Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2]  All

Author Topic: N-com vs. Bluetooth  (Read 4060 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Twolanerider

  • 25K CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 50547
  • EBCM #1.5 Emeritus DSP # ? Critter Gawker #?
    • MO


    • CVO1: 2000 Triple Red Screamin' Eagle Road Glide
    • CVO2: 2002 Candy Brandywine Screamin' Eagle Road King
    • CVO3: 1999 Arresting Red FXR2
Re: N-com vs. Bluetooth
« Reply #15 on: January 05, 2007, 01:05:20 AM »

A little closer in.  The module removes simply.  Battery change (whenever the time comes) is not accessed in the recess behind the module though.  You have to remove part of the ear padding and get to it from the inside.
Logged

hard10

  • Emperor of the Imperial Grand Masters of Sarcasm
  • 5k CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7525
  • EBCM # 6 1/157.48

    • CVO1: FLHTCUSE²
Re: N-com vs. Bluetooth
« Reply #16 on: January 05, 2007, 01:23:00 AM »

So you already have the BT?

Twolanerider

  • 25K CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 50547
  • EBCM #1.5 Emeritus DSP # ? Critter Gawker #?
    • MO


    • CVO1: 2000 Triple Red Screamin' Eagle Road Glide
    • CVO2: 2002 Candy Brandywine Screamin' Eagle Road King
    • CVO3: 1999 Arresting Red FXR2
Re: N-com vs. Bluetooth
« Reply #17 on: January 05, 2007, 01:35:36 AM »

Quote
So you already have the BT?


Yes, had it since early spring.  Works real well actually.  Got it from a shop in London.  It's a great tool for a bike that doesn't have everything setup for hardwired audio connections.

I honestly don't know if the Bluetooth module for the Advanced Audio system would pair with the helmet and shunt all the bike's audio via the Bluetooth.  Since it seems to be so dedicated to phone access and control my suspicion would be in the negative.

We can't be more than a model year or two away from wireless connectivity via Bluetooth becoming the standard for this stuff though.  Just have to wait it out for the time it's built in to the bikes audio systems as part of the package.
Logged

hard10

  • Emperor of the Imperial Grand Masters of Sarcasm
  • 5k CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7525
  • EBCM # 6 1/157.48

    • CVO1: FLHTCUSE²
Re: N-com vs. Bluetooth
« Reply #18 on: January 05, 2007, 01:42:37 AM »

You obviously like the nolan.

Would you go w/ the hard wired? What is the difference between the 584 & 227? What makes it better than the HD?

Would you go w/ the MoCo BT interface? I think I've already answered this for myself.

Twolanerider

  • 25K CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 50547
  • EBCM #1.5 Emeritus DSP # ? Critter Gawker #?
    • MO


    • CVO1: 2000 Triple Red Screamin' Eagle Road Glide
    • CVO2: 2002 Candy Brandywine Screamin' Eagle Road King
    • CVO3: 1999 Arresting Red FXR2
Re: N-com vs. Bluetooth
« Reply #19 on: January 05, 2007, 01:56:13 AM »

Quote
You obviously like the nolan.

Would you go w/ the hard wired? What is the difference between the 584 & 227? What makes it better than the HD?

Would you go w/ the MoCo BT interface? I think I've already answered this for myself.


AJ, with your bike I'd likely go with the hard wired interface to the bike.  Just because you're then hooked to everything that's there (including the passenger).  If you go with stuff like I've got you are disconnecting yourself from everything on the bike to gain the helmet's capability.  To me it just seems like that's not a good trade-off.

So with your bike I'd plug myself in, add the bluetooth module to the bike and have it all in the lid.

My bike, however, only has the radio and XM. And no connections to plug it in to the lid.  I can still hear the radio fine with the lid on (thank you HawgWired!).  And using the lid I gain Bluetooth connectivity and an intercom system that the bike doesn't have on its own.

Those (to me) are the pros and cons that would dictate one decision or the other.

As for how the Nolan helmet audio equipment is better than the HD on the site here TC might be your best source for info.  He's used them both on the same bike.  However, everyone I know who has made the comparison have universally said the J&M equipment offers the better audio capability of the two.
Logged

Midnight Rider

  • AKA: TCnBham
  • 10K CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11107
  • FLHRSEI.ORG

    • CVO1: 2011 SERGU Rio Red (sold)
Re: N-com vs. Bluetooth
« Reply #20 on: January 05, 2007, 11:50:10 AM »

AJ...there is a thread in the Ultra section on this now.  But, to add my 2 cents worth, and agree with what Don has already said, the Nolan N102 with the best headset, appropriate cord to interface their headset to your bikes output jack on the console (and passenger on the tourpak), is the best way to go at this point in time, IMO.  If you want phone service while riding, get the Bluetooth module for the HD radio...from what I've heard from reading, they work just fine...then you are totally wired into your bikes entire system, can listen to tunes through the helmet speakers if you want, and talk on the phone or to the passenger at will.  You have two things going for you in doing this...one is that the Nolan N102 is probably the nicest, most comfortable helmet I've ever had on my head, and my passenger feels the same way: convenient to use with one handed flip feature, well ventilated, face shield works great, and we both even like the sun visor part of the helmet, though it depends on where your eyes are set on your face/head (Don did not like that part on his)...if you don't it's easily removed within a couple of minutes.  The removable chin flap keeps you warm in cool weather.  The buckle mechanism is by far the best quick release I've seen on a helmet.  Two: you will have a speaker system in the helmet FAR superior to the HD unit...it ain't a Bose Headset, so don't over-expect, but compared to anything else of it's kind, it's just simply better. The VOX works better.  Running the tunes through the helmet allows you to both have seperate volume controls, so if the wife wants to nap on the back of the bike, she can mute her music via the tourpak controls.

Basically, there is no down side, if the helmet fits the shape of your head.

I may wear my shorty for short rides to the local pub or something, but any other time, the Nolan will be on my head.

One more side benefit...the "pigtail" for the J&M speakers is much, much easier to hook up to their cord than fumbling about with trying to plug the HD unit into the side of your helmet blindly.

Like Don says, in a couple of years all this stuff is going to change, but it will be with the next generation of audio systems for bikes.  For now, this is as good as it gets, at least for me.
Logged
Sometimes it takes a whole tankful of fuel before you can think straight.
I had the right to remain silent, just not the ability...

Gone, but not forgotten...2011 FLTRUSE with
Fullsac X Pipe w/2" Baffles
Legend Air Ride Rear Shocks
Traxxion Dynamics AK-20 Front Suspension
Clearview GT13 Windshield
TTS Mastertune

hard10

  • Emperor of the Imperial Grand Masters of Sarcasm
  • 5k CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7525
  • EBCM # 6 1/157.48

    • CVO1: FLHTCUSE²
Re: N-com vs. Bluetooth
« Reply #21 on: January 05, 2007, 05:30:22 PM »

Thank you both for your valued input. This is what makes this site so wonderful. AJ
Pages: 1 [2]  All
 

Page created in 0.148 seconds with 21 queries.