Cadence meter - Garmin 305 Forerunner add on OR New computer

Spins

I currently have a cateye strada wireless computer on my bike. I use a Forerunner 305 HRM and have an attachment for it on my bike for multisports. I was thinking of getting the cadence meter add on but noted that it is actually dearer than some of the computers available at the moment. Should i ditch my cateye strada and get a new computer with cadence OR should I get the Forerunner 305 add on so that I can use Multisport facility?
Thoughts please....

scottreynolds

Spins wrote: »

I currently have a cateye strada wireless computer on my bike. I use a Forerunner 305 HRM and have an attachment for it on my bike for multisports. I was thinking of getting the cadence meter add on but noted that it is actually dearer than some of the computers available at the moment. Should i ditch my cateye strada and get a new computer with cadence OR should I get the Forerunner 305 add on so that I can use Multisport facility?
Thoughts please....

305 option. HR, Cadence, and GPS is pretty much all you need.

Manone

Add on as you can upload with the rest of your data.

There are additional bits with a new computer, unless you want a second opinion of your stats and more real time speed readings as GPS does lag.

blorg

I'd get the add-on for the Forerunner, you might just squeeze a computer that does cadence cheaper (although not much cheaper) but it wouldn't do all the data logging.

Note you can use the Forerunner on the bike without the cadence sensor, I am not sure how critical cadence is (although I will admit to having the sensor on three bikes )

Lumen

I have a 705, and have considered taking off the cadence sensor to save weight/ugliness.

Occasionally I get bored on the bike and look at the number, but counting pedal cycles against the clock would pass the time just as well.

Unless you have a specific cadence goal, I don't really see the point TBH.

Spins

I was kinda thinking along the same lines as you Lumen, but then I was told that it can be good specifically for triathlon, which over an olypmic distance is effectively a 40km timetrial if flat.
I'm being a bit of a poser really I suppose as I had sort of decided i was going to get one anyway and was just wondering whether the 305 one was ugly/heavier than others on the market?
From what I'm reading tho, I think I might go with the 305 one, unless any subsequent posts change my mind....
Thanks so far tho...

blorg

Lumen wrote: »

I have a 705, and have considered taking off the cadence sensor to save weight/ugliness.

Lumen

blorg wrote: »

Yeah, OK, that's a bit of a stretch.

But the cadence sensor keeps slipping on the crank, and gets in the way when I swap pedals. And it does look ugly.

Maybe I should ask tunney if the SRM cranks have an integrated cadence sensor. I'm not sure I can really afford to know the answer though.

scottreynolds

I love my cadence sensor for the reason tunney mentioned above. I can get a better idea of an optimal cadence certainly while climbing but also when spinning home to flush the muscles.

Lumen wrote: »

I have a 705, and have considered taking off the cadence sensor to save weight/ugliness.

My bike asked me to get off it the other day for exactly the same reasons.

Lumen

scottreynolds wrote: »

I love my cadence sensor for the reason tunney mentioned above. I can get a better idea of an optimal cadence certainly while climbing but also when spinning home to flush the muscles.

I thought you'd agreed that high cadence was good, and low cadence was good, and optimal cadence was good.

So what's the big deal with knowing the number?

scottreynolds

Lumen wrote: »

I thought you'd agreed that high cadence was good, and low cadence was good, and optimal cadence was good.

So what's the big deal with knowing the number?

training at hc / lc is good but I like riding as much as possible between 85-95 and around 60-75 up hill....

besides I really like numbers -- I just need a power meter now.