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.