I don't race or follow racing, so what the UCI gets up to isn't really something I pay any attention to, however I am aware that they like their rules.
There's a piece on the DCRainmaker size about a new decree (for 2028) limiting the size of GPS units that I though folk might be interested in. The limit they've set appears to be just beyond the size of the current biggest units.
I don't know whether there has been any consultation with the industry about the effect this might have (there's discussion of a new Edge 1060 landing sometime soon).
DCRAINMAKER.COM The pros use the smallest and lightest units anyway and won’t be an issue for general punters so a bit of a non story in my opinion
According to Cycling Weekly the rationale for this move was something to do with not wanting the peloton squinting at X different metrics on a big screen and doing mental gymnastics to manage their performance instead of watching the bunch / road.
There's a genuine point hiding in their argument about cognitive load / attention but if the riders need/use that data then the data will just be smaller on the screen or they will be scrolling through more screens to view it.
I suspect the trend is for smaller units already as markspark suggests.
Chuck in the too narrow for women/narrower men handlebars rule and the spat with SRAM on the gears and I think they're struggling for ideas that are likely to produce any meaningful result. It's incredibly challenging without taking away much of what is great about bike racing to really temper the risks and we shouldn't criticise the UCI for trying but...as a casual observer there seems to be a lot of barking up wrong trees going on.
Bigger battery for the motor, innit
There's a genuine point hiding in their argument about cognitive load / attention but if the riders need/use that data then the data will just be smaller on the screen or they will be scrolling through more screens to view it.
GPLama has a video on YouTube basically saying exactly that:
It's stupid to focus on screen size because it's the software behind it that matters and if you make a smaller screen, riders will simply scroll across more screens (which you can do from your shifters to be fair) but it's still additional cognitive load.
There's actually an argument about safety, especially on descents of having a bigger screen with the course and gradient on it so you can see the bends in advance. That's how I ride - pop it onto map display and use the screen to see how tight the bends are in advance. It's brilliant on long Alpine stuff where you can carry high speed for a long time.
However the pros have lead motos and cars so they use those to judge braking points and corners.
The UCI will do anything to avoid the main issues of safety which is vehicles in the convoy and far too many motos all over the place, the DS handing up clothes, food etc while driving and in-car TVs which the DS can watch (also while driving)! Plus the constant instructions over the radio constantly telling you to move up and just increasing stress levels all round.
It's like they don't actually talk to anyone in the real world before announcing all this stuff. Like the ridiculous gear restriction attempt which SRAM took them to court over (and won) because the UCI could show no justification for their decision and why that gear ratio was apparently the safe limit. So it got ripped to shreds in court.
The maximum dimensions permitted for bike computers will be limited to 126 × 71mm, corresponding to the largest products currently available on the market.
So effectively this has zero impact as nothing currently available would be ruled out of use?
This limitation will enter into force on 1 January 2028. This decision was taken in light of the impact of on-board technologies on the cognitive load experienced by riders. 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.
But if Cognitive workload is already a problem with the current products, and the UCI limitation doesn't change that, how exactly does this ruling help to prevent crashes? They're enshrining the current status Quo in the rules and then saying it's to reduce accidents...
Would it not make sense to apply a limit to the number of data fields a rider can have on display on a single screen? Maybe even set a minimum screen size rather than a maximum, just so the Pro's aren't straining their eyes...
I'm sure when they did the pit walkabouts for last yeas TDF everyone was running edge 840/850s the mid-sized options not the 1050 monsters... If there's really important information for them to be aware of, I'm sure it will be yelled over a Radio at the whole Team...
Most of well heeled middle-aged Pootlers I ride with have 3 or 4 data fields Max on whatever device, because they're all going long sighted (assuming they bother looking at all)...
Sounds sensible to me. Doesn’t ban any kit currently in use. Does set a limit for future devices. It was only a matter of time before domestiques had iPads on their handlebars showing everything the team cars were seeing on their laptops.
Are Smart Glasses covered by the legislation?
Are Smart Glasses covered by the legislation?
UCI rules ain’t legislation are they? Just sporting rules. But I very much doubt they even considered tour questioning, someone in the organisation has a bee in their bonnet a out the aesthetics of GPS units and so they drafted a nonsense rule…
I'v not read up on this but might there also be a theory that people will start designing GPS units to be big enough, and shaped in such a way, to offer aero advantage, like a front wing?
That was my thought! A GPS 2 feet across punching through the air like a well oiled Graham Obree
