GPS Accuracy

Comparison in MyGPSFiles:

http://www.mygpsfiles.com/app/#hgcc0E7h

fenix 5 does seem to have slightly better track and less offset compared to fenix 3 track.

Looks like the 5 makes you run faster too ;)

Hey Olu, welcome to the next round of GPS Accuracy discussions ;)

Definitely agree with your comment; GPS Track Accuracy and GPS Distance Accrual Accuracy are not the same thing and Distance Accrual Accuracy is much more important. In my testing of the fenix 3 and now my 735XT, they both consistently deliver <1% error in distance accrual. I check this by plotting exact running course at a very detailed level compared to distance accrued on the watch and check mile markers as well as total distance.

Will probably be pulling the trigger on a fenix 5 in the next week or so, how about you Olu?

I've been running the same routes for the last 4 years with everything from an FR10 to FR235 and now an F3 since December and the end of every run ends with 30-40 yards no matter which device I'm using.

The way the tracks look on screen in Connect or Strava however will be very different and the F3 is definitely the worst of the bunch, but the distance measured is never more than .03 miles off on a usual 5-8 mile run.

Last Sunday I did a marathon that I had run twice before. The first time was with FR10 which measured 26.40, the second time with FR235 which measured 26.42, and this time I got 26.48 with the F3. I did have to go across the course and back for a "pit stop" in mile 16 which by might've accounted for .02 by itself.

I might have to move in the next couple of months so I don't have the spare funds to buy an F5 right now but probably around mid June I'm all in unless some sort of show stopper bug crops up before then.

With sample size at 1, my first 8 miles are logged on my F5. Should be pretty easy conditions and distance and mile splits were almost exactly in the same spots as my trusted 235. Light years ahead of the absolute failure the F3 was, FOR ME (to the point I returned it in my 90 day window back when it first came out). Track looks pretty nice too. Proper side of the road and mostly all good. Could not be happier with it so far. Only issue is mile splits didn't vibrate (thought I had set that up)?

Another 10k run alongside a river at a brisker pace than yesterday and again the Km splits got messed up rather quickly vs the FR235, end result for the outing :

FR235 : 10.01 km
VAHR : 10.02 km
Fenix 5 : 10.10km

Haven't looked at the track yet but there must be some bad "jumps" to account for the 100 meter difference. Anyway a 1% error...which doesn't sound like a lot but that translates to an average pace of 4'53"/km vs 4'56"/km which looks a lot worse...and it is if you start out your marathon 3"/km too quickly :-( So yes you can correct yourself at mile markers but that's not something you should have to worry about.

Scott, there is a vibration bug which causes it to be turned off on the watch after syncing sometimes. Just re-enable it on the watch and wait for the fix.

CW

Please link to your activity as well - thanks :)

Ok, so I failed at doing a good comparison test (DC Rainmaker I am not! )... Did a run/walk of the first 21 miles on the Boston Marathon course with the Fenix 5 and 735. 1st mistake was I had auto pause on the 735 and not on the Fenix, so at all the street crossing and water stops the 735 would pause and then take a few seconds (up to 10 sec) after I started running to un-pause, I also forgot to start the 735 right away, maybe a 10 tenth of a mile in. So that being said the .25 miles that the watches varied (Fenix 5 had .25 more) I think it would have been pretty spot on if it wasn't for my user error.

The mapping seems to be ok, there looks to be a few times the Fenix puts me on the other side of the road, but for me its very acceptable.

On the Fenix I had connected to my chest strap, so again, not good for comparison!

My one complaint so far is it seams to take a very long time for the Fenix to sync the run, the 735 synced within a minute but much longer for the fenix, although that could have also been user error!

fenix 5
https://forums.garmin.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=958319


735
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1627270201

Hey Olu, welcome to the next round of GPS Accuracy discussions ;)

Definitely agree with your comment; GPS Track Accuracy and GPS Distance Accrual Accuracy are not the same thing and Distance Accrual Accuracy is much more important. In my testing of the fenix 3 and now my 735XT, they both consistently deliver <1% error in distance accrual. I check this by plotting exact running course at a very detailed level compared to distance accrued on the watch and check mile markers as well as total distance.

Yup, I won't engage in this nonsense this time around. Maybe I'm not picky enough, but it hasn't affected my training.
All I want is:
1) Accurate total distance. The F3 has been spot on compared to mapped courses. Actually for months it's been almost exact. It's never over which is good (I'd actually prefer if it was a little more under)
2) Accurate average lap paces. I give the F3 a B+ on this. There are times when I think the average pace sways too much based on perceived effort.
3) Good GPS tracings. I've been lucky I guess. You've seen my tracks on Strava. I rarely get wide or funky deviations.

When Strava shows me previous runs, I like to compare GPS tracings from older devices. The fact of the matter is that I didn't dissect the GPS tracing on the older devices like I do with the F3. I definitely didn't use satellite view or zoom in to the extent that I do now. When I compare my 910 or 610 to the F3, the F3 comes out on top most of the time.

Will probably be pulling the trigger on a fenix 5 in the next week or so, how about you Olu?

It's supposed to be here early next week ;). If I DO see GPS issues, I'll be the 1st to post. I still think the F2 was the worst piece of crap that I ever returned lol!

Ok, so I failed at doing a good comparison test (DC Rainmaker I am not! )... Did a run/walk of the first 21 miles on the Boston Marathon course with the Fenix 5 and 735. 1st mistake was I had auto pause on the 735 and not on the Fenix, so at all the street crossing and water stops the 735 would pause and then take a few seconds (up to 10 sec) after I started running to un-pause, I also forgot to start the 735 right away, maybe a 10 tenth of a mile in. So that being said the .25 miles that the watches varied (Fenix 5 had .25 more) I think it would have been pretty spot on if it wasn't for my user error.

The mapping seems to be ok, there looks to be a few times the Fenix puts me on the other side of the road, but for me its very acceptable.

My one complaint so far is it seams to take a very long time for the Fenix to sync the run, the 735 synced within a minute but much longer for the fenix, although that could have also been user error!

fenix 5
https://forums.garmin.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=958319


735
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1627270201

You're running in my neck of the woods! I would say that's an excellent GPS tracing. I could clearly see you ran most of the run on the left side of the road and could tell when you crossed Washington Street to run on the right side with (for the wider side walk).

Heres the link to your fenix 5 track. https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1627393425

Ok, so I failed at doing a good comparison test (DC Rainmaker I am not! )... Did a run/walk of the first 21 miles on the Boston Marathon course with the Fenix 5 and 735. 1st mistake was I had auto pause on the 735 and not on the Fenix, so at all the street crossing and water stops the 735 would pause and then take a few seconds (up to 10 sec) after I started running to un-pause, I also forgot to start the 735 right away, maybe a 10 tenth of a mile in. So that being said the .25 miles that the watches varied (Fenix 5 had .25 more) I think it would have been pretty spot on if it wasn't for my user error.

The mapping seems to be ok, there looks to be a few times the Fenix puts me on the other side of the road, but for me its very acceptable.

On the Fenix I had connected to my chest strap, so again, not good for comparison!

My one complaint so far is it seams to take a very long time for the Fenix to sync the run, the 735 synced within a minute but much longer for the fenix, although that could have also been user error!

fenix 5
https://forums.garmin.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=958319


735
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1627270201

Could the reason it takes longer to sync be the addition of otherwise extra information captured by the ABC sensors? Adding in that altimter/barometer/temp/etc data could be part of the reason.

Ok, so I failed at doing a good comparison test (DC Rainmaker I am not! )... Did a run/walk of the first 21 miles on the Boston Marathon course with the Fenix 5 and 735. 1st mistake was I had auto pause on the 735 and not on the Fenix, so at all the street crossing and water stops the 735 would pause and then take a few seconds (up to 10 sec) after I started running to un-pause, I also forgot to start the 735 right away, maybe a 10 tenth of a mile in. So that being said the .25 miles that the watches varied (Fenix 5 had .25 more) I think it would have been pretty spot on if it wasn't for my user error.

The mapping seems to be ok, there looks to be a few times the Fenix puts me on the other side of the road, but for me its very acceptable.

On the Fenix I had connected to my chest strap, so again, not good for comparison!

My one complaint so far is it seams to take a very long time for the Fenix to sync the run, the 735 synced within a minute but much longer for the fenix, although that could have also been user error!

fenix 5
https://forums.garmin.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=958319


735
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1627270201

Those two tracks are very close to each other. I can't decide which one is best. Both of them are very good, I'd say...