Well, looking at the strava link I'd say your pace for the last k there is influenced quite a bit by that jump in pace where you ran 1:30 min/k. Which is pretty much usain bolt topspeed style :P
So yeah, hard to tell but strava seems more sketchy in that last k then gc...
Haha, I hadn't noticed that, awesome! I can quite believe the 3:25/km peak after it though. On the opposite side of it.. if you look at my GC you'll see that it says I went high 5's and even low 6's/km around the same time Strava spiked... go figure.
Either way, I'm pretty sure I don't have anywhere near accurate pacing for that last km and I'd still question some of the rest too but hey ho, paper pace bands for me in London and trialling smart recording this weekend!
When you use it you turn off Autolap and manually lap at the race markers and it then adjusts the pace based on the manual lap markers. Here is DCR Review:
I used this in the last half I ran and it worked well. I will say though that I used it with my 735XT and the watch was only off by 0.01 miles per lap when it was off at all at the mile markers. The good thing about this app too is that if you miss a marker it doesn't matter the App accounts for that in it's calculations.
"Peter's Race Pacer" has a much more legible screen, it's easy to see HR for instance and on top of ETA it shows the actual time ahead/behind difference in seconds for where you're at, this is very useful. Now of course with the occasional wild swings of the F5 there's so much you can do between laps but at least you'll know exactly how you're doing at each marker.
Doh, sounds like I'm printing off a pace band to accompany my F5 for London then, lol!
Always a good idea for London. In particular, around Canary Wharf, GPS reception is so horrible you can't tell which road people were running up from their tracks. I do not think this is unique to Garmin watches, and definitely not to current-generation ones (my trusty 310xt really suffered in that stretch).
Always a good idea for London. In particular, around Canary Wharf, GPS reception is so horrible you can't tell which road people were running up from their tracks. I do not think this is unique to Garmin watches, and definitely not to current-generation ones (my trusty 310xt really suffered in that stretch).
Strava FlyBy is great to look at other runners and see what watches they used and how their distance and tracks looked.
Here is a screenshot of a Run on Tuesday (1sec recording. GPS+Glonass) Fenix 5 Sapphire that sent me into the river near the start of battery park city and onto a pier (9A) that I ran past earlier. My Fenix 3 would often lose it around Battery Park City and WFC. Will see if turning off Glonass improves.
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...
Although I preferred the aesthetics (and glass screen) of the fenix 5 over the 935, this is precisely why I ended up settling on the 935. It just works.
I ran an steady 6 mile run today with my Fenix 5 and Polar V800.
This is a course that I have run a hundred times with both the V800 and an iPhone 7, so I pretty much know the mile splits.
The Fenix was precise in that it measured each mile the same, but inaccurate in that each mile was measured at 0.98 miles, resulting in 0.12 mile discrepancy by the finish.
I was disappointed in Fenix 5, but it was the first time locking on to GPS in my area, and it was an overcast sky running in a pretty heavily treed neighborhood.
As an aside, the HRM-Tri strap was also consistently 1-2 bpm over my polar H7 strap.
Although I preferred the aesthetics (and glass screen) of the fenix 5 over the 935, this is precisely why I ended up settling on the 935. It just works.
Same here. My F5X had absolutely great mapping features but GPS accuracy wise, my experience shows the FR935 to be quite a bit better. Not to mention that it's much easier to wear under a shirt at work:D
I'd definitely buy another 5X if Garmin further improve things, though.
Just got my 935 today and had a track workout planned so posting GPS track not very useful, but the 935 was only off on distance by 50 yards over 5.5 miles, which is about 0.5% accuracy. My 735, which I also wore at the same time was off by almost 4%. As anyone who has tried using a GPS watch on a track knows the accuracy is tough, given the number of repetitive tight turns. This was also compounded on this workout by me having paces between 5:50 / mile and walking as I was doing a Stryd power test.
