Apple Watch for cycling

[8CoreWhore]

For me, a watch snug on my wrist while cycling is far more uncomfortable than a chest strap. I don't know what strap you had but mine is cloth and attaches with a single hook. It's Polar's Bluetooth model. Easy and comfortable.

So, what will the watch add to your cycling experience?

Plus - it remains to be seen if the Watch HRM is accurate. I suspect it is, but we can't be certain until it's tested against ones that we know to be good. Polar is accurate, so we'll see.

I sure hope it doesn't have to be worn super tight just to be accurate.

 

[Cashmonee]

I am not sure what type of cycling you do, but many of my longer rides would end up draining the battery on both my iPhone and the watch. Also, my speed/cadence sensors are ANT+, so I would need to replace those to pair them with the iPhone. Lastly, I need instant data, especially heart rate, time, and cadence, and currently the Watch would have a hard time reliably displaying those due to lack of apps at the moment (that should change quickly) and, again, battery life. I also am curious how the screen would do in direct sunlight. Maybe in a generation or two it can be on par with a tri watch, but I don't believe it is now.

I keep coming to the same conclusion with the Watch and fitness. If you are looking for a glorified step counter, it is fine, maybe even fantastic. As a replacement for a Garmin fenix, 920XT, 810, 510, 500, etc., I think it has a ways to go before it is a real contender for those who would be interested in those devices. In my opinion, the Watch is a fashion-focused smartwatch that happens to have some fitness features.

----------

I sure hope it doesn't have to be worn super tight just to be accurate.

The optical HRM to this point have required a tight fit to be accurate. Even then, the accuracy varies.

EDIT: Another thought. No mounting system means you can't always get the information you may need when you need it.

 

[rhyme]

I am not sure what type of cycling you do, but many of my longer rides would end up draining the battery on both my iPhone and the watch.

Yes, I admit this is a concern for me, too. It doesn't take an especially long ride to exhaust the phone battery with GPS turned on. For my purposes, location services are usually sufficient, and let me run the phone all day. If the watch face is always on while exercising, then it won't be any good for fitness purposes (45 minute battery life that way), but if it it is only switching the face on when you turn your wrist to look, and is only sensing heartrate for a few seconds every five minutes (as I have heard someone say), then it shouldn't be an issue.

 

[Cashmonee]

Yes, I admit this is a concern for me, too. It doesn't take an especially long ride to exhaust the phone battery with GPS turned on. For my purposes, location services are usually sufficient, and let me run the phone all day. If the watch face is always on while exercising, then it won't be any good for fitness purposes (45 minute battery life that way), but if it it is only switching the face on when you turn your wrist to look, and is only sensing heartrate for a few seconds every five minutes (as I have heard someone say), then it shouldn't be an issue.

I could see that. Again, it comes down to what you need the data for. If it is for post ride information or general in this heart rate range, then it may be ok. If I need to keep a close eye on any of that data, then the screen will need to be on and the watch will need to be mounted. Drains battery and means wearing a heart rate strap which is part of the appeal of the watch. Casual use, sure. If you are training for something, it probably won't cut it, and you would be better served with a $200 (cheaper if you look) Edge 500.

 

[Mr. Buzzcut]

I could see that. Again, it comes down to what you need the data for. If it is for post ride information or general in this heart rate range, then it may be ok. If I need to keep a close eye on any of that data, then the screen will need to be on and the watch will need to be mounted. Drains battery and means wearing a heart rate strap which is part of the appeal of the watch. Casual use, sure. If you are training for something, it probably won't cut it, and you would be better served with a $200 (cheaper if you look) Edge 500.

Yep but if you don't want another device laying around you can get a battery pack for the phone. All depends on how serious you are. The Garmin is feather light and compact. All trade offs.

 

[KauaiBruce]

rowing was definitely in the workout app too that tim cook showed during the keynote.

thanks

 

[Vundu]

I am not sure what type of cycling you do, but many of my longer rides would end up draining the battery on both my iPhone and the watch. Also, my speed/cadence sensors are ANT+, so I would need to replace those to pair them with the iPhone. Lastly, I need instant data, especially heart rate, time, and cadence, and currently the Watch would have a hard time reliably displaying those due to lack of apps at the moment (that should change quickly) and, again, battery life. I also am curious how the screen would do in direct sunlight. Maybe in a generation or two it can be on par with a tri watch, but I don't believe it is now.

I keep coming to the same conclusion with the Watch and fitness. If you are looking for a glorified step counter, it is fine, maybe even fantastic. As a replacement for a Garmin fenix, 920XT, 810, 510, 500, etc., I think it has a ways to go before it is a real contender for those who would be interested in those devices. In my opinion, the Watch is a fashion-focused smartwatch that happens to have some fitness features.

----------



The optical HRM to this point have required a tight fit to be accurate. Even then, the accuracy varies.

EDIT: Another thought. No mounting system means you can't always get the information you may need when you need it.

The Strava app is ready to roll.

 

[fitshaced]

I got a Fenix 3 recently and am finding the garmin connect app work very seemlessly with the IOS health app. It didn't do that with the Fenix 2 and I had to use Strava as a source.

The Fenix is more accurate that the iPhone. I turned off the motion activity tracking on the iPhone and am purely using the Fenix now. With always on Bluetooth connection, it updates Health straight away and doesn't have as many very short segments of activity such as .01k, .01k, .01k etc. It obviously also updates any runs, cycling, swimming etc into Health.

Health is good for the weekly graph but it's really useless for anything else. You get proper reporting and other tools on Garmin connect. Maybe Apple will develop Health to be of the same functionality but right now it's really no good.

 

[Cashmonee]

The Strava app is ready to roll.

Unfortunately, it doesn't have access to the watches sensors. Also, as best as I can tell, the Strava watch app is more based on telling you where a segment is and post ride info, not so much instant data, such as speed, cadence, heart rate, and power.

Again, it really depends on what you are trying to get out of cycling. If you are just going out to enjoy a shorter duration ride and want some occasional stats along the way with a nice post-ride report, the Watch/iPhone combo may work for you. However, if you are talking long rides, or rides where you are training with a purpose, you will want a handlebar mounted device with instant stats such as cadence, speed, heart rate, and possibly power, that doesn't require carrying a heavy extra battery pack.

The Watch is really not meant for involved training. It really is a casual fitness device from what I have seen thus far. Of course, with time that could all change. It would need to be more waterproof that it currently is, be mountable, allow third party access to all of the sensors, and the screen would need to be legible in bright sun. If you are talking endurance, the battery life would need to increase dramatically. All of this is really not a knock. It is just about understanding its capabilities and limitations.

 

[zacheryjensen]

My take on Apple Watch for cycling as a regular cyclist (no pro or anything but here's my strava) is as follows:

I don't think it will do anything to compete with a dedicated cycling computer like my Garmin Edge 810. I already distrust my phone for reliable recording as even when Strava is not being crashy, other things going on with the phone can cause problems. Besides other apps causing a crash or general instability from recent updates or similar, phones are poor GPS devices that can be totally distracted by a misidentified wi-fi signal.

Furthermore, the watch will probably be pretty good at taking occasional heart rates, but, if you don't clamp it tight to your wrist, it is going to be very inaccurate over a range of time. I already use a wrist based HR monitor with great success (Mio Link) but it only works well if you fit it properly which is a little tighter than I'd ever wear a regular watch. It is only possible to get this proper fit because the band is quite stretchy. *MAYBE* the sport band will be similarly stretchy and this will not be an issue as much there, but, the other bands won't do at all.

However, despite using the Edge 810 for recording, Mio Link for HR, and of course my speed and cadence sensors, I still bring my phone always for a couple reasons. 1) To make calls of course. So many times I forget this is why I started carrying a phone in the first place and 2) music! Maybe the watch will have 2gb of music space but that's really not enough for me. I never know what I want to hear. I ask Siri to switch things up regularly during my ride via my LG Tone headphones. (I only wear one of them when I ride, don't panic safety nerds.)

So the biggest reason I'm looking forward to the watch in regards to cycling is for quick interactions with my phone while my phone is stowed in a pack or in my jersey pocket. Control music, see which "VIP" just emailed me, see who is calling and whether it's fine to just ignore them, and so on all without fumbling around for my phone on a bike like a moron.

That said, if I was not able to afford the Edge 810, I'd probably get some use out of the Strava watch app too since I can't use the audible notifications (they screw up music playback.)

 

[OllyW]

Furthermore, the watch will probably be pretty good at taking occasional heart rates, but, if you don't clamp it tight to your wrist, it is going to be very inaccurate over a range of time. I already use a wrist based HR monitor with great success (Mio Link) but it only works well if you fit it properly which is a little tighter than I'd ever wear a regular watch. It is only possible to get this proper fit because the band is quite stretchy. *MAYBE* the sport band will be similarly stretchy and this will not be an issue as much there, but, the other bands won't do at all.

That's one of the concerns of mine. I'm a mountain biker and you get pretty battered about on long technical downhills, so I'm not sure I could stand a tight wrist band as it could cause problems with discomfort and arm pump.

 

[millerj123]

I've used arm bands to carry iPhones while running in the past, and you can see in the promotional videos that the marathon runner did the same. They aren't all that comfortable, but they work.

I run with my phone in an arm band. I tried an Echo watch, which pairs via bluetooth, but it has to be paired right before you use it, every time. I'd love to be able to put my phone in a waist band, and just have the watch on my wrist, but it would need to reliably control start/stop of Runkeeper.

 

[Julien]

I run with my phone in an arm band. I tried an Echo watch, which pairs via bluetooth, but it has to be paired right before you use it, every time. I'd love to be able to put my phone in a waist band, and just have the watch on my wrist, but it would need to reliably control start/stop of Runkeeper.

As of now only Nike+ and Stravia are listed as coming to the Watch. I'm sure RunKeeper won't be far behind. I have and do use many different Apps (as a backup to my Garmin) and I have found Nike+ to be more accurate than RunKeeper.

 

[nebo1ss]

The watch will be able to work out you heart rate, and the iPhone will do the rest in regards to speed and gps functionality . In the gym it will work out most of the stats from your heart rate, just like the machines in the gym do.

What functionality are you after in therms of cycling?

It is a well established fact that Heart rate measured at the wrist is unreliable, most would say pretty useless. This is particularly so when exercising.
You can get a reliable heart rate at the finger tip and with a chest strap. The finter tip measurement is very accurate but impractical for exercise.

 

[8CoreWhore]

It is a well established fact that Heart rate measured at the wrist is unreliable, most would say pretty useless. This is particularly so when exercising.
You can get a reliable heart rate at the finger tip and with a chest strap. The finter tip measurement is very accurate but impractical for exercise.

I find it interesting that for the Sport version, Apple has shown people exercising with it, but as far as I know has made no claims to the usefulness of the HRM while exercising. The only time they talk about the HRM is to send someone your pulses. Hmph.

 

[BD1]

It is a well established fact that Heart rate measured at the wrist is unreliable, most would say pretty useless. This is particularly so when exercising.
You can get a reliable heart rate at the finger tip and with a chest strap. The finter tip measurement is very accurate but impractical for exercise.

The mio fuse wristband is accurate at measuring heart rate during exercise. I had one and it worked well. Returned it because I want to try the AW. So the technology for accurate HR on a wrist exists. We will see if AW can do it.

Here is a review of the mio fuse: http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2014/12/fuse-depth-review.html

 

[Cashmonee]

The mio fuse wristband is accurate at measuring heart rate during exercise. I had one and it worked well. Returned it because I want to try the AW. So the technology for accurate HR on a wrist exists. We will see if AW can do it.

Here is a review of the mio fuse: http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2014/12/fuse-depth-review.html

You are correct. There are a few wrist based monitors that are accurate, but they all need to be very tight on the wrist. Probably tighter than the Watch will be able to be. I would not count on this watch being accurate. You never know, but in this case, for activity tracking, wait for reviews and apps.