Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

310 XT elevation on the Garmin is way off...

Collapse
X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 310 XT elevation on the Garmin is way off...

    Hi

    Have any one experience the same problem the the elevation gain is way of? I road a tip on bike 143 km in flat Denmark and the elevation gain was about 4700 meters. ?

    That is way of....

    I cant link to the route because Garmin connent is just loading and loading and nope map showing of my activity.

    Have any one experience that problem as well...

    I think it is bad you paid that kind of money for a product that is cearly this is in a beta verison...


    Guffe 33

  • #2
    The 310 does not have a barometric altimeter, which can be a pretty good way of measuring altitude. Instead, the 310 estimates altitude from GPS, which is not very accurate. I do not have any confidence at all in the accuracy my 310 or my FR305 provides. IMHO, it is so inaccurate that Forerunners probably shouldn't report an altitude value at all.

    The data can be post-processed (like MotionBased used to do) to give reasonably accurate elevation gains and losses, but GarminConnect currently does not do this. Supposedly, this capability will be brought into GC sometime in the future.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by DW152 View Post
      ...I do not have any confidence at all in the accuracy my 310 or my FR305 provides. IMHO, it is so inaccurate that Forerunners probably shouldn't report an altitude value at all....
      I do not agree. The accuracy may not be so good but good enough for me while mountainrunning. For me it's an important feature while training or racing in the mountains because monitoring altitude is more important than distance. And it isn't that inaccurate, is it? I plotted several times the track on a detailed map and the accuracy mostly reaches 50m. Only in canyons it's bad.
      At the moment I still (only) have the 305 and I hope the 310 does the elevation-job as well as the 305?

      Comment


      • #4
        I don't know much about mountaineering, so I don't know if it's accurate enough for you. However, IMHO my Forerunners haven't been good enough for running. My FRs have claimed that I gained and lost more elevation running on the beach than running through the hills in my neighborhood, and the run-to-run variation over the same course has also been high. When I used to run with a watch that had a baro altimeter, I could look at the altitude graph and figure out which hill corresponded to eachbump in the graph, but I wasn't able to do that with my FR.

        Comment


        • #5
          It has really nothing to do with Forerunners or even Garmin. It is a feature of GPS technology itself. This is, btw, a FAQ.

          Hopefully accuracy will get better when(ever) the systems (GPS and GALILEO) transmit dual-band signals for free usage, so that people like Garmin can draw from that.
          DISTANCE: 3000M___ - 5000M___ - 10000M__ - 21098M_ - 42195M_ --- Current VDOT: ?
          PB______: 10:50,09 - 18:40,20 - 38:39,00 - 1:25:39 - 3:10:26

          Comment


          • #6
            When analyzing in SportTracks (with Rounding setting elevation set to 90) I get satisfying results (+/- 10%), compared with the figures of the Organization of a race (totals up and down).
            And using the elevation during running I have enough accuracy to know how much vertical meters to go.
            But of course, more accuracy would be nice!

            Comment


            • #7
              I toke a ride on 40 km and the elevation gain was 2000 meter... I is like a ride mountain. The highest point in Copenhagen is 40-50 below sealevel...

              Elevation is total useless...

              Comment


              • #8
                current altitude is OK, total ascent is useless

                Compared to using my Edge 705 or my Polar RS800 (both have barometric pressure), the 310XT is often off by more than a factor of 3 (600' vs 2000') and is allways way over. Everytime I look at the altitude, it seems fairly accurate. But when you download the data and compare the ascent to a more accurate device, it is obvious how useless the 310XT is for actual ascent. I suspect that is why they don't even give you the option of showing "ascent" as a field on the unit itself. The Edge 705 does let you display this.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I find the elevation to be reasonably accurate on 305. It's typically within ten metres, albeit with some spikes when sattelite coverage is poor, which is not suprising as it's totally dependent on good coverage.

                  I've compared the readings with those on my Oregon 300, which has a Barometer and they're usually very close - I personally find the calibration of the Barometer to be such a pain that detracts from the potential accuracy.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I've got the same problem.

                    On any given activity, the starting elevation is correct & corroborated by OS maps. However on an average bike ride the data from my 310XT in TrainingCenter is 1.8x that of my mate's Garmin 605, which is pretty accurate according to those same OS maps.

                    It only gets worse when I upload the data to Garmin Connect, where it can be anything between 2-3 times the values from the 605

                    I've contacted Support and am awaiting a reply. Be interesting if they say the same as @DW152. If so, I'm with @EKUTTER: why bother reporting the data at all if it's fundamentally incorrect?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Thank you everyone for posting good information.

                      The elevation discrepency seen within the FR310XT is an issue we are aware of and plan to have corrected in a future update. I am not quite sure the time frame but as I collect more information I'll make sure to keep this post updated.

                      Regarding GPS elevation data, there are many users who still like to have an elevation value along with total ascent/descent displayed. GPS elevation has a higher probability of inconsistent readings but the values can improve throughout a workout and many times be within 200ft and sometimes less compared to barometric altimeter elevation readings.

                      jjjhawk88

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Am I right in thinking this is not addressed in the v2.6 firmware update?

                        At the least it would be good to have an option on Connect to fish the elevation data out of Google Maps and correct it accordingly.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          You are correct this is not resolved in software version 2.60. We are working to resolve this as soon as possible.

                          It would be nice to convert .klm files from Google Earth to .tcx file but doing a quick search I didn't see anything that would offer such an option.

                          -jjjhawk88

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by JJJHAWK88 View Post
                            You are correct this is not resolved in software version 2.60. We are working to resolve this as soon as possible.

                            It would be nice to convert .klm files from Google Earth to .tcx file but doing a quick search I didn't see anything that would offer such an option.

                            -jjjhawk88
                            http://www.teambikeolympo.it/TCXConv...erter_ENG.html

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              310 XT elevation on the Garmin is way off...

                              I have used a forerunner 305 and have just bought the 310 xt

                              The elevation date on the 305 is not very good...but it is completely off with the 310xt
                              As an exemple, a run along the Thames from Hyde Park to Greenwich foot tunnel results in :
                              - 2246 meters elevation gain / 2281 meters elevation loss with 310xt
                              - 493 meters elevation gain / 493 m elevation loss with 305

                              Readings from 310xt are typically 3 to 6 times those of the 305

                              So far, my enquiries to Garmin have remained unanswered

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X