it's designed to play well with more other websites than Garmin, which seems to be more of a closed system (you can upload data but not share so easily with other sites). That may or may not matter to you.
#23
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,638
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Liked 2,004 Times
in
1,423 Posts
Polar is in its own world, although some websites, like TrainingPeaks, will accept Polar data. Everyone else is supposed to live in the .FIT file world and thus those files should be importable into any website or software other than Polar. That said, there's a current screwup going on between .FIT formats, FIT 1 and FIT 2. Some equipment now creates FIT 2 files which don't import into some websites or software.which only accept Fit 1 files. I haven't encountered this problem since my Edge 800 uses old firmware, though problems with Wahoo files produced by new firmware have been noticed. I doubt that we'll see any problems with Garmin devices. There's a FIT File Repair Tool that fixes FIT 2 files for import.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
eastbay71
Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets
0
05-13-14 04:20 AM
badKarma2
"The 33"-Road Bike Racing
10
12-26-10 11:45 PM