# How much technology on a bike is "too much"?



## Joey Shabadoo (20 Oct 2017)

> I just discovered that the latest road bike components on the market are smarter than I am.



https://www.outsideonline.com/2252181/wired-bike

Interesting article on new technologies being integrated into bikes making the experience more "car-like".

Are these genuinely useful, will they trickle down to become common place or will things like programmable gear change buttons always be a bit niche?


----------



## Drago (20 Oct 2017)

They won't be for me. The beauty of a bicycle is the purity and simplicity of its engineering, the refinement and development of a mechanical device that the Victorians started. The introduction of electronics breaks that chain, and we lose that direct link to the past.

A cheap electronic casio is a far superior chronometer to my new Tudor, but I still know which I'd rather have.


Some might like it, and fair play to them. However, the use of electrons isn't something I'll be getting into.


----------



## petek (20 Oct 2017)

Interesting article. I wondered about that - you are about to be hit- 'rearview radar' kit though.


----------



## mjr (20 Oct 2017)

petek said:


> Interesting article. I wondered about that - you are about to be hit- 'rearview radar' kit though.


I've ridden with a couple of people using rear-facing radar. It seems OK and not too intrusive, but I think it doesn't distinguish cars from other cyclists and it doesn't often hear things earlier than someone with good hearing. Maybe a good addition to a mirror if you find it difficult to look behind you.


----------



## Sharky (20 Oct 2017)

Tis strange, but in 50 years of cycling, I have advanced from a single speed fixed, to multi geared bikes, but in the garage there is still a fixed and a single speed and it is usually one of these that I pick up when off for a ride or TT.


----------



## sight-pin (20 Oct 2017)

Pfft, they've not even thought about reversing lights yet.
Although i wouldn't mind some of that tech though.


----------



## petek (20 Oct 2017)

mjr said:


> I've ridden with a couple of people using rear-facing radar. It seems OK and not too intrusive, but I think it doesn't distinguish cars from other cyclists and it doesn't often hear things earlier than someone with good hearing. Maybe a good addition to a mirror if you find it difficult to look behind you.



Not used one of these but seen them out and about. My concern with tech in general and battery powered tech on bikes in particular is that it can get wet and fail.


----------



## ColinJ (20 Oct 2017)

Sharky said:


> Tis strange, but in 50 years of cycling, I have advanced from a single speed fixed, to multi geared bikes, but in the garage there is still a fixed and a single speed and it is usually one of these that I pick up when off for a ride or TT.


I built a singlespeed bike (with freehub, not fixed) out of old bits last autumn. I did it just for fun and thought I might use it for the odd trip to the shops or nipping down the valley to visit friends. In fact, I found that I enjoy riding it much more than I expected to and have done 1,273 miles on it since 27th November, including metric centuries, imperial centuries and even one '200' (km).



petek said:


> My concern with tech in general and battery powered tech on bikes in particular is that it can get wet and fail.


I have used my ancient Etrex GPS for 11 years, on over 30,000 km of rides in all sorts of bad weather and it hasn't failed me once! There was just one time when it struggled to get a satellite lock and a reset soon sorted that out.

I know lots of more modern GPS devices are nowhere near as reliable though.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (20 Oct 2017)

I spotted a link on here today to a rear light, I think in "spotted a bargain?" and clicked on it. It was for a rear light which linked to your phone, and "did stuff". I rolled my eyes.


----------



## Drago (20 Oct 2017)

Mrs D has a Bluetooth tooth brush. The mind boggles.


----------



## smokeysmoo (20 Oct 2017)

Drago said:


> Mrs D has a Bluetooth tooth brush. The mind boggles.


Why would anyone want blue teeth?


[EDIT] except maybe @ianrauk


----------



## Ming the Merciless (20 Oct 2017)

Drago said:


> Mrs D has a Bluetooth tooth brush. The mind boggles.



You can get bluetooth vibrators, so why not?


----------



## Drago (20 Oct 2017)

YukonBoy said:


> You can get bluetooth vibrators, so why not?



Ye God, surely not? That'll upset the traditionalists who like the antique ones. You know, been in the family for generations.


----------



## Joey Shabadoo (20 Oct 2017)

YukonBoy said:


> You can get bluetooth vibrators, so why not?



That can be hacked, apparently


----------



## Ming the Merciless (20 Oct 2017)

Imagine hacking your friends bike so it shifts to granny gears on the flat and big gears uphill. Such fun...


----------



## Daddy Pig (20 Oct 2017)

YukonBoy said:


> You can get bluetooth vibrators, so why not?


I take it that it's 'hands free?


----------



## PaulSB (20 Oct 2017)

I have enough trouble with all this stuff in a car. Please keep it a long, long way from my bike.

Riding is about me, the bike and the road.


----------



## Joey Shabadoo (20 Oct 2017)

YukonBoy said:


> You can get bluetooth vibrators, so why not?



Do they have rear view radars too, to see who's coming?


----------



## classic33 (20 Oct 2017)

There's shifting gear by thought.


----------



## screenman (20 Oct 2017)

Bring it on, technology is great.


----------



## classic33 (20 Oct 2017)

screenman said:


> Bring it on, technology is great.


Until the batteries run down/out.


----------



## screenman (20 Oct 2017)

classic33 said:


> Until the batteries run down/out.



Solar powered or pedal powered.


----------



## classic33 (20 Oct 2017)

screenman said:


> Solar powered or pedal powered.


Solar power at night?


----------



## Sharky (20 Oct 2017)

Drago said:


> Mrs D has a Bluetooth tooth brush. The mind boggles.





YukonBoy said:


> Imagine hacking your freinds bike so it shifts to granny gears on the flat and big gears uphill. Such fun...


In the days of the down tube shifters, it was sometimes a playful prank to reach over and do just that to drop a mates gear into top just as the road starts to go up. Of course, I never did.


----------



## screenman (20 Oct 2017)

classic33 said:


> Solar power at night?



Lunar powered.


----------



## derrick (20 Oct 2017)

Loving this technology, Just bought the Di2 interface for programming the gears, it's a bit of fun.


----------



## classic33 (20 Oct 2017)

screenman said:


> Lunar powered.


Not much effort on that part. Sort the battery problems out first, then stick the tech in place.


----------



## screenman (20 Oct 2017)

classic33 said:


> Not much effort on that part. Sort the battery problems out first, then stick the tech in place.



Pedal powered then.


----------



## jefmcg (20 Oct 2017)

(some time in the future) OK, so it's got loads of tech and a battery. Seems crazy to get all that, and not get the model with the larger battery and a small assist motor - just in case.

It's seems a lot of complication when the engine is still a person.


----------



## classic33 (20 Oct 2017)

screenman said:


> Pedal powered then.


Dynamos haven't made that much progress in recent years. And then you've different voltages to work with. Put wires into what should be a wireless system in some cases.


----------



## screenman (20 Oct 2017)

classic33 said:


> Dynamos haven't made that much progress in recent years. And then you've different voltages to work with. Put wires into what should be a wireless system in some cases.



Wind?


----------



## pjd57 (20 Oct 2017)

All these brackets/ mounts that let people put their phone on the handlebars should in my opinion be banned.
A major distraction for any cyclist.


----------



## classic33 (20 Oct 2017)

screenman said:


> Wind?


How do you sort the different voltages out. Every manufacturer seems to favour their own, even connection.


----------



## screenman (20 Oct 2017)

classic33 said:


> How do you sort the different voltages out. Every manufacturer seems to favour their own, even connection.



I give in.


----------



## classic33 (20 Oct 2017)

screenman said:


> I give in.


On lights alone, I've "D's" to "AAAA's", three seperate connectors for those with internal fixed batteries, two seperate sized external batteries(6V & 12 V). Backup lights that use CR2032 & CR2035 button batteries.

Sort the power supply problems and it may just be possible.


----------



## MontyVeda (20 Oct 2017)

the only bit of tech i've had is a cheap little computer... i don't regret taking that off so in my book, any tech is too much.


----------



## Globalti (21 Oct 2017)

One of my cycling buddies is big on Strava and keeps deriding my Cateye computer, saying "If it's not on Strava it didn't happen" which is quite irritating really.


----------



## raleighnut (21 Oct 2017)

I suppose the front wheel motor on my trike is quite high-tech, it's a 3 phase brushless 'Hall Effect' motor that freewheels when not powered.


----------



## Nonethewiser (21 Oct 2017)

Whilst I'm generally not anti-tech I'd prefer bicycles to remain relatively simple, wholly mechanical, machines that remain within my ability to service myself. Unlike cars, which I gave up on home servicing years ago.


----------



## Smokin Joe (21 Oct 2017)

Nonethewiser said:


> Whilst I'm generally not anti-tech I'd prefer bicycles to remain relatively simple, wholly mechanical, machines that remain within my ability to service myself. Unlike cars, which I gave up on home servicing years ago.


They still will, because most people who ride a bike just want something they can hop on once a week or month and just ride for short distances. The demand will always be there. But the choice will also be there for those who like to take advantage of the new tech.


----------



## Randy Butternubs (21 Oct 2017)

Dogtrousers said:


> It's not actually that exciting, and not a particularly big jump from just having a GPS computer. A lot of it is integration into a single head unit of various sensors like cadence and power, which largely already exists, but maybe not such a smooth integration. And really that's only of interest to that subset of sports cyclists who train with power meters and/or cadence which is a pretty niche
> 
> Then there's connection to lights, and radar, indicators, which all seems a bit gimmicky. And most of the above sports cyclists who want super integrated power meters and sensors only cycle in the daylight anyway, unless they go through a tunnel in an alp. Anyway, lights drain power very fast compared to computers. So bigger, heavier batteries would be needed, further putting off those sport cyclists.
> 
> And lastly there are added features for electronic shifting. It's easy to sniff at the fancy shift patterns, I've never ridden a bike with electronic shifting so I can't really comment. If you already have electronic shifting then it might sense to have it automatically do a double change for you when you change rings. Seems logical to me.



+1. Some people will love this kind of thing and there's nothing wrong with that. *If* you use a fancy cycle computer it makes sense to integrate it with any extra gizmos you have that could do with a screen. It seems firmly aimed at very wealthy sports cyclists. The radar thing might make sense to those who can't bear the thought of using a mirror. They could do with making it look less like an altoids tin though.







Integration with electronic shifting seems a bit like it's trying too hard. Setting up shift patterns sure, but that's not something you are going to want to do mid-ride surely? And I struggle to imagine indicators ever catching on seeing as you'd need some kind of horizontal bar on the back to space out the left and right indicators enough to be useful.

The biggest disappointment is that you buy a £500 computer and a £140 light and £350 special shifters with buttons so you can control said light without moving a hand...and it doesn't even have separate dip/main beams - the one thing that would actually be useful. Instead you get to turn the light on and off without the indignity of moving your hand 6 inches.

The comparisons to cars are a bit naff. They chuck loads of gimmickry into high-end cars that serves no purpose other than to add weight, cost and complexity. Examples include: boot doors that will open themselves with a motor, electrically operated curtains and self-folding wing mirrors.

Also, have you ever seen an older car where the integrated GPS is still functioning? Every one I've seen has broken and, rather than pay a fortune for a new official unit to be installed, the owners have chosen to spend less money on a better, more up-to-date separate GPS device. Being able to change elements as needed is a distinct advantage of non-integration. Given the cycling industry's love of ever-changing "standards" that fact has to be more relevant than ever.


----------



## jefmcg (21 Oct 2017)

pjd57 said:


> All these brackets/ mounts that let people put their phone on the handlebars should in my opinion be banned.
> A major distraction for any cyclist.


Why I can't use my phone for sat nav?


----------



## pjd57 (21 Oct 2017)

jefmcg said:


> Why I can't use my phone for sat nav?


I just think if you are looking at the phone / satnav / gadget , who is watching the road ?


----------



## Joey Shabadoo (21 Oct 2017)

pjd57 said:


> I just think if you are looking at the phone / satnav / gadget , who is watching the road ?



The speeds I go, I don't think this is an issue.


----------



## Milzy (21 Oct 2017)

Old steel bike with campag any day.


----------



## raleighnut (21 Oct 2017)

pjd57 said:


> I just think if you are looking at the phone / satnav / gadget , who is watching the road ?


----------



## pjd57 (21 Oct 2017)

raleighnut said:


> View attachment 379652


He doesn't have white van man, taxi drivers , the 61 bus etc to watch out for


----------



## classic33 (21 Oct 2017)

raleighnut said:


> View attachment 379652


Something wrong with the front wheel?


----------



## John the Monkey (21 Oct 2017)

We all have our own, personal luddite frontiers[1].

I love my Garmin (800) and it has navigated me back when I've had to cut rides short, and allowed me to explore new areas with reasonable confidence that I'll find my way back again.

Electric shifting though? No thanks.

At least, not for me - I should also point out that it's electric shifting, with it's lower force and shorter throw, that lets a friend of mine continue to cycle despite arthritis in their hands.

[1] a term from this article;


> _I’ve found my cycling technology frontier. I think I have become a Luddite. I certainly felt like smashing the newfound object of my scorn. Like a cancerous growth on an otherwise sound limb – there it was. A festering joke told by accountant-traumatised engineers intent on having a good final laugh. An April Fool’s joke spelt out in plastic and wires.
> 
> I refer, of course, to Shimano’s new electric gruppo. Little electric engines to shift our gears. Like a parasitic growth, the battery to make all this work attaches like that nasty cancerous disease afflicting the mouths of Tasmanian Devils. And there are wires everywhere. And for what? So that instead of a simple push on a traditional lever, these whirring engines of a culture gone mad can take up that miniscule effort instead?_


_

_


----------



## raleighnut (21 Oct 2017)

classic33 said:


> Something wrong with the front wheel?


It's the semi-Halfrauds fitted front fork I'd be worried about.


----------



## Tim Hall (21 Oct 2017)

Dogtrousers said:


> My own luddite frontier is a bit odd. My dream bike would either have down tube shifters or wireless electronic gears. I regard brifters as a bit of an ugly bodge.


I regard the _word_ brifters as a bit of an ugly bodge. The gadgets themselves are lovely.


----------



## Bollo (21 Oct 2017)

If I had my way bikes would look like an outtake from the new Blade Runner.


----------



## Bollo (22 Oct 2017)

Dogtrousers said:


> OT: I went to see that today. I thought it was rubbish. I suppose I should have got round to seeing the original first, but I never did. I don't think I'll bother now.


See the original, but make sure it's the director's cut without the shooty voice-over and happy ending. I'm a proper film ponce though, so I'd take what I say with a pinch of salt.


----------



## montroseloon (22 Oct 2017)

This has been a big worry for the manufacturers and also the teams. They apparently did a hell of a lot of testing and attempts at hacking the systems before they went on sale


----------



## Noodle Legs (23 Dec 2017)

Such an interesting thread. For the record the only tech I have is a garmin edge 520 (which was a birthday present) and I’ve even just indulged in a smart-ish trainer to use zwift for those poor weather days. (Halfrauds had an offer on) A friend of mine pointed out that I need to get a real power meter as apparently I can’t race on zwift using “zpower” (estimated) however having looked at the prices of said power meters I came to the conclusion that I cannot justify spending £500+ on a device just so I can interpret numbers! I’m not anti-Power meter- they are indeed useful in certain capacities - but neither am I a competitive cyclist, and so I don’t need an overpriced gadget that crunches numbers to monitor progress. I guess my point is that tech is useful but it depends on what type of cyclist you are as to how much tech is too much.


----------



## SkipdiverJohn (24 Dec 2017)

Drago said:


> They won't be for me. The beauty of a bicycle is the purity and simplicity of its engineering, the refinement and development of a mechanical device that the Victorians started. The introduction of electronics breaks that chain, and we lose that direct link to the past..



I don't like pointless complexity and gimmicky gadgets in cars either, so the "purity and simplicity" argument doesn't just apply to bikes. There's a tendency now to dumb everything down, so a complex machine can be operated by a complete idiot with no understanding or appreciation of how it works. That to me is not progress. Keep It Simple, Stupid.


----------



## Tin Pot (24 Dec 2017)

If the bike or anything attached to it needs electricity, then you’ve gone too far.

For shame, I have power meter pedals and front and rear lights.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (25 Dec 2017)

Tin Pot said:


> If the bike or anything attached to it needs electricity, then you’ve gone too far.
> 
> For shame, I have power meter pedals and front and rear lights.


For me, this is it, if it isn't powered by muscles when it could be, then it has gone to far.


----------



## bpsmith (25 Dec 2017)

GrumpyGregry said:


> For me, this is it, if it isn't powered by muscles when it could be, then it has gone to far.


So you only use dynamo lights then I assume?


----------



## Johnno260 (25 Dec 2017)

The only pieces of tech I will use are my Garmin 520 and the UT800 light paired to it.


----------



## jefmcg (25 Dec 2017)

Chris Doyle said:


> For the record the *only* tech I have is a garmin edge 520 (which was a birthday present) and I’ve even just indulged in a smart-ish trainer





Johnno260 said:


> *Only* tech I will use is my Garmin 520 and the UT800 light paired to it.



Is this some strange usage of the word "only" of which I was not previously aware?


----------



## Smokin Joe (25 Dec 2017)

Bikes are not and never have been complicated machines. Even with all the latest tech they are simple machines that can be assembled from all their component parts by anyone who can change a set of spark plugs or wire a plug.


----------



## si_c (25 Dec 2017)

I don't think technology goes too far until it detracts from the ride.

My GPS lets me go to new places and my lights to visit old places at different times. The same goes for other new tech, it changes the way you ride, but you're still riding, turning the pedals and propelling yourself by yourself.

Even eBikes simply increase the accessibility of cycling. If you don't want to use some of these things then that's your choice, but it's not too much.


----------



## mustang1 (25 Dec 2017)

Drago said:


> They won't be for me. The beauty of a bicycle is the purity and simplicity of its engineering, the refinement and development of a mechanical device that the Victorians started. The introduction of electronics breaks that chain, and we lose that direct link to the past.
> 
> A cheap electronic casio is a far superior chronometer to my new Tudor, but I still know which I'd rather have.
> 
> ...



+1 to what drago said. I love technology and stuff but when it comes to bikes, keep all that mumbo jumbo away from me. Indont want any of it, I don't want and trickle down. If that ever happens, then I'll finally go to an independent frame builder or go single speed. 

I don't want anything that requires a "software update". To the hell with that. 

And just in case it's not clear: screw all electronics on the bike. Screw them all to hell.


----------



## mustang1 (25 Dec 2017)

petek said:


> Interesting article. I wondered about that - you are about to be hit- 'rearview radar' kit though.



Warning, you are about to be hit in the ass. Your will has been auto uploaded to your solicitor. Have a happy funeral and thank you for buying product X rear view protection.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (25 Dec 2017)

bpsmith said:


> So you only use dynamo lights then I assume?


Not exclusively, no.


----------



## vickster (25 Dec 2017)

pjd57 said:


> I just think if you are looking at the phone / satnav / gadget , who is watching the road ?


We women can multitask you know


----------



## gilespargiter (25 Dec 2017)

I can see that this tech can be great to play with and as experimenting with concepts can be quite a pleasure to many people. 
Does it make your bike go faster more easily? Is it more reliable and less mainteneance? I really don't think so. I most certainly will not be setting off across muddy wet hills with kit like that anytime soon myself, either on or off road.

The bit I really like in the linked to article is where it says; ". . . weight difference between them and the mechanical group has narrowed to a mere six ounces . . ." My alternative fraziology (?) was more like; Cor blimey - you pays all that money and it weighs nearly half a pound more! 

Rather like disc brakes on light road bikes - You spend loads a time, thought and money on making them slick light and streamlined - then spend even more on screwing all that up and stopping them . However I'm not supposed to be the sarcastic one round here. . .


----------



## Sunny Portrush (25 Dec 2017)

I like a wee bit of technology but not willing to spend any amount hence my most expensive piece of tech bar the bike itself is an Edge 25. But the main thing from this thread that sticks in my mind is that you can get bluetooth vibrators - do you put them under the saddle??


----------



## Noodle Legs (26 Dec 2017)

jefmcg said:


> Is this some strange usage of the word "only" of which I was not previously aware?


Ah, the old “I don’t have a relevant comment so I’ll pull apart others’ spelling and/or grammar instead” routine......


----------



## jefmcg (26 Dec 2017)

Chris Doyle said:


> Ah, the old “I don’t have a relevant comment so I’ll pull apart others’ spelling and/or grammar instead” routine......


No, it is the old "satirising of a ridiculous statement by pretending it is using language incorrectly"**


**borrowed from Douglas Adams


> "We're safe,' he said.
> "Oh good,' said Arthur.
> "We're in a small galley cabin,' said Ford, "in one of the spaceships of the Vogon Constructor Fleet.'
> "Ah,' said Arthur, "this is obviously some strange usage of the word "safe" that I wasn't previously aware of.'


----------



## ColinJ (26 Dec 2017)

pjd57 said:


> I just think if you are looking at the phone / satnav / gadget , who is watching the road ?


If you are coming out of a t-junction and looking left, who is watching the road to the right? 

I don't stare at my GPS; I glance at it for about half a second at a time, and only when I am not looking at something more important such as a car coming straight at me!


----------



## Ming the Merciless (26 Dec 2017)

Smokin Joe said:


> Bikes are not and never have been complicated machines. Even with all the latest tech they are simple machines that can be assembled from all their component parts by anyone who can change a set of spark plugs or wire a plug.



Your bike has Spark plugs and plugs into the mains?


----------



## Smokin Joe (26 Dec 2017)

YukonBoy said:


> Your bike has Spark plugs and plugs into the mains?


Doesn't everybodys?


----------



## Ming the Merciless (26 Dec 2017)

Smokin Joe said:


> Doesn't everybodys?



The seat is heated but that is about it


----------



## Tin Pot (26 Dec 2017)

Was the derailleur a step too far? It’s been a slippery slope ever since...


----------



## Ming the Merciless (26 Dec 2017)

Tin Pot said:


> Was the derailleur a step too far? It’s been a slippery slope ever since...



As for the technology involved in wheels and frames, went too far in 1854.


----------



## pjd57 (26 Dec 2017)

ColinJ said:


> If you are coming out of a t-junction and looking left, who is watching the road to the right?
> 
> I don't stare at my GPS; I glance at it for about half a second at a time, and only when I am not looking at something more important such as a car coming straight at me!


Can you apply that to using a phone while driving as well !


----------



## ColinJ (26 Dec 2017)

pjd57 said:


> Can you apply that to using a phone while driving as well !


I wouldn't object to a driver taking a 0.5 second glance at a phone screen to see who had just called or texted (if it was safe to do so). Reading or sending texts when driving, or making phonecalls... STOP FIRST!


----------



## Johnno260 (26 Dec 2017)

jefmcg said:


> Is this some strange usage of the word "only" of which I was not previously aware?



Sorry if it offended you.. I tried to make the sentence better if it means it makes you warm and fussy inside...


----------



## Noodle Legs (26 Dec 2017)

jefmcg said:


> No, it is the old "satirising of a ridiculous statement by pretending it is using language incorrectly"**



Touché...


----------



## Noodle Legs (27 Dec 2017)

.......And out come the language “experts”...... haha


----------



## jefmcg (27 Dec 2017)

Dogtrousers said:


> Means: I have the Garmin 520 and no other tech besides.


and a smartish trainer.

just sayin' 

PS @Chris Doyle, loved your work in Chungking Express and In the Mood for Love.


----------



## Noodle Legs (27 Dec 2017)

Dogtrousers said:


> Hey, I'm on your side



Lol, cheers! 

It’s amazing how a very mild grammatical error is taken so out of context and how quick people are to jump on it!


----------



## Noodle Legs (27 Dec 2017)

PS @Chris Doyle, loved your work in Chungking Express and In the Mood for Love.

Haha, my uneducated mind has no idea what they are but thanks anyway!


----------



## jefmcg (27 Dec 2017)

Chris Doyle said:


> Haha, my uneducated mind has no idea what they are but thanks anyway!


You have a namesake who is an amazing cinematographer 



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2rzeq4V00k


----------



## Noodle Legs (28 Dec 2017)

Well what can I say? Everyday’s a School day!


----------



## Ajax Bay (28 Dec 2017)

si_c said:


> My GPS lets me go to new places


What was stopping you going to 'new places' before your use of a GPS? Non-availability of mapping? Reluctance to explore?


----------



## mjr (28 Dec 2017)

ColinJ said:


> I wouldn't object to a driver taking a 0.5 second glance at a phone screen to see who had just called or texted (if it was safe to do so). Reading or sending texts when driving, or making phonecalls... STOP FIRST!


I would because it's so unnecessary. There are phones now that can read out texts or caller names. There seems no need to read from the phone while the vehicle is in motion. I can only think of looking at a screen if it's showing you roadsign-style or map-style directions as being a valid reason.


----------



## jefmcg (28 Dec 2017)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oal-vBFmnRk


----------



## ColinJ (28 Dec 2017)

mjr said:


> I would because it's so unnecessary. There are phones now that can read out texts or caller names. There seems no need to read from the phone while the vehicle is in motion. I can only think of looking at a screen if it's showing you roadsign-style or map-style directions as being a valid reason.


I'm not suggesting it as a recommendation, but rather as a _limit_!

I don't drive so it would never apply to me, but I never use my phone on the move on my bike. I would always stop somewhere safe to use it.


----------

