GPS Accuracy

Same thing I linked to :) - but good to have another testimonial to it.

Sorry, missed that you had put a clever link in the text link that ;)

Would have just added agreement.

So... Ran the HM from Berlin this weekend with both the F5 and the 735xt.

F5 on the 2.72 FW and both with GPS+GLONASS 1sec recording.

Mygpsfiles:
http://www.mygpsfiles.com/app/#xu3f6VaJ

GC F5:
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1653512239

GC 735XT:
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1656286769

GC 235 (2016 edition):
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1112831476

I must say a pretty decent track for the F5 (thank god)! Plenty of higher buildings and over 30k runners so plenty of GPS signals.

The 735XT is still the better track imo, but the Fenix 5 is quite ok as well imo. Of course I don't know which really is the more realistic one (there was quite a difference between 1k markers for the 2 watches in the end, almost in sync the first k's but about a 100m or 150m difference as well at one point). But still, nothing that can't be overcome with that connectIQ datafield mentioned before I guess.

I will be running some more tests, just not the next few days, with both watches but this surely gives me hope!

*edit*
Added the FR 235 track from 2016 as an extra reference...

735 is definitely better especially on the southern leg of the race.

Excellent run FipStone!! I'd love to think I could go sub 1:24 at my age, but don't see that happening anytime soon. Congrats and enjoy recovery

735 is definitely better especially on the southern leg of the race.

Excellent run FipStone!! I'd love to think I could go sub 1:24 at my age, but don't see that happening anytime soon. Congrats and enjoy recovery

Thanks! Was very pleasantly surprised myself as well :D Was hoping for a sub 1:25 so this was even better then expected :) Don't know what times you run atm, but hey... never give up! ;)

But agreed, especially the 2nd half is clearly for the 735. Just a tad too many wobbles on the F5 side for my liking but still very usable and given the F3 experiences I read and also the first impressions with the F5 I was pretty satisfied. The first half is very equal, almost identical (I believe the 38:18 marks are identical for both the 735xt and the f5, it gets lost after that).

Btw, also updated the mygpsfiles link to a version where I also added the 235, and added the GC link to it in my previous post as well. Think the F5 and 235 are on par...

Excellent run Flipstone.

735 is definitely the best of the bunch overall, but it seems a bit off in the beginning of the race, and as there is interference from buildings, etc. the f5 shows a "fenix" GPS track. distance accrual overall seems pretty OK for all 3.

@Olu, I bet you still have a sub 1:24 half in you based on the training paces I have seen ;)

Well done for the race and thanks for sharing the tracks, pretty much confirms what others have seen, i.e. some improvement with v2.72 but still not acceptable when you get better performance from other watches.

Just looking at the distance :
- Fenix 5 : 21.42 vs 21.10
- FR735 : 21.20 vs 21.10
- FR235 : 21.10 vs 21.10 (but in 2016 so can't be compared directly)

So yes you could get around this with "Peter's Race Pacer" but why deal with that (and the uneven pace) when you don't have to and not know your actual pace/distance while training ? Clearly there's a lot to like about the F5 but feature wise the FR935 is the same and it offers better performance on GPS/v4.22 than the F5x on GPS/v4.20...

Well done for the race and thanks for sharing the tracks, pretty much confirms what others have seen, i.e. some improvement with v2.72 but still not acceptable when you get better performance from other watches.

Just looking at the distance :
- Fenix 5 : 21.42 vs 21.10
- FR735 : 21.20 vs 21.10
- FR235 : 21.10 vs 21.10 (but in 2016 so can't be compared directly)

So yes you could get around this with "Peter's Race Pacer" but why deal with that (and the uneven pace) when you don't have to and not know your actual pace/distance while training ? Clearly there's a lot to like about the F5 but feature wise the FR935 is the same and it offers better performance on GPS/v4.22 than the F5x on GPS/v4.20...

Cheers and well, 21.1 is when running the ideal line of course which i did not do. The question is how many extra meters I actually made (as I was able to start from the front it shouldn't be as extreme as when one has to pass a lot of other runners though). Wrt to the fr235 2016 run, that one actually underestimated the route so I ran an extra 50m or so after the finish line just in case.

And for me its about the total package, the 935 look just doesnt do it for me. It's perfectly fine as a sportswatch but less attractive as my daily. So its all about priorities and the balance... If the F5 is good enough for what I want to do with it then that's fine, might be plenty of room for improvement but ok. Still in the process of deciding if it's really good enough though, but I haven't signed it off yet (and I really want it to be good enough ;) )

GPS test for today, 735 XT (Right Wrist) vs. fenix 5 (Left Wrist)

http://www.mygpsfiles.com/app/#xePVdrTd

Track from the fenix 5 seems quite good, and I would say better represents where I actually ran compared to the 735 track. Distance accrual difference was only 0.8% (see GC files below). Pretty acceptable performance now.

ConnectIQ data from Stryd continues to be a mess:

f5: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1656903324
735XT: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1656909701

Stryd dropped out massively on the f5, while connection was maintained without any dropout.

Stryd: connected as foot pod, 3s Average Power setting, Distance and Pace - Indoors

Seems that setting the Stryd to Pace - Always may also impact distance accrual on the f5 from my earlier test, but will need to retest this to be sure.

Any chance that your Stryd is connecting with bluetooth instead of ANT? When I 1st paired my F5 and Tacx, it wanted to use Bluetooth. Try removing the Stryd and Stryd app from your Connect IQ and your sensor pool and re-adding them.

GPS tracks are looking good. Once the Stryd issues are worked out, I'm going to switch to pace AND distance from the unit. GPS is great, but if there's a more accurate way then why depend on GPS for this?