|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Garmin Edge 305 or Edge 500 ??
"David Scheidt" wrote in message ... MikeWhy wrote: :"Peter Cole" wrote in message ... : I love GPS -- for charting and speedometer/odometer functions when direct : measurement is difficult (e.g. boats). For bikes, we have a perfect : odometer/speedometer simply by counting wheel revolutions, so I don't see : the justification for complex alternatives. :The 705 recalculates tire circumference by comparing the spoke magnet count :to the satellite derived travel distance. It typically varies over the :course of a ride, and for sure from day to day. What you're really counting :with that perfect odometer/speedometer is wheel revolutions, not distance :travelled. I'm more interested in distance travelled than how many times the :wheel went around. You know, the circumfrence of my tires simply doesn't change that much. When it does, i stop and fix the flat. The accuracy of counting wheel revolutions is greater than that of GPS. Sure. I'll board this loonie bus. Let's see where it takes us. You measured this how? |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Garmin Edge 305 or Edge 500 ??
MikeWhy wrote:
"Peter Cole" wrote in message ... I love GPS -- for charting and speedometer/odometer functions when direct measurement is difficult (e.g. boats). For bikes, we have a perfect odometer/speedometer simply by counting wheel revolutions, so I don't see the justification for complex alternatives. The 705 recalculates tire circumference by comparing the spoke magnet count to the satellite derived travel distance. It typically varies over the course of a ride, and for sure from day to day. What you're really counting with that perfect odometer/speedometer is wheel revolutions, not distance travelled. I'm more interested in distance travelled than how many times the wheel went around. Putting aside the issue of whether satellites are necessary to continuously recalibrate wheel circumferences, I'll simply say that a revolution counting odometer/speedometer has been more than adequate for my purpose, which was to navigate via a cue sheet. I don't need an atomic wris****ch, either. I've had several wired (~$20) Cateyes, that never failed and never even required new batteries. There's one in my tool box that's still displaying the numbers from the last ride it was used on -- 7-8 years ago. I've never found anything better at measuring relative fitness than riding the same loops with the same (mostly) set of riders. There are so many variables day to day (wind, temperature) that the averages aren't consistent, ranking is a much better indicator. Some people follow "zone training", and try to spend planned intervals at particular effort levels. My experience has been that after using a HRM for a while I can estimate my rate pretty accurately, so there's no real need to wear that damn strap any more. Faced with real facts -- that is, power production as a measure of fitness -- you would rely instead on physiological stress as an indirect measure, and then offer that no measurement is even better. I am impressed with the depth of your resolve to remain ignorant. How is "power production" any more of a "real fact" than "physiological stress"? Unless you're trying to achieve some kind of abstract fitness (of your own definition), the usual ultimate goal of cycling fitness is to ride further, faster. The easiest and most direct way to measure this is to see how far and fast you can ride. Unless you have a track, determining absolutes is impossible, so you might want to see how you stack up against comparable riders. That's why we have races. I've not seen any evidence that formal regimes help average cyclists get much faster, that is any faster than someone who is just riding hard a lot. Ride bike. Dropping (body) weight helps enormously, too. My evidence is in my electronic log; you have it wrong about "just riding hard a lot" being an effective training plan; and I'm not out to sell you on anything. You don't need electronics to set up a training program. You certainly don't need an "electronic log". I'm very confident you would dismiss any evidence unexamined as inaccurate, incomplete, or inapplicable. You read minds, too. Try presenting "evidence" instead of opinions, or a "buyer's guide" and we'll see how it goes. It does seem odd that, to you, random thrashing about should be as effective as disciplined and directed training, Define "effective". Define "disciplined" and "directed". My definition of "disciplined" is hauling your ass out of bed on a cold rainy morning and cranking out the miles. It's grim business. and your subjective "oh, I don't feel so good today" is equal to even the HRM mismeasurement of physiological stress from the effects of your diet, lost sleep, distraction, the day's heat, humidity, and wind might substitute meaningfully for measured performance. I have no idea what you're trying to say in the above. http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/id...acts_backfire/ Yes, I subscribe. I read it in Sunday's paper. The gist of the article is that people holding beliefs tend to filter facts to suit. Duh. Before you accuse me of filtering facts you might do me the courtesy of presenting some. Wouldn't it be easier to just say you don't care to spend the money, and you don't have any serious interest? I think I said both of those things, if not, let me be clear. I can't see the point in spending money on useless gadgets unless for strictly entertainment purposes. I'm not, at this time pursuing fitness goals that a training regimen might deliver, but I have in the past. I know many serious riders, for whom training programs are a way of life. They are not "average". It's perfectly clear to me that your desire for continued ignorance does not in any way invalidate anything I know, from measurements I made myself, or believe, from work documented and published by others. It's hard to know what you think I'm trying to "invalidate". Let me sum up: I assume you are trying to cycle faster, rather than having some other less direct goal like cardiac rehab or weight loss. There are many different venues to ride faster in: road races, crits, time trials, hill climbs, distance events, etc. There is no single measure of fitness or performance. There are many touted structured training regimes. They vary widely in duration, hard days/recovery days, use of intervals, etc., etc. Some may feel that a HRM is necessary to ride in "zones", but even those are broad enough that estimates suffice. You don't need a Powertap. You don't need a cadence counter. You don't need a GPS speedometer/odometer. You might need a Timex. The most accurate things you probably need are bathroom and kitchen scales. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Garmin Edge 305 or Edge 500 ??
MikeWhy wrote:
"David Scheidt" wrote in message ... MikeWhy wrote: :"Peter Cole" wrote in message ... : I love GPS -- for charting and speedometer/odometer functions when direct : measurement is difficult (e.g. boats). For bikes, we have a perfect : odometer/speedometer simply by counting wheel revolutions, so I don't see : the justification for complex alternatives. :The 705 recalculates tire circumference by comparing the spoke magnet count :to the satellite derived travel distance. It typically varies over the :course of a ride, and for sure from day to day. What you're really counting :with that perfect odometer/speedometer is wheel revolutions, not distance :travelled. I'm more interested in distance travelled than how many times the :wheel went around. You know, the circumfrence of my tires simply doesn't change that much. When it does, i stop and fix the flat. The accuracy of counting wheel revolutions is greater than that of GPS. Sure. I'll board this loonie bus. Let's see where it takes us. You measured this how? This is a silly subject since it presumes that even cheap bike odometer/speedometers are insufficiently accurate -- which is the first time I've heard that. But, putting that aside, a quick perusal of the Garmin site didn't divulge any specification for the accuracy of the odometer/speedometer. What is the spec and where did you find it? |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Garmin Edge 305 or Edge 500 ??
"Peter Cole" wrote in message ... MikeWhy wrote: "David Scheidt" wrote in message ... MikeWhy wrote: :The 705 recalculates tire circumference by comparing the spoke magnet count :to the satellite derived travel distance. It typically varies over the :course of a ride, and for sure from day to day. What you're really counting :with that perfect odometer/speedometer is wheel revolutions, not distance :travelled. I'm more interested in distance travelled than how many times the :wheel went around. You know, the circumfrence of my tires simply doesn't change that much. When it does, i stop and fix the flat. The accuracy of counting wheel revolutions is greater than that of GPS. Sure. I'll board this loonie bus. Let's see where it takes us. You measured this how? This is a silly subject since it presumes that even cheap bike odometer/speedometers are insufficiently accurate -- which is the first time I've heard that. But, putting that aside, a quick perusal of the Garmin site didn't divulge any specification for the accuracy of the odometer/speedometer. What is the spec and where did you find it? Yes, it is silly, and it's going exactly where a smarter person would know it would go as soon as you posted about the $20 CatEye and your odious tao of non-measurement. Why don't we just stop this bus, and both get off and walk away while we still can? |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Garmin Edge 305 or Edge 500 ??
MikeWhy wrote:
"Peter Cole" wrote in message ... MikeWhy wrote: "David Scheidt" wrote in message ... MikeWhy wrote: :The 705 recalculates tire circumference by comparing the spoke magnet count :to the satellite derived travel distance. It typically varies over the :course of a ride, and for sure from day to day. What you're really counting :with that perfect odometer/speedometer is wheel revolutions, not distance :travelled. I'm more interested in distance travelled than how many times the :wheel went around. You know, the circumfrence of my tires simply doesn't change that much. When it does, i stop and fix the flat. The accuracy of counting wheel revolutions is greater than that of GPS. Sure. I'll board this loonie bus. Let's see where it takes us. You measured this how? This is a silly subject since it presumes that even cheap bike odometer/speedometers are insufficiently accurate -- which is the first time I've heard that. But, putting that aside, a quick perusal of the Garmin site didn't divulge any specification for the accuracy of the odometer/speedometer. What is the spec and where did you find it? Yes, it is silly, and it's going exactly where a smarter person would know it would go as soon as you posted about the $20 CatEye and your odious tao of non-measurement. Why don't we just stop this bus, and both get off and walk away while we still can? How about sharing one of your "facts"? |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Garmin Edge 305 or Edge 500 ??
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 09:59:00 -0500, "MikeWhy"
wrote: "David Scheidt" wrote in message ... MikeWhy wrote: :"Peter Cole" wrote in message ... : I love GPS -- for charting and speedometer/odometer functions when direct : measurement is difficult (e.g. boats). For bikes, we have a perfect : odometer/speedometer simply by counting wheel revolutions, so I don't see : the justification for complex alternatives. :The 705 recalculates tire circumference by comparing the spoke magnet count :to the satellite derived travel distance. It typically varies over the :course of a ride, and for sure from day to day. What you're really counting :with that perfect odometer/speedometer is wheel revolutions, not distance :travelled. I'm more interested in distance travelled than how many times the :wheel went around. You know, the circumfrence of my tires simply doesn't change that much. When it does, i stop and fix the flat. The accuracy of counting wheel revolutions is greater than that of GPS. Sure. I'll board this loonie bus. Let's see where it takes us. You measured this how? Dear Mike, For what it's worth, here are the last few measurements from my daily ride, second crack of the driveway and back, using a $15 Schwinn cyclocomputer, which measures in thousandths of a mile: 15.331 new front tire, pumped up 15.315 51.316 15.319 15.292 [dropped 0.039 miles 15.331-15.292, 206 feet, 0.255%] 15.300 pumped tires 15.299 flat rear interrupted ride 15.287 15.295 flat rear interrupted ride 15.290 15.291 15.292 15.296 flat rear interrupted ride 15.295 [dropped 0.013 miles, 15.300-15.287, 69 feet, 0.085% 15.309 pumped tires *** The odometer records the weaving path that the tires take down the road and through corners, not straight-line geometry. For how far the bicycle actually moves, it's inherently more accurate than point-to-point GPS measurements. For point-to-point measurements, it's inherently less accurate, giving a larger resulat. Temperature affects the tire pressure and roll-out, varying from 70F to 94F. An unmarked U-turn on a 2-lane highway accounts for some variation--a few feet off either way is doubled. Sometimes the front wheel spins a little while I fix flats. The tire slowly loses pressure, leading to lower readings. My lines through corners and traffic aren't perfectly repeatable. And my wobbling down the road gets worse with lower speeds and gears into headwinds. A thousandth of a mile is roughly a single wheelspin. Cheers, Carl Fogel |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Garmin Edge 305 or Edge 500 ??
Peter Cole wrote:
MikeWhy wrote: "Peter Cole" wrote in message ... MikeWhy wrote: "David Scheidt" wrote in message ... MikeWhy wrote: The 705 recalculates tire circumference by comparing the spoke magnet count to the satellite derived travel distance. It typically varies over the course of a ride, and for sure from day to day. What you're really counting with that perfect odometer/speedometer is wheel revolutions, not distance travelled. I'm more interested in distance travelled than how many times the wheel went around. You know, the circumfrence of my tires simply doesn't change that much. When it does, i stop and fix the flat. The accuracy of counting wheel revolutions is greater than that of GPS. Sure. I'll board this loonie bus. Let's see where it takes us. You measured this how? This is a silly subject since it presumes that even cheap bike odometer/speedometers are insufficiently accurate -- which is the first time I've heard that. But, putting that aside, a quick perusal of the Garmin site didn't divulge any specification for the accuracy of the odometer/speedometer. What is the spec and where did you find it? Yes, it is silly, and it's going exactly where a smarter person would know it would go as soon as you posted about the $20 CatEye and your odious tao of non-measurement. Why don't we just stop this bus, and both get off and walk away while we still can? How about sharing one of your "facts"? Which one would you like to share? We'll call that one our's. How about this one? The calculated 2112 mm circumference of my 700x28 rear differs from the commonly published values. This value is meaningful and interesting to me because, aside from the 60' error in a measured mile, it handily compares to its unloaded circumference to yield a proportionality constant for the tire's natural frequency. Which is meaningful in relation to the transmissibility of road shocks to the rider's visceral mass. From this scant nothingness, I can already discern that its resonant frequency is 31% higher than that of my 26x2.1 MTB rear, at those inflation pressures. I think that's a real juicy one. I'll set it aside and mark it as our's. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Garmin Edge 305 or Edge 500 ??
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Garmin Edge 305 or Edge 500 ??
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:42:01 -0400, Peter Cole
wrote: MikeWhy wrote: [---] Yes, it is silly, and it's going exactly where a smarter person would know it would go as soon as you posted about the $20 CatEye and your odious tao of non-measurement. Why don't we just stop this bus, and both get off and walk away while we still can? How about sharing one of your "facts"? Don't hold your breath ... |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Garmin Edge 305 or Edge 500 ??
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:55:41 +0000 (UTC), David Scheidt
wrote: You know, the circumfrence of my tires simply doesn't change that much. When it does, i stop and fix the flat. The accuracy of counting wheel revolutions is greater than that of GPS. Indeed it is. To the point where, over my regular 41km training circuit, a small increase in the normally constant distance measured is a sure indication that tyre pressure has dropped. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
LF: Garmin Edge 705 | AWN[_4_] | Marketplace | 0 | May 2nd 09 01:42 PM |
Garmin Edge 305 HC | Bob Chambers[_2_] | Australia | 4 | June 18th 07 01:35 PM |
Garmin Edge 305, anyone use it? | Jason Spaceman | Techniques | 23 | April 18th 07 12:17 PM |
Garmin 205 Edge | [email protected] | Techniques | 2 | March 11th 07 01:51 PM |
Garmin Edge 305 | Centurian_Ooo'yabass | UK | 4 | May 31st 06 10:42 AM |