Cheaper alternative to Ergo computer?

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 04:12:32 +0000, Kovie wrote:

Seems to me that if your computer already has a cadence sensor and
capability (mine does), it would be a relatively simple matter to add to it
the ability to calculate and display which gears one was in (so long as
there was a way to input the number of teeth on the front and rear gears,
the way you currently have to input the wheel circumference).

Well, there was a computer that did this in reverse. Some Shimano Flight
deck (I think that was the name)Â*computers would tie into the STI
shifters, so they knew what gear you were in, would then take the gear and
speed and give you a "virtual" cadence. It didn't know when you were
coasting, though, so required some interpretation.

But modern bikes have so many crossover gears that it could never really
tell you what gears you were in from the cadence and the speed. It could
tell you the gear size easily enough, but would have to guess what
chainring you were in.


But it would be nice
to be able to know which gear I was in without having look look down.

I hasten to point out that, in order to read the computer you have to look
down, as well.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored
_`\(,_ | by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo
(_)/ (_) | Emerson

"Kovie" wrote in message news:MYtue.8153
There seems to be a certain anti-tech "old school" purist ethos going on
in this ng. Take a look at some of the responses I've gotten to my request
for recommendations on hydration packs in a recent thread I started. I try
to ignore it. My take is if it helps you do what you like to do, increases
safety, and solves a problem or two, I'm all for it, even if they never
had 'em in the good 'ole days.


I totally agree with you. To me it seemed that you asked a simple and
reasonable question and many of the responses are saying that you are wrong
and should be doing things their way. I don't get it but it seems to happen
very frequently.

I am sorry that I don't have an answer to your question and hope that
someone has a useful idea.

Frank Drackman wrote:
"Kovie" wrote in message news:MYtue.8153
There seems to be a certain anti-tech "old school" purist ethos going on
in this ng. Take a look at some of the responses I've gotten to my request
for recommendations on hydration packs in a recent thread I started. I try
to ignore it. My take is if it helps you do what you like to do, increases
safety, and solves a problem or two, I'm all for it, even if they never
had 'em in the good 'ole days.


I totally agree with you. To me it seemed that you asked a simple and
reasonable question and many of the responses are saying that you are wrong
and should be doing things their way. I don't get it but it seems to happen
very frequently.

I am sorry that I don't have an answer to your question and hope that
someone has a useful idea.

I hate to point out the obvious, but the only direct and correct answer
to his question is "NO".

wrote in message
oups.com...


Frank Drackman wrote:
"Kovie" wrote in message news:MYtue.8153
There seems to be a certain anti-tech "old school" purist ethos going
on
in this ng. Take a look at some of the responses I've gotten to my
request
for recommendations on hydration packs in a recent thread I started. I
try
to ignore it. My take is if it helps you do what you like to do,
increases
safety, and solves a problem or two, I'm all for it, even if they never
had 'em in the good 'ole days.


I totally agree with you. To me it seemed that you asked a simple and
reasonable question and many of the responses are saying that you are
wrong
and should be doing things their way. I don't get it but it seems to
happen
very frequently.

I am sorry that I don't have an answer to your question and hope that
someone has a useful idea.

I hate to point out the obvious, but the only direct and correct answer
to his question is "NO".


Are you sure that the only correct answer was "NO", could it have been, "I
have not seen the solution that you are looking for", or "I am not aware of
any company that makes a product with the exact features that you wan?"

wrote in message
oups.com...


Frank Drackman wrote:
"Kovie" wrote in message news:MYtue.8153
There seems to be a certain anti-tech "old school" purist ethos going
on
in this ng. Take a look at some of the responses I've gotten to my
request
for recommendations on hydration packs in a recent thread I started. I
try
to ignore it. My take is if it helps you do what you like to do,
increases
safety, and solves a problem or two, I'm all for it, even if they never
had 'em in the good 'ole days.


I totally agree with you. To me it seemed that you asked a simple and
reasonable question and many of the responses are saying that you are
wrong
and should be doing things their way. I don't get it but it seems to
happen
very frequently.

I am sorry that I don't have an answer to your question and hope that
someone has a useful idea.

I hate to point out the obvious, but the only direct and correct answer
to his question is "NO".


The ONLY direct and correct answer? Can you prove this? If not, then your
assertion lacks credibility. Show me how the reasoning I provided (as
opposed to lack of any you provided) could not work. It's pretty simple
math. If you know your wheel's circumference--which of course you need to
for a computer to display meaningful mileage-related numbers--and have a
cadence sensor, then a simple equation will tell you what gear-inch you're
in. Adding the number of teeth in the front and rear gears enables you to
make an educated guess as to which combination you're in. And for
combinations that have no gear-inch duplicate, the "guess" would be nearly
100% accurate. None of this requires any additional mechanical parts, just
some extra memory and a fairly simple software enhancement on the computer.
Of course, since these things aren't programmable by users (wouldn't it be
nice if they were, though, especially for the ones that can hook up to
PCs?), it would have to be programmed at the factory, but still entirely
doable.

Show me the flaw in this reasoning. And prove to me why "NO" is the only
direct and correct answer. Back up your assertion, or just back off.

--
Kovie
zen

Read my other recent reply. I agree that it would be hard to guess gear
combinations that have gear-inch duplicates. But even in such cases, an
educated guess could be made as not all duplicates are precise numerical
duplicates. For example, I have a 12-25 10-cog cassette matched to a
30-42-53 triple chainring. Both 42x 15 and 53x19 result in a 74 g-i ratio,
rounded. But the first one is actually 73.97, while the second is 73.69, so
a smart computer could make a pretty good guess as to which combo was in
use. Even if errors are introduced by innacurate circumference measurement,
or expansion/contraction due to weather or wear, etc., could be compensated
for because the relation between these two ratios remains steady. None of
this would require ANY additional mechanical parts or modifications. So
unless I'm missing something, I don't see why this wouldn't be possible from
a technical pov. In terms of whether this would make business sense, that's
a whole different issue. I'd buy one, if it was not much more expensive than
standard computers. And it certainly shouldn't cost much for manufacturers,
who are constantly upgrading their products to stay competitive.

And I'd say there's a wee bit of a difference between looking down AND back,
away from the direction of travel (and oncoming bikes, cars, trucks,
potholes, etc.), and looking down and slightly forward, where peripheral
vision keeps you relatively safe.

--
Kovie
zen


"David L. Johnson" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 04:12:32 +0000, Kovie wrote:

Seems to me that if your computer already has a cadence sensor and
capability (mine does), it would be a relatively simple matter to add to
it
the ability to calculate and display which gears one was in (so long as
there was a way to input the number of teeth on the front and rear gears,
the way you currently have to input the wheel circumference).

Well, there was a computer that did this in reverse. Some Shimano Flight
deck (I think that was the name) computers would tie into the STI
shifters, so they knew what gear you were in, would then take the gear and
speed and give you a "virtual" cadence. It didn't know when you were
coasting, though, so required some interpretation.

But modern bikes have so many crossover gears that it could never really
tell you what gears you were in from the cadence and the speed. It could
tell you the gear size easily enough, but would have to guess what
chainring you were in.


But it would be nice
to be able to know which gear I was in without having look look down.

I hasten to point out that, in order to read the computer you have to look
down, as well.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored
_`\(,_ | by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." --Ralph Waldo
(_)/ (_) | Emerson

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" wrote in message
oups.com...


Kovie wrote:

Kovie wrote:

I like the feature on Campy's Ergo computer that tells you which
gear
combo you're in, but don't think it's anywhere near worth the
triple-digit price tag (for my needs and budget at least). I already
have a pretty decent computer (CatEye Astrale) that has just about
every feature I want and need, except for this one. I was wondering
if anyone made a cheaper version of the Ergo that had this feature?





There seems to be a certain anti-tech "old school" purist ethos going on
in
this ng. Take a look at some of the responses I've gotten to my request
for
recommendations on hydration packs in a recent thread I started. I try to
ignore it. My take is if it helps you do what you like to do, increases
safety, and solves a problem or two, I'm all for it, even if they never
had
'em in the good 'ole days.

Don't discount some of these completely. There is a certain
gadget-mindedness in today's cycling gear and a lot of the stuff that
is around now is just plain silly. A lot of people here have a lot of
miles on a bici, and some of thier suggestions, altho low tech, may be
worthwhile.

No argument on the "some". Although I appreciate and welcome innovations
that serve a real and worthwhile purpose, I'm no fan of gadgets that add
weight and complexity with little to no real added value. Sometimes the old
and tested way works, and sometimes new's better. How many high-mileage
cyclists still use down-tube shifters, excepting vintage bikes of course?
Some, but not that many, I'd say (you own a bike shop so you'd know better
than me, of course). How many still use heavy leather saddles? Again, except
for vintage bikes, not many, I'd guess. Same goes for toe clips, freewheels,
clamp-on bottle cages, etc. But how many have automatic shifting? Not many,
either, because it's an "innovation" that generally doesn't make sense for
road bikes, as it adds weight and complexity without much value. Depends on
the device, how useful it is, and how well-made it is. I was just making a
point that "old for old's sake" doesn't make sense to me.

--
Kovie
zen

I hate having to look back at my gears to tell which one I'm in, and I
agree
that it's often unsafe, and in any case hard to do with a 10-cog
cassette.
This isn't one of those devices that creates as many problems as it
solves,
or is just plain silly and unnecessary. I think it serves a perfectly
valid,
and possibly safety-enhancing, purpose, while not requiring any
modifications or additions to one's setup.

As for your suggestion, I have a Campy setup, so I'm not sure this would
work. But I still think that adapting a computer to do this makes the
most
sense. With cadence it would have all the information it needs to
calculate
this, and display either gear-units or actual gears.


As for your answer-since ERGO brsin uses a mechanical attachment inside
the lever, I don't see how another computer could be adapted. If you
want a visual dfisp[lay of gear selection, it's ERGO brain for Campag,
Flightdeck for shimano.

See my posts about how this shouldn't really require any mechanical parts or
modifications. It's all in the math. I could probably write a program to do
this in an hour, provided the necessary numbers (wheel circumference & rpm,
cadence & gear teeth).

--
Kovie
zen

On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 07:58:36 GMT, "Kovie"
wrote:



Hi, maybe you could adapt a Shimano optical indicator to your needs. I
use the 9-speed version with my DA shifters.
Here is what I am thinking. If they make a 10-speed version, all the
better, but either way, overall travel should be the same, so the
9-speed would work. You would have to redo your handlebar tape, to
expose part of the cable, where you would insert the indicator. There
you have it.

I don't like looking down to the rear. I don't mind glancing at the
chainrings. And with 9-10 rear cogs, it is hard to tell what gear you
are in anyway. Looking down isn't very safe and often when you would
like to know what gear you are in, is at times, when safety is an
issue.


Life is Good!
Jeff



As for your suggestion, I have a Campy setup, so I'm not sure this would
work. But I still think that adapting a computer to do this makes the most
sense. With cadence it would have all the information it needs to calculate
this, and display either gear-units or actual gears.

Hi, I just checked Shimano's technical website. They do make a
10-speed optical indicator. Are you familiar with them?
Like I said, you would have to expose a section of your shift cable,
along the handlebar. I would bet that it would work.

Now, from reading your other posts, it seems to me that you want a
computer solution. Well, then the obvious solution is to pay the bucks
and get the Ergo brain. I have a Cateye Astrale which is a nice
computer, but you probably aren't going to adapt anything to it, for
less money than the Campy Ergo.

So, I guess it boils down to, do you want a solution, or do you just
want to speculate?


Life is Good!
Jeff

"Jeff Starr" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 07:58:36 GMT, "Kovie"
wrote:



Hi, maybe you could adapt a Shimano optical indicator to your needs. I
use the 9-speed version with my DA shifters.
Here is what I am thinking. If they make a 10-speed version, all the
better, but either way, overall travel should be the same, so the
9-speed would work. You would have to redo your handlebar tape, to
expose part of the cable, where you would insert the indicator. There
you have it.

I don't like looking down to the rear. I don't mind glancing at the
chainrings. And with 9-10 rear cogs, it is hard to tell what gear you
are in anyway. Looking down isn't very safe and often when you would
like to know what gear you are in, is at times, when safety is an
issue.


Life is Good!
Jeff



As for your suggestion, I have a Campy setup, so I'm not sure this would
work. But I still think that adapting a computer to do this makes the most
sense. With cadence it would have all the information it needs to
calculate
this, and display either gear-units or actual gears.

Hi, I just checked Shimano's technical website. They do make a
10-speed optical indicator. Are you familiar with them?


As I've explained several times, I have a Campy setup so I don't think this
would be compatible. And even if it were, as you correctly surmise below,
and I thought I made pretty clear, I do want a purely computer solution,
without any mechanical modifications or additions, and which I think is
completely feasible. And so far no one's explained why it isn't.

Like I said, you would have to expose a section of your shift cable,
along the handlebar. I would bet that it would work.

Now, from reading your other posts, it seems to me that you want a
computer solution. Well, then the obvious solution is to pay the bucks
and get the Ergo brain. I have a Cateye Astrale which is a nice
computer, but you probably aren't going to adapt anything to it, for
less money than the Campy Ergo.

So, I guess it boils down to, do you want a solution, or do you just
want to speculate?


Life is Good!
Jeff

Sometimes it feels like I'm talking to myself. There's no way that the Ergo
is worth $150 for what it does. It doesn't have heart rate, power or any
other fancy features. Campy's charging a premium for it because there's no
competition and there are people rich or foolish enough to pay this much for
it. I see no reason at all for why a competitor couldn't come out with a
similar computer for half the price or less, with the same features. If you
or others don't agree, tell me why, specifically, this can't or won't be
done, instead of telling me to put up or shut up (in so many words). Where
the tendency to knock down others' ideas without explaining why they're
unworkable comes from eludes me.

--
Kovie
zen

Quoting Kovie :
weight and complexity with little to no real added value. Sometimes the old
and tested way works, and sometimes new's better. How many high-mileage
cyclists still use down-tube shifters, excepting vintage bikes of course?

A lot of them use bar-end shifters which are pretty old and tested.

than me, of course). How many still use heavy leather saddles? Again, except
for vintage bikes, not many, I'd guess.

I estimate at least 1/3 of British touring cyclists use Brookses. They may
be heavy (except when compared to the weight of the rider) but they're
comfortable. I did the End to End on a Brooks B-17 Narrow - am I going to
save 300 grams to change it for some unknown lump of plastic? I think not.
--
David Damerell flcl?
Today is Epithumia, Presuary - a weekend.