Question: Recently, I had a bike crash that distorted my front wheel. I was unhurt, but the fact that it occurred while I was glancing at my GPS bike computer has my wife alarmed. We often ride together, and she insists that I spend too much time looking at my cycling data while riding, but since the crash is my first after several years of riding, I think her concerns are overblown. What can I tell her to allay her fears? —Steve V.
RBR’S STAN PURDUM REPLIES: If you are hoping for an easy out on this matter, you’re asking the wrong guy. My most injurious crash happened precisely because I was paging through the screens of my cycling computer looking for some detail I thought I needed to know right then, when I should have been watching where I was going. I don’t know how long I was looking down — I think only a few seconds — but when I looked up, I was rolling into the rear of my buddy’s bike ahead of me. My knee-jerk reaction was to yank my handlebars to the right, which threw me to the left and hard onto the payment. My bike was undamaged, but I ended up with a broken collar bone and at least one broken rib. It took surgery and a couple of metal plates and several screws to reconstruct my collar bone and a few months of toughing it out for my ribs to heal.
For what it’s worth, I did not get rid of my computer, but I did set it to the screen displaying the info I most often wanted then while rolling and vowed to wait until I was stopped to look at any other screens — a practice I have adhered to through several upgrades of my computer.
It may be of interest to you that the UCI (Union Cycliste Internationale), which is the governing body of competitive cycling, recently announced that as of January 2028, no computer larger than 126 × 71mm, which corresponds to the largest bike computer currently on the market, will be allowed on the bikes used by professional cycle racers.
“This decision was taken in light of the impact of on-board technologies on the cognitive load experienced by riders,” the UCI said. “Several studies have shown that the increasing volume of data available to riders during competition can contribute to an increased cognitive workload, a key factor in the occurrence of accidents” (emphasis added).
As far as I’ve been able to find out, the UCI did not identify the “several studies” but here’s one I found on my own regarding cognitive load while cycling.
Here’s the UCI’s fuller rationale: “Limiting the size of bike computers is intended to prevent an excessive increase in the amount of data available during races, which could significantly compromise rider safety.”
Often, the UCI is seen as a spoilsport in the competitive cycling world, and this decision has its share of critics. I’m not taking a side, but the reality may be that this rule will eventually play out on your handlebars, since bike computer makers have less incentive to make devices in sizes and with features that professional cycling teams will not purchase because they are forbidden.
Cognitive load is a sneaky thing. A key part of cognition is the ability to focus on specific information while filtering out distractions. When I recently added a rear radar system to my bike, I chose the one from Lezyne because it does not require another screen to watch. Rather, it causes the rear lens on the included headlight to glow when traffic is approaching from behind, and at the same time, the light emits a beep. All well and good, but I’ve also discovered that I can overlook even those warnings when my cognition is engaged in yacking with my riding buddies. In effect, my cognitive power can treat the radar’s warning as a distraction from the conversation.
The studies that seem apropos to your question have to do with multitasking —doing two cognitively demanding tasks at the exact same time. Those studies show that multitasking is biologically impossible for humans. What feels like multitasking is actually rapid task switching, which fragments attention, drains your working memory, and drastically lowers your overall productivity.
If I were you, I’d accept that your wife is speaking wisdom, and admit that the time spent interacting with your data while riding is time not watching where you are going.
Stan Purdum has ridden several long-distance bike trips, including an across-America ride recounted in his book Roll Around Heaven All Day, and a trek on U.S. 62, from Niagara Falls, New York, to El Paso, Texas, the subject of his book Playing in Traffic. Stan, a freelance writer and editor, lives in Ohio. See more at www.StanPurdum.com.
Next Article: Question of the Week
I’ve turned off many of the warning “alarm bells” on my Garmin because of the distraction they cause. Garmin seems to have a philosophy that I should be concentrating on their unit rather than the road and my surroundings.
The worst injuries I suffered from a crash happened because I was looking at a screen instead of the road. I was leading a ride (I had just come off the front) when we came to a fork. 99% of the time we go left. But on this day, we were SUPPOSED to go right. A number of riders on the front went left, and the riders behind them yelled that they went the wrong way. I told them not to worry…we would just adjust our route on the next available turn. I was looking at the map on my computer for that road. When I looked up, I saw that the front group had stopped to wait for us. I crashed into the group, went over the bars and hit the ground. Broke 4 ribs, punctured a lung and spent 3 days in the hospital. Learned a valuable lesson…glance at your computer, don’t stare at it!
I’ve completely solved this problem in that the only electronics I carry are my phone (in my jersey pocket, never looked at while riding) and my watch, so I know how long I’ve been on this road or the next. Somehow we were able to ride successfully before the advent of a computer on the handlebars, and it’s still possible!
I am an 82 yo rider. I ride approximately 8000 miles a year. I have one screen that I use 95% of the time I am riding on my Garmin 1050. I average 16.5 mph. It has my Xert datafields that I check every few minutes when I am pacing. These fields are the Beta Test 5.2 screen that show me my Low, High and Peak data and my current speed and bpm. I will ocassionally check the Avg 60s field. I ride with a Varia 820. That information is also displayed on my screen. The majority of my riding is done in the Northern suburbs of Chicago. I find it helpful to have an alert when there is a vehicle behind approaching. One of the features of the Varia 820 is its ability to display overtaking vehicles. I confirm this with a glance at my bar end Sprintech mirrors.
These are tools that I use as part of my gear to navigate this environment. My main responsibility is paying attention to what is in front of me. We need to remember that these are tools, not solutions and use them judiciously.
Thanks all for the good feedback!
Listen to your wife. Turn the incident around – if she had crashed while looking at a screen, how would you react? “It only happens every few years” is not sound reasoning. Crashes are to be avoided, not accepted as inevitable at any frequency.
Guys like stats, but how important are they really? What part of a ride are you going to remember in 20 years? Something about that big wonderful world you’re riding through? Or stats? I’m with Kerry on this one. Pay attention to the ride – and your wife – not another screen full of ultimately meaningless tech.