So this is my first year taking cycling in the off-season seriously. Part of that was grabbing a Kickr Core and I’ve been using my iPhone to control it via the TR app. This Black Friday season has presented me with some good sales on both the 540 for $329 CAD or the Bolt for $369.
At first I was drawn to the Bolt but I can seem to find a clear consensus that the Bolt can sync to TR without a third party such as Strava. Given the recent Strava API announcement I’m hesitant to hop on a computer that I’ll have issues with syncing indoor workouts.
Does anyone have suggestions on viable work arounds or if they were to buy again which they’d prefer?
TR has indicated that having a direct synch to Wahoo is now a priority for them…but no timetable has been announced.
And while I am not a particular fan of Garmin products overall, I would find it hard to recommend the Bolt over the 540. The 540 is current-gen product while the Bolt is several years old now and seriously due for an update. They have a new unit rumored, but it will also likely be significantly more expensive than the prices you noted in your post.
Seems like the 540 would be a no-brainer. It is, for all intents and purposes, the same as the 840 without a touchscreen.
I much prefer Wahoo bike computers (zoom function, better physical buttons, better interface, and so on) so I’d take the Bolt. But I’d also suggest checking with your local bike shops. With a new Wahoo computer on the way, they may be happy to offer you a deal.
For example, I just got a Wahoo Roam v2, their current top-of-the-line unit, for $319 USD ($450 CAD). Not too far from the prices you cited, for a much better device. My LBS confirmed there is a new Wahoo coming, and they were happy to offload some inventory to a good customer at a great price.
TR is working on direct syncing from Wahoo cycling computers, because of the Strava debacle. I don’t expect this to be an issue long-term.
I prefer Wahoo devices, because of
the zoom feature: it suffices to build less pages and then simply zoom in or out to hide or reveal data fields.
the buttons: future versions will likely combine physical buttons with a touch screen. I’ll wait for that to replace my aging Bolt v1.
the great app, which allows you to create and change data fields live. It is very intuitive and has worked very well.
great support by the company. I have only had to contact them once because of my Wahoo Rival, and their service was top-notch.
My impression is that this was always on the backburner for TR (no pressing need as Wahoo owners could use syncing via Strava ) … until Strava lit a fire under TR’s rear-end.
One of the biggest plus points for Garmin is “Garmin Connect” - it’s developed into one of if not the best fitness tracking apps out there.
And as the market leader it tends to be the forefront of any 3rd party cycling apps minds when it comes to syncing.
I’m sure direct wahoo to TR sync will be along very soon though.
Never used a Wahoo head unit myself but friends that have like them.
Tides do seemed to have changed a little reliability wise though - more wahoo rides cut short now on Strava than Garmin - definitely used to be the other way round in previous generations.
Unfortunately, Garmin Connect is being used to try to coerce its users into doing EVERYTHING on both Garmin hardware and software. I have multiple issues with workouts not being imported, simply because I was recording via another app (even though on a Tacx) or on another trainer.
Right now, for example, TrainingPeaks Virtual workouts cannot go to Garmin Connect, even if I’m on a Tacx trainer. And I’d rather lose Connect than allow Garmin to extort me to buy hardware that’s not what I prefer, and use apps that are not what I prefer. Hell, no.
Sure, if you’ve got your heart dead-set on not even using a free Strava account, I guess that matters. For everyone else, I can’t imagine it makes any difference.
I’ve seen this view spring up in a few places - must admit that I don’t agree at all.
Garmin Connect is funded by Garmin device sales - they have never pitched it as a central hub for those on multiple ecosystems.
I see the product as being hardware+software. If another manufacturer wants to pull me away from Garmin then they need to work on their own software or I need to accept that I may need to rely on a 3rd party solution.
I would still say that it is fair criticism, and mitigating it would be in Garmin’s interest and in the interest of Garmin’s customers. You cannot expect that customers only own Garmin devices. But since Garmin wants to compute things like training readiness, it needs all the data it can get.
The cost is offset by Garmin’s spreading it across its entire customer base.
I went Bolt over Garmin 520, mainly due to battery concerns on that iteration. I only found it “ok” to be honest. A few years later I upgraded to a 530, for a few of the newer features (like climb pro, which I think wahoo caught up with).
tl:dr I wouldn’t hesitate in recommending the 540 over the bolt.
6 of one half dozen of the other. Go with whichever is cheaper.
I had a 540, but had to switch back to the Roam. I have some hearing loss and for the life of me I could not hear the beeps for my Varia on the 540 nearly as well. Whatever the tone is on the Roam is significantly easier for me to hear. And since the Varia is the single most important piece of equipment I use, Roam it is. But I’m such a tiny use case I can’t imagine the tone of the beeps bothering most people.
Garmin imports Zwift workouts directly, but TP Virtual has been in existence for about a week, so perhaps its a little early to expect integration there?
You can always dual record on your computer for the time being. Also, presumably if you are using TPV, you are doing analysis in TP. For me, I did not buy my Garmin for Connect, but in the past couple of years, I have realised it offers quite useful insights (like load focus), so I’m getting additional functionality for no extra cost, which is a win.
If you are currently using your phone to do indoor workouts then I wouldn’t change that. Where Strava syncing will be a problem is for non-trainerroad workouts and outdoor rides where you are recording on a head unit instead of a phone.
I currently use a wahoo roam v2 and like it for outdoor rides. I live in Canada so I am doing all of my winter riding indoors currently and my wahoo sits on the shelf eagerly awaiting spring. Trainerroad has said that wahoo sync is of equal priority to the Zwift API which they think will be January. I am optimistic that direct sync with wahoo will be possible by the time I need it in the spring.
Others have also suggested that getting outdoor rides done on wahoo to sync through dropbox is possible although not automatic. This could be a workaround should direct sync take longer than expected.
But they literally open sourced fit files which allows all this sharing of data in the first place
And Ant+ to allow the use of many brands of sensors
You can always dual record on your Garmin device to get your cycling data into connect.
I’m obviously fighting a loosing battle
How should I record fit files with my Varia? I’m not trying to be facetious here, but owning a Garmin device does not necessarily imply I can or should record with it. (Think of scenarios where someone has a Garmin head unit and a sports/smart watch by another maker or vice versa.)
Garmin’s contribution to the sports industry when it comes to formats is absolutely something they should be lauded for. But that doesn’t take away criticism from when their products don’t work as well as they (in our opinion) should.
The hassle of dual-recording is of no interest for me: I don’t wear a watch on the bike, same as I don’t carry my bike computer on a run. The data’s recorded once and is available for upload everywhere that permits/accepts it. In theory I could use RunGap to spoof a Garmin device, but this would also be hassle as I’m primarily an Android user, with just an iPad for watching vids on the trainer.
NB before buying a FR265 I knew it’d have flagship features crippled by my use of a non-Garmin bike computer, as my wife already owned one and I’d carefully studied Ray’s review, so there’s no buyer’s remorse or anything. I simply consider it poor that holistic fitness features, such as readiness, don’t make a better attempt to take account of data that’s available (yes, in formats that Garmin came up with!) but choose not to accept or take account of. cf. with how pointless TR’s RLGL would be if it only considered indoor workouts completed within the TR app.
Just differences of opinion - makes the market innit
FWIW garmin’s approach here makes me less likely to buy a Garmin bike computer, not more. The more open and interoperable these services are the better, so I’ll vote that way with my wallet where practicable.
) … until Strava lit a fire under TR’s rear-end.
