Wireless computers

[young Ed]

even if it does have a cadence magnet, just don't fit it and it might read something it might not but you can just ignore that if you aren't interested
Cheers Ed

 

[midlife]

Somebody somewhere will be selling old stock with just the single wheel sensor ..…....

Shaun

 

[screenman]

Use 2 magnets to go twice as fast.

 

[ScotiaLass]

Ive got the basic cateye wireless 9 function about £25 .does everything I need distance ,speed ,ave ,time,total milage etc . Had it fitted when I bought the bike but really simple magnet on spokes receiver cable tied to forks and unit to stem .just programming wheel size into unit and off you go

Same here.
It's great...does everything I need and has been reliable.

 

[andyfraser]

A mystery has been cleared up. My cheap wireless computer wouldn't work properly at night. It hadn't crossed my mind that my lights were interfering with it.

 

[S.Giles]

An occasional reading glitch, if that's what happens, is neither here nor there.

I'd be interested to know if all wireless computers use the same method of wireless communication between the sensor and computer. If so, then wouldn't they all be equally prone to interference? Unfortunately I don't have enough knowledge of cycle computers to say.

Admittedly I'm talking about the extremely cheap end of the market, but I wouldn't describe the computer problems I experienced as being an 'occasional glitch'. It would go completely haywire every time I was in certain locations.

 

[S.Giles]

Use 2 magnets to go twice as fast.

It's funny you mention that. When I was fitting my replacement sensor the other day, I realised I now had two magnets available, and it occurred to me that I could experiment with using both of them. I was going to fit them both (180 degrees apart) and re-programme the wheel diameter to half its actual size to see if it still worked accurately. Phase two of the experiment would have been to put them 90 (or is that 270?) degrees apart and observe what manner of confusion ensued.

Then I decided to make a cup of tea instead.

 

[sittingbull]

........ I've heard of people having problems from nearby powered lights with wireless computers.........

I've used Cateye Micro Wireless Computers on several bikes with flashing lights for years without problems.... UNTIL .... I got a Moon XP500 front light. Even though they were on opposite sides of the stem the Cateye was useless when the Moon was on the lower power settings on steady beam.

My Garmin Edge 200 appears unaffected but there are stories of some high power lights affecting GPS's.

 

[Arrowfoot]

I had a wireless Sigma that didn't want to work when there were 4 AA batteries alongside powering a light. It was always fine when I was using AAA battery-powered lights. I've heard of people having problems from nearby powered lights with wireless computers. Worth checking if you run heavyish lights before you buy. Though, if you switch the light off you will have proof that you go faster in the dark....

Had the exact same problem with the Sigma. Took me days before I realised it was the lights.

 

[Katherine]

A mystery has been cleared up. My cheap wireless computer wouldn't work properly at night. It hadn't crossed my mind that my lights were interfering with it.

Mine is not affected by my lights which are nothing fancy.

 

[Pale Rider]

I'd be interested to know if all wireless computers use the same method of wireless communication between the sensor and computer. If so, then wouldn't they all be equally prone to interference? Unfortunately I don't have enough knowledge of cycle computers to say.

Some dearer computers are described as transmitting on 2.4ghz.

My radio knowledge is equivalent to yours, but it's a reasonable guess the sales pitch is that frequency suffers less from interference.

 

[Bazzer]

I currently have a topeak panoram wireless. Admittedly an older model than currently being sold, but I haven't experienced any interference in the readings, even with a light on either side of it.

 

[mrbikerboy73]

+1 on the Cateye Strada Wireless. I've got cadence and non-cadence models on different bikes. The cadence novelty wore off after maybe one mile, and the transmitter is bigger too if I was to be picky. On the plus side, they're both easy to operate on the move and have a good size display. Plenty of secondhand ones on eBay.

 

[Cuchilo]

Some useful tips.

I'm not fussed about losing the total mileage reading at battery changeover time.

A quick Google suggests the Strada now comes with a cadence sensor, which involves another magnet on the bottom bracket.

Good for some users, but unwanted complication for me.

Hopefully one of the shops tomorrow will have a basic one.

I'm sure the points about wired computers are well made, but for the sake of a few extra pounds, I prefer the neater look of wireless.

An occasional reading glitch, if that's what happens, is neither here nor there.

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/cateye-strada-cadence-cycle-computer/?utm_source=google&utm_term=cateye strada&utm_campaign=RTC_cateye&utm_medium=cpc&utm_content=seEcxCsKm_dc|pcrid|44920733594|pkw|cateye strada|pmt|e|&dest=1&curr=GBP

Cadence magnets just go on the crank arm and stay there . They are no more hassle than the wheel magnet ( even less hassle if you swap wheels out )
I would add it personally , especially if it comes with the computer you are getting .

 

[S.Giles]

Some dearer computers are described as transmitting on 2.4ghz.

My radio knowledge is equivalent to yours, but it's a reasonable guess the sales pitch is that frequency suffers less from interference.

I have a feeling that the wheel-magnet of a cheap computer just causes the 12v battery housed in the wireless sensor unit to be connected momentarily by a micro-switch, and thus creates an electromagnetic pulse each time the wheel turns that is picked-up by a coil in the computer. I could be wrong, but that would account for the need for a 12v battery, the tendency to be affected by outside interference, and the tiny 'click' sound that can be heard being emitted by the sensor as the magnet passes it. I'll dismantle my old wireless sensor when I get a chance to find out.

I imagine that >£30 buys something more sophisticated that works at the 2.4GHz you mention, and is therefore much more resistant to interference.