Which Smart Cycling Features Actually Make Riding Better?

[livall-loen]

Hi everyone,

I’m with the LIVALL team, so full disclosure: we work on both smart helmets and e-bike technology. Rather than turning this into a product pitch, I’d like to ask a broader question about cycling technology.

Which smart features actually make riding better — and which ones are mostly unnecessary?

When people talk about cycling technology, the conversation often starts with power, speed and range.

Those things obviously matter, especially with e-bikes.

But I think there is another interesting side to the discussion: visibility, communication and rider awareness.

Cars have brake lights, turn signals, mirrors and increasingly sophisticated driver-assistance systems.

Cyclists traditionally have much less built-in communication with the traffic around them. We rely heavily on hand signals, basic lights and our own awareness.

That creates an interesting opportunity for cycling technology — but it also creates the risk of adding features simply because they are possible.

Some examples I’m curious about:

• Turn signals — useful additional communication or unnecessary complexity?
• Automatic brake lights — genuinely useful in traffic?
• Better front and rear visibility — more important than most other “smart” functions?
• Fall detection / emergency alerts — valuable safety backup or something most riders would never use?
• Bluetooth communication — useful when riding with others?
• Navigation prompts — helpful or distracting?
• Electric assistance — where should technology stop interfering with the natural feel of riding?
• Connected devices — does having the helmet and bike equipment communicate with each other actually add value?

At LIVALL, these are questions we think about when working on products such as our smart helmets and PikaBoost 2 e-bike conversion system.

But being involved in the product side also means we’re obviously not neutral, which is exactly why I’m interested in hearing from experienced riders here.

I’d especially like to know:

If you could choose only three pieces of cycling technology to keep, what would they be?

And on the other side:

Which “smart cycling” features have you tried that turned out to be more gimmick than genuinely useful?

For me, the best technology should probably disappear into the ride most of the time and only become noticeable when you actually need it.

I’d be interested to hear where everyone here draws that line.

Thanks for the feedback — critical opinions are welcome as well.

— LIVALL Team

 

[stompandgo]

Hi everyone,

I’m with the LIVALL team, so full disclosure: we work on both smart helmets and e-bike technology. Rather than turning this into a product pitch, I’d like to ask a broader question about cycling technology.

Which smart features actually make riding better — and which ones are mostly unnecessary?

When people talk about cycling technology, the conversation often starts with power, speed and range.

Those things obviously matter, especially with e-bikes.

But I think there is another interesting side to the discussion: visibility, communication and rider awareness.

Cars have brake lights, turn signals, mirrors and increasingly sophisticated driver-assistance systems.

Cyclists traditionally have much less built-in communication with the traffic around them. We rely heavily on hand signals, basic lights and our own awareness.

That creates an interesting opportunity for cycling technology — but it also creates the risk of adding features simply because they are possible.

Some examples I’m curious about:

• Turn signals — useful additional communication or unnecessary complexity?
• Automatic brake lights — genuinely useful in traffic?
• Better front and rear visibility — more important than most other “smart” functions?
• Fall detection / emergency alerts — valuable safety backup or something most riders would never use?
• Bluetooth communication — useful when riding with others?
• Navigation prompts — helpful or distracting?
• Electric assistance — where should technology stop interfering with the natural feel of riding?
• Connected devices — does having the helmet and bike equipment communicate with each other actually add value?

At LIVALL, these are questions we think about when working on products such as our smart helmets and PikaBoost 2 e-bike conversion system.

But being involved in the product side also means we’re obviously not neutral, which is exactly why I’m interested in hearing from experienced riders here.

I’d especially like to know:

If you could choose only three pieces of cycling technology to keep, what would they be?

Bluetooth connectivity with ANT+ for ANT+ LEV functionality on the bike
GPS cycling computer with ANT+ LEV functionality
Rear radar light with cycling computer integration

I won't ride on the road without these things.

And on the other side:

Which “smart cycling” features have you tried that turned out to be more gimmick than genuinely useful?

Incident detection systems
Text alerts on the display
Ride auto-start function

For me, the best technology should probably disappear into the ride most of the time and only become noticeable when you actually need it.

I’d be interested to hear where everyone here draws that line.

Thanks for the feedback — critical opinions are welcome as well.

— LIVALL Team

 

[6zfshdb]

In the electric assistance category, cruise control with throttle override is most important. It allows me to set a comfortable speed and pedal to assist the bike, rather than it assisting me. This has the additional benefit of increasing range by eliminating wasteful current spikes caused by erratic pedal effort. I ride mostly trails and this cruise feature has all but eliminated my need for PAS.

This feature wasn't available on many bikes in 2018 when I bought mine, so I had to make my own.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

Welcome aboard! Interesting questions.

You're going to get a lot of very idiosyncratic answers, including mine. As I'm sure you know, all of this depends strongly on experience, on what, how, and where you ride, and on how comfortable you are with all of that.

Some examples I’m curious about:

• Turn signals — useful additional communication or unnecessary complexity?
• Automatic brake lights — genuinely useful in traffic?

My ebike has basic, always-on front and rear lights. Alway use hand signals, but really wish it had these features. My wife's ebike came with both at ⅓ the price.

• Better front and rear visibility — more important than most other “smart” functions?

Most of my rides are on good bike infrastructure with few to many cars around. My biggest threats (after oblivious pedestrians) are drivers coming up on my left with thoughts of beating me to the right turn just ahead.

My mirror covers that threat well enough from the bike lane, but if I had to share lanes with cars more often, I'd want a rear-facing radar paired with my head unit.

• Fall detection / emergency alerts — valuable safety backup or something most riders would never use?

Not for me. As a 78 year-old who no longer bounces well, some kind of fall alert might be wise. But I seldom ride far from help, and I definitely don't want the missus to know about minor mishaps.

• Bluetooth communication — useful when riding with others?

Big yes here. My voice is soft from a prior surgery, and riders right next to me usually have a hard time understanding it.

Some kind of light, compact, hands-free, and reasonably priced comm device that I could hand to a single riding partner would be fabulous.

Thinking of something like my very light and comfortable Shokx bone conduction headphones with added short-range comm. No reduction in ambient sound, seldom feel them on.

• Navigation prompts — helpful or distracting?

Generally don't use it. The vast majority of my rides are from home and under 40 mi. Don't need or want audible cues for those.

For one thing, I don't mind stopping to memorize the next 5 moves from my head unit's excellent GPS map. I like looking at maps and knowing a little about my surroundings.

But glad my head unit has voice nav when I want it. Will be handy some day on a long tricky route through unfamiliar territory.

• Electric assistance — where should technology stop interfering with the natural feel of riding?

Not an issue for me. The power delivery on my higher-end power-sensing mid-drive ebike feels utterly natural. But the power delivery on low-end cadence-sensing ebikes can be jarringly crude.

My ebike has an auto assist feature that doles out just the assist needed to go X miles with Y% battery left. I'm way too hands-on for that, but other forum members find it useful.

• Connected devices — does having the helmet and bike equipment communicate with each other actually add value?

My head unit will pair with my ebike's fairly sophisticated operating system, but the data sharing isn't perfect and doesn't meet my particular needs. So I don't pair them and use the bike's own excellent display for bike data like cadence, rider power, and battery level.

My heart rate monitor connects to the bike and head unit simultaneously via Bluetooth. That has its uses.

Otherwise haven't thought about this possibility.

I’d especially like to know:

If you could choose only three pieces of cycling technology to keep, what would they be?

Head unit for at least GPS and nav services on the handlebars, the rider power and cadence readouts on my bike's display (from built-in sensors), and a heart rate monitor.

That pretty much covers my current riding needs.

And on the other side:

Which “smart cycling” features have you tried that turned out to be more gimmick than genuinely useful?

My head unit has many hardcore training features I'll never use. But they may not be gimmicks for folks who take their training seriously. Nothing beyond that.

 

[fooferdoggie]

I like all my lights to be automatic. So that's nice on a e bike since they are all wired. so on my regular bike all my lights and radar are ANT+ so I turn on my GPS they all turn on, and when the battery is low I get a notification.

 

[LandoftheGiants]

Most of the new stuff is just placebos to my mind, tech that makes you feel good but doesn't really enhance the ride itself. "Which smart features actually make riding better? " Modern suspension I feel, but that's what you guys are about is it.

 

[McApple]

How about a screen, probably your phone, divided into quadrants, to display such things as: route(s), rear-view, riding stats, weather radar, etc.

If it could be designed so that inputs could mesh seamlessly with the host (phone, ), and be displayed on a selection menu that those of us in the 70+ age-bracket could understand, and use, you would have a winner.

 

[fooferdoggie]

Most of the new stuff is just placebos to my mind, tech that makes you feel good but doesn't really enhance the ride itself. "Which smart features actually make riding better? " Modern suspension I feel, but that's what you guys are about is it.

yep the only real one I found was the garmin radar but even that has been around for awhile.

 

[fooferdoggie]

when smart fails. I have three bikes and two Gps an old garmin and a Karoo but the radar does not always connect well when go fro0m gps to gps. so I bought the no light Garmin radar for 100.00 as I did not need the taillight. well I found out the radar wont turn on when I turn the GPS on. it will turn off but not on. its the same wit the garmin and Karoo. not a huge deal but its like huh?

 

[livall-loen]

Welcome aboard! Interesting questions.

You're going to get a lot of very idiosyncratic answers, including mine. As I'm sure you know, all of this depends strongly on experience, on what, how, and where you ride, and on how comfortable you are with all of that.



My ebike has basic, always-on front and rear lights. Alway use hand signals, but really wish it had these features. My wife's ebike came with both at ⅓ the price.



Most of my rides are on good bike infrastructure with few to many cars around. My biggest threats (after oblivious pedestrians) are drivers coming up on my left with thoughts of beating me to the right turn just ahead.

My mirror covers that threat well enough from the bike lane, but if I had to share lanes with cars more often, I'd want a rear-facing radar paired with my head unit.



Not for me. As a 78 year-old who no longer bounces well, some kind of fall alert might be wise. But I seldom ride far from help, and I definitely don't want the missus to know about minor mishaps.



Big yes here. My voice is soft from a prior surgery, and riders right next to me usually have a hard time understanding it.

Some kind of light, compact, hands-free, and reasonably priced comm device that I could hand to a single riding partner would be fabulous.

View attachment 214378
Thinking of something like my very light and comfortable Shokx bone conduction headphones with added short-range comm. No reduction in ambient sound, seldom feel them on.



Generally don't use it. The vast majority of my rides are from home and under 40 mi. Don't need or want audible cues for those.

For one thing, I don't mind stopping to memorize the next 5 moves from my head unit's excellent GPS map. I like looking at maps and knowing a little about my surroundings.

But glad my head unit has voice nav when I want it. Will be handy some day on a long tricky route through unfamiliar territory.



Not an issue for me. The power delivery on my higher-end power-sensing mid-drive ebike feels utterly natural. But the power delivery on low-end cadence-sensing ebikes can be jarringly crude.

My ebike has an auto assist feature that doles out just the assist needed to go X miles with Y% battery left. I'm way too hands-on for that, but other forum members find it useful.



My head unit will pair with my ebike's fairly sophisticated operating system, but the data sharing isn't perfect and doesn't meet my particular needs. So I don't pair them and use the bike's own excellent display for bike data like cadence, rider power, and battery level.

My heart rate monitor connects to the bike and head unit simultaneously via Bluetooth. That has its uses.

Otherwise haven't thought about this possibility.



Head unit for at least GPS and nav services on the handlebars, the rider power and cadence readouts on my bike's display (from built-in sensors), and a heart rate monitor.

That pretty much covers my current riding needs.



My head unit has many hardcore training features I'll never use. But they may not be gimmicks for folks who take their training seriously. Nothing beyond that.

Thank you for taking the time to go through these one by one — this is exactly the kind of real-world perspective I was hoping the thread would bring out.

A few things in your response really stood out to me.

Your point about **turn signals and automatic brake lights** is interesting because it gets at the difference between a feature being “smart” and simply being useful. If something improves communication with drivers without asking the rider to think about it constantly, that feels much more valuable than technology added just for novelty.

I also completely understand your point about **rear-facing radar**. In situations where cyclists are sharing space with faster-moving traffic, knowing what is approaching from behind can arguably be more useful than adding another display or notification in front of the rider.

The part I found especially interesting, though, was your comment about **lightweight, hands-free communication between riding partners**.

That seems like a very practical use case: something simple enough to hand to another rider, comfortable enough to forget you’re wearing it, while still leaving ambient sound available. That “low friction” aspect feels important — if riders have to stop, pull out a phone, pair several devices, or navigate menus, the technology starts defeating the purpose.

Your comments on navigation and connected devices also reinforce something I’ve been thinking about: more integration isn’t automatically better integration. If the bike display already presents certain information well, there isn’t much value in duplicating it somewhere else just because the devices can technically connect.

And I like your three-device answer:

* GPS / navigation head unit
* Rider power and cadence data
* Heart-rate monitoring

It’s a good reminder that the “best” technology depends heavily on the rider and the type of riding they actually do.

One follow-up question, since the communication idea caught my attention:

**For rider-to-rider communication, would you prefer a completely standalone system that works without a phone, or would phone-based Bluetooth be acceptable if the actual riding experience were simple and hands-free?**

Thanks again for such a thoughtful response. This is much more useful to us than a simple yes/no reaction to individual features.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

One follow-up question, since the communication idea caught my attention:

**For rider-to-rider communication, would you prefer a completely standalone system that works without a phone, or would phone-based Bluetooth be acceptable if the actual riding experience were simple and hands-free?**

Thanks again for such a thoughtful response. This is much more useful to us than a simple yes/no reaction to individual features.

Happy to help. The following will surely be easier said than done.

No phone involvement would be ideal. Just hand off the headset and start talking. Especially nice if your partner didn't have to install an app to use it.

But I can see that using phone resources might help to simplify/miniaturize/lighten the headsets themselves.

If phones must be involved, it should be from somewhere other than the bars. Which means you shouldn't have to see or touch a phone to use the comm in the saddle.

Why? Handlebar vibrations can damage some high-end phone cameras. Apple's issued a warning about this risk, and I lost telephoto focus on 3 flagship Samsung phones to that before figuring out what was happening. Existing phone mount dampers (e.g., from QuadLock) are tuned for motorcycle, not bicycle vibrations.

But I always carry a phone — just in a pocket now. So if my phone could do its part in the comm system from there, I'd be OK with it.

 

[newts]

for me as a bike commuter it would visibility. I have been working on some projects to make obnoxiously bright blinks if a car is approaching too fast or too close. I started with 10GHZ radar but the module I had didn't have the real world range. I have a LIDAR now which should be better but might be too focused. I have it kind of working on the bench I just need to deploy it for testing in the next week or two.

 

[harryS]

A small front and rear camera system that records the last 30 minutes and stops say 5 minutes after a crash/jolt. Both would run off a rechargeable lithium with a USB-C power port. Give me a powerbank that snaps onto the frame somewhere to run it, with a spare bank hanging in a nice wall charger that is smart enough not overcharge it, I'll just swap banks before each ride, even if they can last for several days. Keep it undr $100.

Rear facing radar with visual LED alert, Runs off same powerbank,

 

[Bicyclista]

Turn signals—useful if widely spaced and other motorists can see BOTH at the same time so that the message is clear; turn signals that are only a few inches apart are confusing, and so are those that are placed so that only one signal is visible from certain angles.
Automatic brake lights—useful if combined and wirelessly connected with a rear brake light on the back of a helmet, just like cars have a brake light in the rear window.
Better front and rear visibility—yes, front and rear lights on the bike combined with front and rear lights on helmet, both bright enough in sunlight
Fall detection/emergency alerts—no, I already have that on my iPhone.
Bluetooth communication—I used Sena walkie-talkie helmets in the past and found them to be very useful not just to chat (and ride single file, which is safer than side-by-side), but to alert my partner about potential dangers. The Senas are hands-free, have a mic under the visor and speakers just above the ears.
Navigation prompts—no, my iPhone can provide that.
Electrical assistance—all ebikes should have cadence, torque, and speed sensors; they should combine the information from the three sensors and deliver an instant, smooth, powerful response. My ten-year-old ebike did that, yet there are bikes today that only offer cadence or torque sensing, require a quarter turn (or more) of the pedals before the motor engages, and lurch forward when it does. They also lurch when engaging the throttle. Those ebikes provide a very crude riding experience. Lurching is dangerous and can cause accidents.
Connected devices—some ebikes offer connection to my health app on my iPhone and to my Find My service as well—in case the bike gets stolen. I welcome these features.

3 pieces of eBIKE cycling technology to keep

1. Cadence, torque, and speed sensors combined
2. Cruise control all the way to 28mph
3. Rear radar

“Smart Cycling” features that are gimmicks
Requiring the bike be connected before it can be turned on or unlcked, as a security feature. I went to test ride a Segway ebike. The Segway network was down, and the bike could not be activated. Needless to say, I did not buy it, nor will I consider any bike that is hobbled like that.

 

[fooferdoggie]

3 pieces of eBIKE cycling technology to keep

1. Cadence, torque, and speed sensors combined
2. Cruise control all the way to 28mph
3. Rear radar

why would a bike need cruise control your legs are the cruise control. cries control is for e scooters.

 

[Bicyclista]

@fooferdoggie: why would a bike need cruise control your legs are the cruise control. cries control is for e scooters.

See post #3 by @6zfshdb. Also, cruise control provides relief for tired legs and it's fun.

 

[livall-loen]

Turn signals—useful if widely spaced and other motorists can see BOTH at the same time so that the message is clear; turn signals that are only a few inches apart are confusing, and so are those that are placed so that only one signal is visible from certain angles.
转向灯——如果间距足够大，其他驾驶员可以同时看到两个转向灯，这样信息就清晰明了；如果转向灯之间的距离只有几英寸，就会令人困惑，如果转向灯的位置使得从某些角度只能看到一个转向灯，也会造成混淆。
Automatic brake lights—useful if combined and wirelessly connected with a rear brake light on the back of a helmet, just like cars have a brake light in the rear window.
自动刹车灯——如果能与头盔后部的后刹车灯结合并进行无线连接，就像汽车后窗上的刹车灯一样，那就非常实用了。
Better front and rear visibility—yes, front and rear lights on the bike combined with front and rear lights on helmet, both bright enough in sunlight
更好的前后方可视性——没错，自行车上的前后灯加上头盔上的前后灯，在阳光下都足够明亮。
Fall detection/emergency alerts—no, I already have that on my iPhone.
跌倒检测/紧急警报——不，我的 iPhone 上已经有这个功能了。
Bluetooth communication—I used Sena walkie-talkie helmets in the past and found them to be very useful not just to chat (and ride single file, which is safer than side-by-side), but to alert my partner about potential dangers. The Senas are hands-free, have a mic under the visor and speakers just above the ears.
蓝牙通讯——我以前用过Sena对讲头盔，发现它们非常实用，不仅可以聊天（而且可以单列骑行，比并排骑行更安全），还能提醒同伴注意潜在危险。Sena头盔支持免提通话，在面罩下方有麦克风，扬声器位于耳朵上方。
Navigation prompts—no, my iPhone can provide that.
导航提示——不，我的 iPhone 可以提供这个功能。
Electrical assistance—all ebikes should have cadence, torque, and speed sensors; they should combine the information from the three sensors and deliver an instant, smooth, powerful response. My ten-year-old ebike did that, yet there are bikes today that only offer cadence or torque sensing, require a quarter turn (or more) of the pedals before the motor engages, and lurch forward when it does. They also lurch when engaging the throttle. Those ebikes provide a very crude riding experience. Lurching is dangerous and can cause accidents.
电动助力——所有电动自行车都应该配备踏频、扭矩和速度传感器；它们应该整合这三个传感器的信息，提供即时、平顺、强劲的动力响应。我十年前的电动自行车就能做到这一点，但如今有些电动自行车只提供踏频或扭矩感应，需要踩下四分之一圈（或更多）踏板电机才会启动，而且启动时车身会猛地向前冲。加油门时也会出现这种情况。这些电动自行车的骑行体验非常糟糕。车身猛地向前冲很危险，容易引发事故。
Connected devices—some ebikes offer connection to my health app on my iPhone and to my Find My service as well—in case the bike gets stolen. I welcome these features.
有些电动自行车配备了联网设备——例如，它们可以连接到我iPhone上的健康应用和“查找我的iPhone”服务——以防自行车被盗。我很喜欢这些功能。

3 pieces of eBIKE cycling technology to keep
3 项 eBIKE 自行车技术，以保持

1. Cadence, torque, and speed sensors combined
   踏频、扭矩和速度传感器的组合
2. Cruise control all the way to 28mph
   巡航控制最高速度可达 28 英里/小时
3. Rear radar 后视雷达

“Smart Cycling” features that are gimmicks
“智能骑行”功能只是噱头
Requiring the bike be connected before it can be turned on or unlcked, as a security feature. I went to test ride a Segway ebike. The Segway network was down, and the bike could not be activated. Needless to say, I did not buy it, nor will I consider any bike that is hobbled like that.
出于安全考虑，自行车必须先联网才能启动或解锁。我去试骑了一辆赛格威电动自行车，结果赛格威网络瘫痪，自行车无法激活。不用说，我没买，以后也不会考虑任何存在这种问题的产品。

Thank you — this is an extremely useful breakdown, especially because you’ve gone beyond simply saying whether a feature is useful and explained **what would make it useful in practice**.

Your point about **turn-signal spacing and viewing angle** is particularly important. A turn signal isn’t doing much good if another road user can’t immediately distinguish left from right, or if the signal disappears from certain angles. That’s a much better design criterion than simply being able to say “the product has turn signals.”

I also really like your idea of pairing an **automatic brake light on the bike with a second brake light on the helmet**. The comparison with a car’s elevated center brake light makes a lot of sense — redundancy and height could potentially make the rider’s intent much easier to notice.

Your experience with Sena is also helpful. What you’re describing is less about “Bluetooth as a feature” and more about **hands-free rider-to-rider safety communication**. Being able to warn a riding partner about a pothole, vehicle, pedestrian, or other hazard while remaining single-file is a much more compelling use case than simply chatting while riding.

The point about assistance quality may be the most important one of all.

I completely agree that more power doesn’t automatically mean a better ride. If assistance arrives late and then suddenly surges, the technology is getting in the rider’s way rather than helping. Combining multiple inputs to produce a fast, predictable and smooth response seems much more meaningful than simply adding another assist level.
我完全同意，更大的动力并不一定意味着更好的骑行体验。如果助力来得晚，然后突然增强，那么这项技术非但没有帮助，反而成了阻碍。将多种输入信号结合起来，产生快速、可预测且平顺的响应，远比简单地增加一个助力等级更有意义。

And your Segway example is a great illustration of what I’d call **bad connectivity**.
你举的赛格威例子很好地说明了我所说的**糟糕的连接性**。

Connected functions can add value — health data, theft recovery, Find My integration, etc. — but the basic ability to use the bike should not become dependent on a remote service being available. A smart product still needs a sensible offline fallback.
互联功能可以增加价值——例如健康数据、失窃找回、查找我的自行车等——但使用自行车的基本功能不应依赖于远程服务的可用性。智能产品仍然需要合理的离线备用方案。

Your three priorities are also interesting:
你的三项优先事项也很有意思：

1. Cadence + torque + speed sensing working together
1. 踏频、扭矩和速度传感协同工作
2. Cruise functionality 2. 巡航功能
3. Rear radar 3. 后方雷达

That’s a very different list from the usual “more range, bigger screen, more app features,” which is exactly why these discussions are useful.
这与通常的“更广的音域、更大的屏幕、更多的应用功能”清单截然不同，而这正是这些讨论的意义所在。

One follow-up question on the lighting point:
关于照明点，还有一个后续问题：

**If you had both bike-mounted and helmet-mounted turn/brake lights, would you want them to operate automatically as one synchronized system, or would you prefer the helmet and bike to remain independently usable if one device lost connection or ran out of battery?**
**如果您同时拥有自行车和头盔上的转向灯/刹车灯，您希望它们作为一个同步系统自动工作，还是希望在其中一个设备失去连接或电池耗尽时，头盔和自行车仍然可以独立使用？**

That kind of fail-safe behavior seems just as important as the connected feature itself.
这种故障保护机制似乎与连接功能本身同样重要。

Thanks again — there’s a lot here worth taking back to our product team.
再次感谢——这里有很多值得我们产品团队借鉴的信息。

 

[Bicyclista]

One follow-up question on the lighting point:
关于照明点，还有一个后续问题：

**If you had both bike-mounted and helmet-mounted turn/brake lights, would you want them to operate automatically as one synchronized system, or would you prefer the helmet and bike to remain independently usable if one device lost connection or ran out of battery?**
**如果您同时拥有自行车和头盔上的转向灯/刹车灯，您希望它们作为一个同步系统自动工作，还是希望在其中一个设备失去连接或电池耗尽时，头盔和自行车仍然可以独立使用？**

That kind of fail-safe behavior seems just as important as the connected feature itself.
这种故障保护机制似乎与连接功能本身同样重要。

If one device lost connection or ran out of battery I would prefer the remaining device to continue working.

The problem of turn signals on an ebike could easily be solved by shaping the signals as arrows—an arrow pointing left and an arrow pointing right. Instead of simply blinking, the arrows should be animated. The left arrow should appear to move to the left and the right arrow to the right. Communicationn of the intent would be very clear.

Similarly, having both turn signals blink to signal hazard is not clear, specially if one of the lights cannot be seen from certain angles. Instead, a diamond outline should blink red and have some animation.

 

[fooferdoggie]

@fooferdoggie: why would a bike need cruise control your legs are the cruise control. cries control is for e scooters.

See post #3 by @6zfshdb. Also, cruise control provides relief for tired legs and it's fun.

well cruise control would only work on a bike with a throttle. then it stops being a bike. I seldom see people with e bikes actually exercising most of the time its throttle only or ghost peddling. e bikes are turning into e scooters and sitting on a bike doing nothing will get boring after while.