Shimano Flightdeck computer and Ciclosport CP23 HRM

[User]

I am interested in the views of anyone who has used either a Shimano
Flightdeck computer or a Ciclosport CP23 HRM.

Does the virtual cadence of the flightdeck work well ?

Is the Ciclosport CP23 worth nearly double an entry level HRM ?

Any comments much appreciated
--
Dave

[Colin Blackburn]

In article >,
says...
> I am interested in the views of anyone who has used either a Shimano
> Flightdeck computer or a Ciclosport CP23 HRM.
>
> Does the virtual cadence of the flightdeck work well ?

Obviously it reports a cadence regardless of whether the cranks are
turning and so as long as you only take regard of the cadence figure
when you are pushing the pedals it is okay. It can give some interesting
numbers out when freewheeling down big hills!

Colin

[Andy Koppe]

User wrote:

> I am interested in the views of anyone who has used either a Shimano
> Flightdeck computer or a Ciclosport CP23 HRM.

I got the Flightdeck a couple of months ago because I liked the idea of
integrating shifters and computer like that.

Installing it took a bit of guesswork (the manual could do with more detail)
and lots of patience (there are enough chances to break or lose things).


> Does the virtual cadence of the flightdeck work well ?

It does for me so far. Also, having the buttons on the handlebars is rather
nice. The gear display is more of a toy of course.

Rather annoying is the division of the computer's functions in two groups,
between which one switches by holding the mode button for something like
three seconds. It's made worse by the fact that the two most important
functions, i.e. RPMs and distance, are in different groups.

Andy

[Velvet]

User wrote:
> I am interested in the views of anyone who has used either a Shimano
> Flightdeck computer or a Ciclosport CP23 HRM.
>
> Does the virtual cadence of the flightdeck work well ?
>
> Is the Ciclosport CP23 worth nearly double an entry level HRM ?
>
> Any comments much appreciated

I have the flightdeck. Cadence seems to work very well, but I've not
compared it to a 'real' cadence sensor. I can't see any reason it
wouldn't be good enough, so long as it's accurately sensing which gear
you're in (and mine is).

Velvet

[Sam Salt]

I find the gear display of the Flightdeck one of its more useful
features,plus I didnt find setting it up much of a problem.I must agree the
splitting of the two sets of information is a bit of a bind,also there is no
'auto-start ' function ( or if there is I've never found it ).


Sam Salt


Andy Koppe wrote:
> User wrote:
>
>> I am interested in the views of anyone who has used either a Shimano
>> Flightdeck computer or a Ciclosport CP23 HRM.
>
> I got the Flightdeck a couple of months ago because I liked the idea
> of integrating shifters and computer like that.
>
> Installing it took a bit of guesswork (the manual could do with more
> detail) and lots of patience (there are enough chances to break or
> lose things).
>
>
>> Does the virtual cadence of the flightdeck work well ?
>
> It does for me so far. Also, having the buttons on the handlebars is
> rather nice. The gear display is more of a toy of course.
>
> Rather annoying is the division of the computer's functions in two
> groups, between which one switches by holding the mode button for
> something like three seconds. It's made worse by the fact that the
> two most important functions, i.e. RPMs and distance, are in
> different groups.
>
> Andy


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.502 / Virus Database: 300 - Release Date: 18/07/2003

[Andy Koppe]

Sam Salt wrote:

> I find the gear display of the Flightdeck one of its more useful
> features,

I should have said, I attached it to the Deore shifters of my ATB, which
already had mechanical gear indicators. It's nice to get all the
information at a glance, but I presume it makes more of a difference on a
road bike.


> plus I didnt find setting it up much of a problem.

Might depend on the type of shifters as well. Surely got nothing to do with
skill. :)


> I must agree
> the splitting of the two sets of information is a bit of a bind

Yep, at least they could have split the functions more sensibly, e.g. put
RPM, DST, TIM, and CLK in the first group and the rest in the second.


> also there
> is no 'auto-start ' function ( or if there is I've never found it ).

Yep. Do think as well as well that the mph display is rather slow to pick up
when accelerating from standstill?

Don't get me wrong though, in spite of these niggles the FlightDeck is still
a very clever piece of kit.

Andy