EGG
Newbie Member
Posts: 12
|
Post by EGG on Aug 6, 2004 19:16:28 GMT -5
Does anyone have any suggestions on what a good cycle computer to get would be? Theres so many options to choose from since one offers cadence, heart rate, speed, etc. What should I really care about bieng a relatively new rider?
|
|
|
Post by Scott Baker on Aug 6, 2004 21:24:08 GMT -5
It comes down to how many functions you want vs. how much money you want to spend. Do you want to just read the data or to download it on the computer? I recommend using a cyclometer/heart rate monitor (HRM) combination. I have used several combinations and it became too much stuff to look at instead of just riding. I think for training you can't do without an HRM and a cadence option is very nice. I have used Cateye computers and Polar HRMs and I finally settled for the Ciclosport HAC4 . It has all the bells and whistles and is downloadable. It has a wired cadence kit and wireless cyclometer transmitter. Of course, this isn't the cheapest solution, but it has everything someone like me wants (geek) and needs.
Polar makes all-in-one models for cycling(http://www.polarusa.com/consumer/productfinder/productfinder.asp) also, but I prefer the HAC4 (http://www.ciclosportusa.com/hac4.htm).
I hope this helps! ;D
|
|
EGG
Newbie Member
Posts: 12
|
Post by EGG on Aug 7, 2004 10:34:02 GMT -5
I think I'll wait, the nice ones cost half of what my bike did...the only reason I would need one is to see how fast you guys are going once you pass me. For now, I'll just plant a money tree, keep riding so I can get good enough to stay in yhour pace line (then I'll just ask how fast we're going), and then maybe santa clause will bring me one. Have you seen this one by CATEYE though??? It's supposed to be under $200 I think...but I can't find it anywhere www.cateye.com/en/products/viewProduct.php?modelId=3&catId=6&subCatId=0
|
|
|
Post by Scott Baker on Aug 7, 2004 14:29:38 GMT -5
I haven't seen those new Cateye computers, but they look pretty cool. For under $200 those would be a great deal. Check with Motion Makers since they carry Cateye and see what the availability is for them.
|
|
|
Post by billjacobs on Aug 18, 2004 14:44:23 GMT -5
For what it's worth, I'm real happy with my Specialized Pro, which has the normal functions plus an altimeter that creates grade % and total climbing functions. Costs a bit under $100. For the mountains, the grade and climbing info is, at least for me, endlessly interesting, and on tough climbs provides confirmation for why I'm feeling like hell. Has a cadence feature, but not a heart monitor (I guess I subscribe to the approach that if I'm working pretty much as hard as I can work, then I'm working hard enuf for it to do me some good; but I should be open-minded about the use of an HRM , and would be interested in observations about the benefits of using one).
|
|
|
Post by thomasB on Aug 19, 2004 11:21:54 GMT -5
to Bill re: HRM use- They're a very useful tool. First I'll say it's good to be able to put it down and just ride sometimes. However, if you're planning to prepare for anything; whether it be a century, race, or just to inflict pain on friends during the weekly group ride, there is no better step to take in getting the most out of your rides. When I say the most, that does not mean an HRM is only used to tell you how hard you must go. Often times it keeps you at an appropriately lower level, with the goal in training being to do the minimum necessary to elicit the desired training response. Once one learns the HR Zones that guys like Chris Carmichael helped USA Cycling formulate, you might be surprised at how "easy" many of the hours on your bike seem, while "going hard," is broken up to specific, limited chunks of time with adequate recovery, both during and between rides. I could go on for hours, but I'll stop. If you want more info on HRM use, let me know. thomasB
|
|
|
Post by billjacobs on Aug 21, 2004 19:48:38 GMT -5
Thomas,
Thanks for the comments. Any quick synopsis, or web-site references, for the training routines worked out by Carmichael, et al?
Bill
|
|
|
Post by 1yellowtire on Aug 22, 2004 19:35:13 GMT -5
I have used a number of different computers, but have had limited luck with the Polar HRM/cpu combo. The HRM part seems to work well, but the speed, etc. seems spotty--it could be because it's wireless.
I agree that Specialized has some cpus with lots of features at a very low price. Jennifer uses one and has been happy with it.
|
|
|
Post by Vespa on Aug 23, 2004 8:07:30 GMT -5
Andy Applegate's website www.a2coaching.com/coachbio.htmfollows the Joe Friel model at ultrafit, which is a lot like Carmichael (Friel's overall program includes weight training where I think Carmichael's advocates for resistance training on the bike via stomp intervals, etc...). I'm not sure if Carmichael calcs HR zones differently, but here: www.a2coaching.com/HRzones.htmThis is a reply to Bill's inquiry, but I'll also cross post it under TRAINING. Here's my take on A2's zones: Zone 1 65-81% LTHR recovery zone Zone 2 82-88% LTHR optimum aerobic conditioning zone :)Zone 3 89-93% LTHR Tempo zone Zone 4 94-100% LTHR sub-threshold Zone 5a 100-102%LTHR super threshold Zone 5b 103-105%LTHR aerobic capacity Zone 5c 106% + LTHR anaerobic capacity
|
|
|
Post by thomasB on Aug 23, 2004 14:56:51 GMT -5
The difference bewtween Friel's program and USA Cycling's model, is that Friel bases HR zones on Lactate Threshold and USA Cycling bases them on Max HR. While it is true that performance in cycling is based more on LT than max HR, do you, the casual/amateur cyclist have the resources to accurately determine LT? If you don't, can you really base workout on Zones differentiating between 102% and 103% of LT? A good system for the average man or woman figuring out their own stuff is this (using an observed or estimated max HR) Zone 1-recovery/cool down- <65% of max Zone 2-good avg. for long slow distance-65-72% - through the course of a year by far has the most time of any zone Zone 3 - 73-80%- used for climbing intervals, can spend a lot of time in this zone Zone 4 - works on LT most directly- 2x20 min intervals - 84-90% Zone 5 - 91-100%- e.g. 2 sets of 3x4 min intervals during a 2.5 hour ride with 5 min bewtween reps, 10 min b/w sets. 90-100 rpm - takes a lot of motivation to do these but rewards are big
Friel and USA cycling are both legitimate. Just know the zones are different, and make sure you don't mix the two (been there) anyone who wants more individualized, day by day training plans can email tee_burns@yahoo.com
|
|
|
Post by Vespa on Aug 23, 2004 15:33:23 GMT -5
Heehee -- were you in Friel's zone 5+, but holding 100+% of your max instead of your AT (anaerobic threshold or LT/lactate threshold -- same thing)? Ouch, if so...
I wonder if YoEddy and the guys in Reid could check up on how to administer a Conconi test -- I've done them in a PT lab in a computrainer to get a fairly accurate AT/LT... Fun and easy -- NOT!
Anecdotally, on a good flat/rolling course -- say River Road in Asheville or in an actual event -- I understand that a maximum *sustained effort* in a 40K length TT yields an AVERAGE HR that should be pretty close to your AT. You need a HR monitor that shows average HR for that.
I agree that USA Cycling's formula is effective, but I think you need a HRM and some observation during maximal efforts to find your max HR -- the 220-age formula is WAAAY too general. I'm 35, so I should be dead at 196 BPM, but that's about my highest max in the last three years (191 recently).
Thanks Thomas! I may come talk to you about combining some components of Friel that I like with some from the USA Cycling program this winter, since you know both programs...
|
|