The main problem is that I live and ride mainly in London, which meant that when I was tracking it as an anti-theft device it was tracking as it normally would because it was seldom over 10ft from somebody with an iPhone. I have therefore amended the article above and wanted to be transparent about how this mistake was made below. In my original review of this AirTag holder I said there was no noticeable loss of signal, which upon further testing turned out not to be the case. It is expensive, though, and the reduction in signal means that if you’re using it away from high population areas it will not be as effective as something made of plastic. ![]() In terms of the positives it is very secure and has a high quality finish, with it sitting well under a bottle cage. Overall, I have mixed feelings about this AirTag holder. > Inside the mind of a bike thief - learn how to protect your bike It's only available in black, though, whereas the Muc-Off holder comes in a variety of colours. The closest I've seen in terms of construction and security is the Supmega AirTag Bicycle Mount, which also has an aluminium body and security Torx bolts, and costs £19.20. We haven't looked at any other AirTag holders on to compare it with, but this is more expensive than what's available on Amazon. It was still effective in built-up urban areas, but for the suburbs or rural areas this will have a significant impact. It means that this is not an AirTag holder that is effective when it comes to tracking your bike over longer distances. ![]() This compares to around 30 feet when I place a ‘naked’ AirTag in the same position. At under around 17 feet it still tracks as normal, but over this distance it loses signal. However, upon further investigation there is a definite a loss of signal when using the find function at longer distances. It still tracked in the same way and I could pick it up from my bike shed when I was inside, and when I tested by riding around and tracking it from a different phone I had similar results to a ‘naked’ AirTag. In London this was difficult to detect because it appeared to operate the same way as my original test of the AirTags. Although this does make it more robust, it has the impact of reducing the AirTag signal. Also, it's made from 6061 aluminium, with the AirTag bolted inside there is no way to prise it open or cut it off.Īs I have mentioned several times, the AirTag holder is made from aluminium which makes it difficult to get off without specific tools. It's more secure for two main reasons: instead of regular Torx bolts it uses T25 security bolts, so unless a thief happens to have that specific key, they won't be able to simply unscrew it. Rather than keeping it hidden, this Muc-Off holder attaches more securely to your frame so the tag can become a visual deterrent. ![]() ![]() Other options, such as putting it in the frame, under the saddle, or in the stem cap, can reduce the AirTag signal, and again rely on a potential thief not knowing they're there. In the end I used a plastic holder that sat underneath my bottle cage, which was fine but dependent on any potential thief not noticing it was there and simply removing it. The only problem was there was no easy way to attach one securely to my bike. I reviewed a pack of Apple AirTags last year and found them incredibly useful for bike security, offering most of the benefits of a GPS unit at a fraction of the price, with vastly superior battery life. However, it is flawed as it reduces the power of the signal quite a lot. The Muc-Off Secure Tag Holder is a simple means of attaching an Apple AirTag securely to your bike.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |