Garmin Edge 800 Test

Many riders who wants to get a new bikecomputer with inbuild GPS, so they can track their own route and plan new routes before their rides, will be looking at a Garmin Edge. They come in three different series. The 200 series, the 500 series, and the 800 series. The 800 series is the Rolls Royce of the bike GPS’s out there, coming in at the price of around 400 euro’s, including speed/cadencesensor, heartbeatsensor and a map of the area you live in (continent, etc.). The Garmin Edge 800 is probably the best you can get, and many buys the 800 when they are switching their standard bikecomputer out with a GPS-based bikecomputer.

Installation

The installation is easy. The holder for the Edge 800 unit is installed within a minute, just needs 2 rubberbands (not the normal ones, but some much stronger). It’s really functional. If you want to take the Edge 800 off it, you just turn it 90 degrees to the side, and it can be released. Same thing then you want to put it back on. The speed/cadencesensor just need two strips before it’s on place. Remember to use a bit of tape so the strips will not damage the paint of your bike, when tightened and in use. Of course remember to make sure it’s tight. Once that is done, it will sit perfectly. Also there will follow a bit of tape that will be used for the magnet to sit on the crank to measure your cadence. There will also be a magnet to measure the speed, if the GPS will fail, like under a bridge, can sit on a single spoke on the wheel, like a normal magnet for any other bikecomputer.

On the road

It works just as expected. You start it up, wait for the GPS-signal, and then it is ready to go. That can take everything from 15 seconds to 3-4 minutes on a bad day. I guess it depends on where you live, as well as the placements of the satellites. You can always just turn it on, put your bike outside, and then get your helmet and such things on, and it will probably be ready to go then you are. However, once it has a signal, it really holds that signal until the end. I have been riding under small bridges (100-200 meters), and it would still keep the signal. I can also get a signal with it, if I take it into my house, after training. The weight of it is about the same as a normal smartphone.

Many people will probably be asking about the battery of the Edge 800. But it won’t be a problem in your everyday training or normal races. I have used it for a race that lasted about 8-9 hours, and there was still 43% capacity left on the battery. Therefore, unless you are doing the Race Across America, or some 24 hour race, it will be just fine.

It tracks the speed just fine. There is the standard lag in acceleration as any other bikecomputer, but the GPS along with the speedsensor on the spokes, will calibrate to make your distance and speed more realistic than a normal speedsensor (probably only like 30 meters over 100 km difference). The size of it is acceptable. It can fit on the stem, but do not go on buying very short stems, because that can maybe give you an issue. There are alternatives of course, so you can place it on other parts than the stem.

The cadence- and heartbeatsensor

The cadencesensor, which is the same unit as the speedsensor, works just fine. I cant seem to make it give a weird result. It just always shows values that are believeable. And the connection from the sensor to the Edge 800 isn’t a problem neither.

The heartbeatsensor seemed nice in the start too. It was more comfortable than I expected, and just as importantly, it was really useful for optimizing your training. It will also help you get to know your body better for races, so you know how much you can push throughout a race. With it, you can also train after your pulse, and the different pulsezones there is, which will make your training much more effective. For me, it needed to be soaked a little with ordinary water, before it worked. Else, it would start working about 8-10 minutes into my training, due to sweat.
After 2 months though, it began giving me problems. It suddenly told me I had a pulse of 40 when having something that would be more like 170 bpm. I tried switching batteries in the sensor, but did not help anything. I have searched a little, and it does seem that I’m not the only one having this problem. Many has bought a Polar pulsebelt and then used the Garmin sensor along with it, and for them, that combination works just fine. I have not had the money to do that, so I have been riding without that the past 11 months now.

Endless possibilities

The software of the Edge 800 works great. It is simple but still gives a lot of information. You can make many different pages on it, which you can switch between. You can also make the pages just as you want it them be. Everything from map, altitude, map, and a page where you can get up to 8 different information’s shown on the same time. So you will always be sure to have the information’s you want to have, at the same time.

After your trip, you can upload the file your Edge created from your training to different sites, where you can see how the race/training went. You can read about some of the different sites tested by me, if you click here.

The verdict

Is it worth the price? Well, that depends on what you want your bikecomputer to do. If you want to add and see routes, and be able to get more out of your training, I will certainly say that this is a great buy then. But if you just need to see your speed and distance, then go for a standard 30 euro bikecomputer. If you do not have 400 euro’s or wants to put 400 euro’s after a bikecomputer, the Edge 200 and 500 will be cheaper but also good solutions for that then. The 200 does not have a map inserted in it, so if you want to see routes while on your bike, the 500 is the cheapest you can get. There are other alternatives than Garmin too though, like Bryton.

But as a package, you get a much funnier training with the Garmin Edge 800. At least if you are an analytic freak, it will be very fun to see how you perform in different aspects. The heartbeatsensor did not work for me, but for 9 out of 10, it does, and for those, it can help optimizing the training quite a bit.

One thing I am sure of, is, that I never regretted buying it. I absolutely love it, and all the functions it comes with. So if you want the best, and/or wants to get more out of your training, the Garmin Edge 800 is a sure thing on the “to buy”-list. 

Written by René

Read more: http://cyclingtipsonline.com/news/garmin-edge-800-review/

Mavic Cosmic Elite Test

Mavic is a very wellknown producer of strong and high quality wheels. I have been riding on their budgetwheels known as Cosmic Elite Clincher, which came with my 2012 Scott Foil. A 30 mm profile wheelset, that is fine for the everyday ride, and for the riders who don’t want to spend much money on what is “just a pair of wheels”. They come in at around 1770 grams per set, which makes them a bit high in the weight, but at the price of around 300 euro per set, what to expect?

On the road

So, how do they feel on the road? Well, they feel better than they on paper should feel. Somehow, the weight does not feel that big. The acceleration is rather okay, especially when taking the price and weight into account. Of course, there is a big list of wheels better suited for a lighter and better acceleration, but these will do that just fine.
Aerodynamicwise, they do not seem to get much worse than other wheels when the speeds grows above 40-50 km/h. That is mostly because of aerodynamic spokes. Spokes that also are very stiff. I have not felt any flex in the wheels yet, so they are doing that job very well.

One bad thing I have to point out about them is, that I tried doing a test, where I had the Cosmic Elite and a pair of very cheap Alex Rims, and tried to see, which of the rearwheels would spin for the longest time if I started them at the same time. I was very surprised to see that the Alex Rims actually rolled for a longer time. Of course they weigh a bit more (2 kg per set), but I would have expected the hubs to be off a better quality than expected. They do not feel that bad on the road, but I must say that there is a mile in difference between these, and wheels like Shimano C35 Dura Ace wheels, when it comes to maintaining speed. Those wheels are twice as expensive, so that is of course expected, but so would I have thought about the 100 euro Alex Rims, where they actually seems to be better at maintaining speed than the Cosmic Elite. But, let’s remember, that it’s the legs that has to do the talk. Therefore, a good rider on these will still kick the ass of a normal rider on a pair of Lightweight Obermeyer.

And let’s be fair, these wheels were never meant for racing anyway, but as the everyday training wheel that has to deal with all the torture a rider can give them, and still don’t fail on you. For this purpose, they are doing the job as they should. Better than expected actually. They are very VERY solid. I have been getting some beating that none of my other wheels has gone through, but they are still straight as the first day I got them. Mavics wheels are just somewhat indestructible, so if you want very strong trainingwheels, the Cosmic Elite is a winner.

The verdict

The Mavic Cosmic Elite Clincher wheels are perfect for everyday training, and/or for the rider that wants a wheelset that just does not break when it gets tortured. It will be your very best friend on a harsh ride on cobbles, and bad roads. The hubs are not as good as expected, but that is more or less the only downside on this wheelset. They are a rocksolid, overall decent performing wheelset, for a very good price. Therefore, if you are looking for a cheap longlasting wheelset, this is definitely a good choice.

Written by René

Read more: http://cyclingtipsonline.com/news/mavic-cosmic-elite-clincher-review/

Shimano Dura Ace C35 Test

Shimano is not just a company that makes gears for bikes. No, they also make other stuff, such as wheels, which is what we are looking at here. Shimano produces a few different wheels. C24, C35, and C50. The numbers behind the C’s are how deep the rim is. C24 is 24 mm deep, and a lowprofile, C50 is a highprofile with an 50 mm deep section. I have been testing the 2012 Shimano C35 Dura Ace Clincher wheels, the top allround wheels they produce. They are not as aero as the C50, but not as as heavy either. On the other hand, they are more aero than the C24, but also heavier. So if you riding in different terrain, the C35 would be a good choice. I can compare this wheel to Alex Rims and Mavic Cosmic Elite.

The Shimano Dura Ace wheels are known as very good value for money. For less than 900 euro you can get wheels that achieve almost the same as wheels costing more than twice as much. The quality is also one of Shimano’s big plusses, since they always make their products amongst the best in quality. The Shimano C35 wheels I am testing are a version older than the ones being sold now. The 9000-series is a bit lighter and stiffer than the 7900 I am testing. The clincher version of the 7900 C35 Dura Ace wheels I am testing, comes in at around 1630 grams per set. That’s a little high weight, but as Shimano states, the most of the weight is located in the hub, that is made out of titanium, so it is easier to accelerate up, than the weight would make you believe. And that is believable, since the outer part of the rim is in lightweight carbon, and the spokes are in steel. So they are pretty solid too, actually they don’t have any weightlimit on them, that’s how much Shimano believes in them. The Dura Ace hubs, are also known as really really good. But more about that later.

On the road

I have been riding these wheels for a year so far now, and I have only been hugely satisfied with them. Still today, they are straight when I spin them round. And I have been beating them on some pretty tough cobblestones, so its not like they have had an easy life. Compared to Mavic Cosmic Elite, they role a lot better. The hubs are just soooo smooth. Actually the hubs are so good, that I am outrolling a friend of mine on his 2-3 times more expensive Zipp 404, if we both stop pedaling, and just let the bikes roll. That’s how good the hubs of the Shimano wheels are!

The acceleration of them are good too. I feel a lot faster accelerating on the C35’s than any of the other wheels I have been riding on so far. That being said, I definitely can feel, that there seems to be lighter wheels out there, and if you want to do good at criteriums or mountainclimbings, the C24, or other lighter wheels, would probably be a better choice, while for a time trial, the higher profile rims would be better. But these wheels doesn’t seem to be the worst in any case, nor the best. They are just making sure, that you are not the one having the worst wheels for any condition.

When it comes to the aerodynamics, they feel good at keeping higher speeds, but there are of course better choices, if that is what you are doing all the time. In rough crosswinds, the 35 mm profile is deep enough to make you sway a little bit from side to side. Well at least for me, but since I weigh in at around 65 kg, I am far from being a heavy rider, and therefore the heavier riders may or may not, feel this in crosswind.

In sprints, they are stiff enough for me at least. It does not feel like they are about to hit the brakepads when im accelerating heavy on them, which some other wheels tends to do. The hightension spokes of the wheels are doing a great job keep them straight, even when stressed out. But of course, I am a lightweight rider, so if Cancellara took them out for a trip, they could maybe not be stiff enough for a guy like him. But is there any wheels that would be that? I doubt that.

The verdict

I sadly have no more expensive wheel to compare them with myself, but they are by far the best of the wheels I have tried so far, when it comes to acceleration, hubs, and aerodynamics. So if you want a pair of allround wheels, the Shimano Dura Ace C35 are a really great choice. Especially if you can’t afford more expensive wheels. But as I mentioned, they are at some points, like the hubs, better than the more expensive wheels, so you are getting great value for your money.

Written by René

Read more: http://cyclingtipsonline.com/news/scott-foil-10-test/

Scott Speedster S20 Test

The Scott Speedster is the Swiss-based company Scott Sports aluminium frame for roadbikes. It has been in the market for quite some years, but is still known as one of the better aluminiumframes on the market. The tested model is the 2010 Speedster S20, with full Shimano 105, apart from the rear deraillur being Ultegra. The fork and seatpost are both made in carbon, so it is quite comfortable compared to the pure aluminiumbikes. The weight comes in at 8,9 kg wich doesn’t make it the lightestdefinitely not heaviest aluminiumbike out there. The tested model had a 34-49 crank and a 11-25 cassette.

First off, the frame is looking quite good in this 2010 silver layout. I paid roughly 1000 euro for it, and for that price, I got a pretty decent bike. The wheels are some lowbudget Alex Rims wheels, that weighs about 2kg per set, but they are, as stated before, rocksolid. I have been beating them up, and they are steady as new. In addition, they actually roll pretty well. I tried to compare them with some more expensive Mavic Cosmic Elite wheels, and the Alex Rims, were rolling better than the Mavics!
The Shimano 105/Ultegra combination makes it’s a good value for money too, and all around the bike, you can be sure, that they haven’t given it anything poor and cheap products, like some few other bikes at this pricerange sometimes get.

On the road

But how is it on the road? Well, you can feel it is an aluminiumframe, and not a carbonframe, by the comfort of it. It does not take bumps as good as a carbonframe, but as an aluminiumframe, it is doing the job decently. The Alex Rims are a pain to accelerate up, if you are used to some lighter wheels, but once they are up in speed, they maintain it better than the lighter wheels, because of the increased inertia. So for a time trial, they would actually do the job better than similar lowprofile wheels, that are lighter. But for any sprints or normal racing, they are just too heavy. But rocksolid, so as trainingwheels, they would be great, unless you of course wants just a little lighter wheels.

So The wheels makes the bike feel a bit heavy in accelerating, but else, it feels like a good ride. You are not tired after 100 km on it, and you do not feel sore in your butt or arms after such a trip, so the comfort is fine for me at least. The finish of the bike is great, and the paint does not have any flaws in it. The stiffness of the frame was not any problem neither. It did not seem to flex at least when I was sprinting, but I am a hiller/climber type, so I cannot speak for the heavier types, who can put more power in the pedals. Compared to a more expensive Scott Foil-carbonframe, it feels just as stiff when sprinting for me, and I guess anyone else would say the same.
The gears shifts fine. Shimano 105 and Ultegra are probably the best value for money you can get, when it comes to the Shimano-series, so I do not have anything bad to put on that either.

The verdict

Overall, we have to remember that this bike is a semi expensive entrylevel bike, and not ment for competitive racing. If you want to use it for racing, you will need new wheels at least. But as the standard bikerider who rides for fun and for the execercise, this bike will do the job absolutely fine. With different wheels, the frame is definitely good enough for racing. Not in the highest levels, but as for low- and mediumlevel racing, the frame is just decent enough for that. So, if I were gonna buy my first roadbike, or just wanted a new aluminiumracer, would I buy this one? Sure, it does not go down on quality anywhere and the weight of the wheels are more or less the only thing bad I can point out on it.

Written by René

Read more: http://cyclingtipsonline.com/news/scott-speedster-s20-review/

Scott Foil 40 Test

The Scott Foil, the first aeroframe from the Swiss brand Scott Sports, developed in corporation with Mark Cavendish back when he rode for HTC-Highroad, along with the Mercedes F1 team, to develop what Scott calls the “The only aeroframe on the market that is both as light and as stiff as a normal frame”. A bike now used by Simon Gerrans and the rest of the Orica-GreenEDGE team, amongst others. I have had the opportunity to be riding both the topframe Foil 10 (2013), but also the more affordable frame Foil 40 (2012). This one is gonna focus on the Foil 40, while the Foil 10 review can be found here

Aeroframes for roadbikes has become the new black in cyclingregi, and all brands with respect for themselves, have developed their own aeroframes. Cervelo got their S2 and S5, Specialized got their Venge, and Scott got their Foil.
The Foil though, is quite different from the others. While the other manufactures has kept their normal standard topframes, Scott skipped the Addict-frame totally, because the Foil was both more aerodynamic, but also stiffer and even lighter than the Addict. A combination only the Foil have managed to do, while the other aeroframes has been slightly less stiffer along with being heavier than the other companies other topframes. Scott has since then entered a new version of their Addict to the market, but for 2 years, the Foil was the undisputed top racingframe from this Swizz brand.

So, is it aero? Well, according to Scott themselves, it would, compared to nonaeroframes, save you somewhat 15 watts doing 40 km/h. It is not as aerodynamic as a Cervelo S5 and a Specialized Venge, according to the aerotest performed by the Velo Magazine in a windtunnel, but it is stiffer, and therefore better suited in the sprints and climbings than other aeroframes. So for a flat road, being in a break away, an S5 or Venge would be the better choice, but as an overall frame, the Scott Foil is, on paper, the best aeroframe out there.

On the road

But what about it on the road. Is it fast? The short answer is, yes. It does feel faster than a standard frame. First time I took it out for a ride (38 km route I usually do when it comes to short rides), I set a new personal record, beating my previous record by 1½ minute. But the real thing that amazed me, was that, I felt a lot faster in was the crosswinds. Somehow I felt and still feels, that it’s like just almost as fast in crosswinds as in tailwind. In headwinds, the drag also feels reduced. Im pretty sure, that im doing a gear or 2 greater than then using a standard nonaeroframe. Suddenly, headwind doesn’t feel that bad as I used to think of it before. I would love to try an S5 in headwind, if it, on paper, is saving you twice the amount of Watts as a Foil, because I am sure I would be feeling like flying then.

A thing that I noticed pretty fast was, that the seatpost is costummade, and only suits the Foil. The adjusting of the hight of the seatpost is done inside the frame too, where other frames usually have that done above the frame. It is details like this, that makes the Foil feel special and looking aerodyamic while standing still.

It does also feel very very light. The topframe Foil 10, using HMX-carbonfibre, weighs in at around 850 grams for a size medium (54), while the other cheaper versions of the Foil (like the 20, 30, 40), using HMF-carbonfibre, comes in at around 920 grams for a medium. So it is even one of the lighter frames out there, while being aerodynamic. And the lightness can be felt when climbing hills, at least compared to a Scott Speedster aluminiumframe. The great stiffness comes to a nice help here too though. It does not seem to flex at all when sprinting. But I am more a Contador than a Cancellara, so I have no idea about the flexing if a stronger guy was riding it. But as the Velo Magazine could tell, it was the stiffest bike in the test. So stiff actually, that Mark Cavendish originally complained about the bike being too stiff (Too stiff for a sprinter? Must be a firsttimer), and other reviews have stated the same. But I personally, doesn’t think it’s too stiff. It’s not comfortable as other carbonframes, but it’s still more comfortable than several aluminiumframes out there.

As stated in the start, I have tried both the frame with the fancier HMX-fibres and the cheaper version with the HMF-fibres. The difference between them is, well, I don’t really know if there is any. On paper the more expensive Foil 10 is 70 grams lighter, but hey, that’s 1 sip of water less in your bottle, and you have saved that as well. So if you ask me, it is more like a gimmick to get the Foil 10, than the other 1500$ cheaper Foil’s you can buy. It will always give a little extra when stating, “I have the best Foil out there”, instead of “I got the cheaper frame”, but in the end, you can’t feel a difference at all. And remember, it is always the legs that has to do the talk. So if I were you, I would save those 1500 dollars, and spend them on some nice wheels. If you are lucky, you can probably find some Zipp 404’s out there somewhere for those money.

Should you buy it?

Is it the aeroframe to buy? Well, as I stated before, there are some frames that will save you more Watts in the wind, but if you want a frame that is just as light and stiff as a normal frame, there is no denying, that the Foil is the only choice for you. So, if you live and race on flat roads with a  lot of wind, another frame like the Venge or S5 would be better suited for you. But if you are planning to get a frame that can get you up a steep hill or long mountain just as fast and easy as a standard frame, along with saving you energy on the flat parts, the Foil will be the number 1 choice for you. It’s a great frame, with a very good finish, so it would be a great choice for anybody needing a new frame to win their races in.

Written by René

Read more: http://cyclingtipsonline.com/news/scott-foil-10-and-40-review/