Cyclists Hub is supported by its readers. We may receive a commission if you buy products using our links.
All content on Cyclists Hub is written by humans, not robots. Learn More
This article compares ClimbPro vs. Climber vs. Summit features from Garmin, Hammerhead, and Wahoo bike computers. I tested these features in the Italian Dolomites to determine the most helpful and accurate one.
KEY TAKEAWAY
I enjoyed using Climber and Summit more because they provide more information than ClimbPro, which is not very customizable. Accuracy was questionable for all of them. Each feature struggles somewhere else. Keep reading to learn more.
ClimbPro vs. Climber vs. Summit: Pros & Cons
I ride without planned routes most of the time, so I appreciate that all manufacturers have caught on and introduced these features for freeride. Planning a route each time I hop on a bike just to see the climbs is limiting.
I summarized the pros and cons in the following table.
| Garmin ClimbPro | Hammerhead Climber | Wahoo Summit | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pros | • Includes ClimbExplorer for exploring climbs • Shows climbs on the map • Shows all climbs for a pre-planned route before your route starts | • Data from Climber can be shown on other data pages • Data page can take half of the entire screen • Shows many information about the climb • Shows all climbs for a pre-planned route once your route starts | • Data from Summit can be shown on other data pages • Shows many information about the climb • Does allow changing the data fields |
| Cons | • Data can be shown on ClimbPro data page only • Shows less data fields at once (map and gradient take two thirds of the screen leaving less space for other data fields) • Starts accurately but often ends before the actual climb ends • Doesn’t allow changing the data fields | • Starts accurately but ends before the actual climb ends • Gradient data are inaccurate • Doesn’t allow changing the data fields | • Doesn’t have the “average gradient remaining” data field • Doesn’t show all climbs for a pre-planned route before or after your route starts |
Viewed Information and Adjustability
The biggest difference between all these functions is in the information displayed. Climber and Summit are my favorites because they show the most information (gradient, estimated time to finish, remaining elevation, and more).
Since ClimbPro takes up 2/3 of the screen with the map and gradient, there isn’t much space left for additional information. I wanted to change this layout but without success. The only possibility is to change the two bottom data fields.
With Climber, I couldn’t find an option to modify the data fields, but it’s the only function that allows displaying across a portion of the screen or the entire screen. It overlays any data page, but you can hide it by pulling the tab down.
Wahoo Summit is traditionally the most customizable, and you can set up almost any data field. In my opinion, it provides the most useful information, with just a few minor details missing (remaining average gradient), which could certainly be added via firmware update.
ClimbPro vs. Climber vs. Summit: Accuracy
Regarding accuracy, I tested it in the Italian Dolomites and also on routes around my home in the Czech Republic.
Two basic types of accuracy can distinguish these functions:
- The point at which the climb starts and ends.
- The accuracy of the current gradient.
ClimbPro could detect climbs’ beginnings relatively accurately, but it often marked their ends too soon or too late. As for the gradient, I observed a few seconds of delay. I also noticed that even though I tested the function on the Garmin Edge 540 Solar and 840, both of which have Multi-Band GNSS, the current gradient occasionally differed between them.
Climber detected the beginnings and ends of climbs inconsistently. There were often deviations at both the start and the end. The gradient also frequently didn’t match reality, especially in areas where it changed.
Summit relatively accurately detected the beginnings and ends, as well as the gradients. However, it wasn’t always the case.
In conclusion, none of these functions are 100% accurate. However, Garmin appears to be the most precise, followed closely by Hammerhead and Wahoo.
My Verdict
In my experience with these features and bike computers, ClimbPro stands out as the most accurate, although it lacks the most helpful information and can only be shown on the ClimbPro page.
Climber can be displayed on any data page, but the data it provides, like the current gradient, are not the most accurate.
Summit offers the most helpful and customizable information, but its accuracy is not as good as ClimbPro. Nevertheless, it’s my favorite due to the information it displays.
My ideal “ClimbPro-like” feature would combine the accuracy of Garmin, the UI of Hammerhead, and the flexibility of Wahoo.
I hope you find this comparison helpful. Which feature do you like the most? Let me know in the comments below.
