I'm a cyclist and have done a couple of rides with the 5S, the distance are spot on compared to my EDGE 1000. How is that possible if the GPS is so bad?
My distances (F5s) are pretty much spot on (within 2-3%) on the track I did many times before. It's on par with my previous FR620, FR630 and much better than early days Spartan Ultra. However, as earlier mentioned, an instant pace is off and fluctuate a lot. The 1km pace is ok; it's only an instant pace I find to be erratic.
As I never had Fenix 3, what was the experience with an instant pace? Was this ever an issue, and was it sorted at the end?
So I tried 1sec recording and it's obviously not the right way... Polar distance 6,1km F5 5,95km, but instant pace was terrible, while running downhill V800 indicates 5:40min/km F5 8:40 min/km. Uff beginning to regret my money for F5, does anyone knows if FR935 has same problems ?
I also noticed it tooks several seconds on my F5 between 1.00 km autolap is reached and autolap alert which says last lap pace....
Here's hoping the 935 is better, otherwise I maybe going back to the F3
The 935 is better indeed (compared to my F5X that I ended up selling). The sort of big difference in tracking accuracy you posted above gives me hope that Garmin may be able to tweak things so that we get more of the former, rather than of the latter results.
EDIT: I do miss the mapping capabilities of the 5X a lot though and really hope that things somehow pick up on the GPS accuracy front. Or that Garmin do the clever thing and also realease a less premium, fully plastic (and cheaper) 5X.
This doesn't look good for the 5X and I guess it's the same for 5/5S. It's pretty sad that an iPhone has better GPS Accuracy than the top of the line sport watch... http://fellrnr.com/wiki/GPS_Accuracy
This doesn't look good for the 5X and I guess it's the same for 5/5S. It's pretty sad that an iPhone has better GPS Accuracy than the top of the line sport watch... http://fellrnr.com/wiki/GPS_Accuracy
Please, forget this chart for once. There has been written a lot about the methodology used there and its flaws.
This doesn't look good for the 5X and I guess it's the same for 5/5S. It's pretty sad that an iPhone has better GPS Accuracy than the top of the line sport watch...
http://fellrnr.com/wiki/GPS_Accuracy
He you should check it again, FellRNR just updated it and now it turns out a sextant is now his most accurate navigation device, but he does note that it is awkward to carry and he cannot use it for 1s recording, so he uses Smart Recording :rolleyes:
We all know any reviewer is going to be limited. Even DCR has a limited view of GPS accuracy and everyone I have seen post here and on Suunto's forum at WUS seems to waver on their opinions from defend against all comers to switching models (F5 to 935) or even manufacturers (Suunto <-> Garmin). So take fellrunr's eval fwiw (for what its worth), which is one person's limited eval based on that person's limited testing, but you can't just ignore it entirely. Ignoring results that don't fit your preferences is called confirmation bias! A common logical flaw in itself.
The other problem with this whole discussion is everyone has a different metric that they think is essential. A lot of folks seem to care about real-time pace. Personally I do not. A lot of folks care about accumulated distance in real-time (as opposed to after workout analysis in some software). I agree on that - I run ultras and it is mentally useful to know how much farther to the next aid station or finish. But I really really value knowing where I am - particularly when I'm in an unfamiliar area. Many people seem to run on pre-planned routes - DCR certainly does, which is fine, and I do when I'm in an organized event - but I also like to explore, which means tracking my location. I do not need POI or turn-by-turn nav, but I do want to know what the shape of my track is and it would be great to know where I am on an actual map. That is why I tried the Epix and am interested in the 5X. The Epix had a variety of problems, not the least of which was battery life. But having accurate GPS makes everything else work, so I appreciate ALL reports of how well a device lets you know where you are relative to true location. Tracks that are off are problematic.
Sorry for the rant, but I get tired of people dismissing reports from others when they don't like the report. I get that you don't like sweeping conclusions, such as those seemingly reached by fellrunr or DCR (who has his own biases in terms of limits to testing conditions), but please just take them FWIW. :)
Out of curiosity, are the same issues with the F5 GPS inaccuracies also present in the F5S? Since that has a smaller bezel than the F5 I'm curious if it mitigates the issue.
