But that one DOES look pretty great, what were the settings? (GPS+GLONASS and 1sec)?
If mine looked like that I'd be pretty happy as well ;) Then again, I only did like 1k test-walks so far so haven't really walked a decent distance... But those 1k walks were pretty ugly.
Yes. GPS + GLONASS with 1 second recording.
Also, I open the app before I stretch and loosen up so the GPS and heart rate can settle for those few minutes before I actually press start.
10 mile race i did yesterday. Pace seemed to work well for me on this one. 1 sec recording, GPS + GONASS:
Vale of York 10 mile race 2017 >
Nice Race!
Did GC also measure at exactly 10.0 miles? MyGPSFiles calculates 10.1 miles based purely on the GPX track.
I checked a bunch of other participants with a range of devices from the Strava App on the phone to a 310XT to 920XTs and all seemed to report 10.0 miles in Strava (one or two had 10.1 miles) so it seems distance accrual was quite good for the fenix 5.
Did GC also measure at exactly 10.0 miles? MyGPSFiles calculates 10.1 miles based purely on the GPX track.
I checked a bunch of other participants with a range of devices from the Strava App on the phone to a 310XT to 920XTs and all seemed to report 10.0 miles in Strava (one or two had 10.1 miles) so it seems distance accrual was quite good for the fenix 5.
Garmin connect measured: 10.06 miles, so yeah, pretty dam spot on. :)
Why would the 5x indicate quite a bit less distance than the gpx file itself?
I did a slow trail run with it and my Suunto A3P yesterday. The 5x and GC says I ran 7.1 miles, but GPSfiles says is was 7.5, which is in line with what the A3P recorded and the expected route distance.
Up until getting the 5x, I've been using a Forerunner 620. The FR620 had notably bad GPS until Garmin posted the 3.30 firmware patch.
I was curious how my 5x compares to the FR620, and in particular wanted to see how it compared to a device that was known for having GPS issues. My hypothesis was that the 5x would beat it.
Instead, I think that both devices did an okay job on this run, but the FR620 actually did a better job of capturing my true path. That's kind of disappointing, although both did okay (and my FR620 has had several issues on other runs of just stopping, etc.).
Why would the 5x indicate quite a bit less distance than the gpx file itself?
I did a slow trail run with it and my Suunto A3P yesterday. The 5x and GC says I ran 7.1 miles, but GPSfiles says is was 7.5, which is in line with what the A3P recorded and the expected route distance.
Looks like some spots where Pace and Cadence dropped out, or you stopped. Did you have any devices connected during the run / walk? There have been instances where dropouts from Ant+ devices (particularly Stryd, but also HRM-Tri in at least one case) have affected the distance accrual on the fenix 5 that I have seen.
If not then my explanation would be that on a tortuous path at lower speeds in forest conditions it is a difference in the algorithms used by GC and MGPSF.
