Looking at Amazon, the Wahoo RFLKT is half the price of the Wahoo RFLKT+. What practical benefits would I actually miss out on if I just went with the Wahoo RFLKT? Any pros and cons of the two different models?
-
1Be aware that Bluetooth radio waves do no penetrate the human body. Therefore, if your body is between your Bluetooth device and its sensors or receivers, you'll get no signal. I found this out the hard way when I bought a Bluetooth heart rate monitor. Since I carried my phone in my jersey pocket, it simply did not work. I had to either mount the phone on the handlebars or carry it strapped to my arm.– Carey GregoryCommented Jun 17, 2015 at 16:46
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
I have a RFLKT+ which I use with Cyclemeter. The significant differences are the altimeter and the ANT+ bridge. The reason why I bought it was so that I could use ANT+ sensors, specifically the Garmin magnet less speed and cadence sensors. The altimeter seems to be very sensitive and enables more or less real time grade display – just in case you want to know why you're miserable climbing a hill :-)
If you don't need those features, then I don't think there is a reason to by the plus version.
One other thing that I'd add is that the connection to ANT+ sensors is not as robust as I'd like. I find that I have to pay attention to the sequence in which I wake up the sensors and start the app to ensure that everything works. It seems like the sensor discovery process can take quite a while (maybe as much as a minute) which adds to the aggravation.
I'm not sure if this is a RFLKT+ thing, an ANT+ bridge thing, a Garmin thing, or a Cyclemeter thing… But if the fiddling with hardware and software isn't your thing this would be another reason to lean towards the RFLKT (the Bluetooth link seems much more robust).
-
From what I read, you only need the ANT+ bridge if you intend to use it with an iPhone or other phone that doesn't support ANT+. If you have an Android phone that supports ANT+ (not all of them do), then you can use the ANT+ features of the phone directly, and you don't have to get the RFLKT+. The only advantage left over is the altimeter, which like you say, can be somewhat useful in climbing. I have an altimeter built into my GPS, and find it surprisingly accurate. The reading will go up or down by 1m increments as I lift or lower it in my hand. No idea with how accurate the RFLKT+ is.– KibbeeCommented Jun 17, 2015 at 15:11
-
That makes sense. I didn't realize that some of the Android phones supported ANT+ directly, that's cool.– dluCommented Jun 17, 2015 at 15:15
-
@Kibbee Either your GPS has an altimeter and you didn't realize it, or your elevation data is nowhere near as accurate as you think. GPS simply cannot provide accurate elevation data because there are no satellites below it. It can be off by 10s of meters in elevation at any given point, and often is, which adds up substantially over the course of a ride. Commented Jun 17, 2015 at 16:41
-
Geographic elevation data is more accurate, but it's very coarse. You may only have a single elevation data point for a large area, and therefore small hills within that area simply don't get counted. That can amount to a lot of climb over the coarse of a ride that won't be counted. I tested this last year using several devices and elevation databases, and found all of them consistently and significantly wrong when compared to a GPS unit with barometric altimeter. Commented Jun 17, 2015 at 16:43
-
@CareyGregory I said I have an altimeter built into my GPS. Also, it's worth mentioning that barometric sensors aren't without their own problems. Since they rely on atmospheric pressure to calculate altitude, weather condtions such as storm can throw them off. A change in pressure of 5 mbar can result in a skewed reading of 40 meters. Even without storms, the pressure can easily change by 1 mbar, resulting in readings being off by 8 meters. They are great in showing change in altitude over a relatively short time, for individual climbs, but probably shouldn't be trusted as always correct.– KibbeeCommented Jun 17, 2015 at 16:56