I was quite happy with GPS from my F5, a little better than F3 which was ok. but my advice is : Use Smart recording instead of 1 sec and GPS will be better!
My 2c experience, but from now on I am going to use that.
I just did 4, short 1 mile, comparison walks with my Fenix 5 in each of the 4 recording combinations.
I just did 4, short 1 mile, comparison walks with my Fenix 5 in each of the 4 recording combinations.
...
IMO, the order from best (most closely resembles the path) to worst (least like the path) are:
....
Thanks. This is my preferred criterion - in real-time, can you know accurately where you are in the world. That is what I use GPS more for than anything else.
It's interesting even though F5 produces these wobbly tracks (Edge is not much better in this comparison), it still measures pretty accurate distances most of the time. Generally it's ok, but the problem is when uploading to a SW that measures distance on their own from the actual GPS track, the results can be quite different.
Yes agree. A strange example that came up for me this week was using the GPX file in Garmin VIRB video software where it recalculated the distance incorrectly.
Im finding my F5 pretty good on last few runs/races. Distances are al pretty spot on. 1 mile alerts are sometimes off by around 10m in front of race 1 mile markers at times though. But overall Im really pleased. no other issues at all with it. Apart from my annoying tiny scratch on the bezel, but that was my own fault :)
About the overall distance being ok, that's nice but actually not all saying...
Say when you run a 10k and watch 1 is spot on on every 1k-lap while watch 2 is short 200m in 5 laps and long 200m in the other 5 laps for every 1k. The end distance is spot on but watch 2 is still pretty crappy when looking at the actual precision.
If GC somehow smooth outs the glitchy gps track that's pretty admirable from GC, but doesn't take away the source being a glitchy gps track. And if it's glitchy at running speeds or in ok environments, it's only a question what the impact of more crappy environments are...
Anyway, I still don't know what to think about the Fenix5. It seems 'good enough' overall but I'm getting more and more doubts about 'good enough' being what I expect and want for a 600 euro watch. So I contacted my seller if they expect the FR935 soon and about returning my Fenix5...
My lap pace is all over the place (lap = 1km) anywhere near tall buildings or going under anything. This morning I thought I was running 9km with the last km at 4:20/km, instead I was running 9.1km with the last km at 3:51/km. I've got the watch on 1s recording and GPS+GLONASS. Strangely enough though the track on GC is not too far off the mark.
Any recommendations on how I could sort this to get a more accurate lap pace? I'm doing London marathon is 12 days and wouldn't mind a slightly more accurate lap pace! Smart recording make any difference?
About the overall distance being ok, that's nice but actually not all saying...
Say when you run a 10k and watch 1 is spot on on every 1k-lap while watch 2 is short 200m in 5 laps and long 200m in the other 5 laps for every 1k. The end distance is spot on but watch 2 is still pretty crappy when looking at the actual precision.
If GC somehow smooth outs the glitchy gps track that's pretty admirable from GC, but doesn't take away the source being a glitchy gps track. And if it's glitchy at running speeds or in ok environments, it's only a question what the impact of more crappy environments are...
Anyway, I still don't know what to think about the Fenix5. It seems 'good enough' overall but I'm getting more and more doubts about 'good enough' being what I expect and want for a 600 euro watch. So I contacted my seller if they expect the FR935 soon and about returning my Fenix5...
