My observations with calculated distances for trails by e.g. Google Maps or STRAVA is that they are often wrong, at least for me. So it could be, that the real distance might be very closed to what your F5X, or FR 620 measures. Based on a normal distribution, 80% of the data from the F5X are between 1.68 km and 1.72 km. Difficult to say what the reality is...
I made a test today, it was not planned as a test but since I decided to run several laps around my favorite small lake I tought it was a good idea to check repeatability and distance accuracy compared to Google maps. It was done with 2.90, GPS + Glonass 1 sec.
Actually I don't know if the result was good or not. I searched for some of my old runs with 620/630 and found that some of them was better than Fenix, and some of them was the same. All in all, Fenix 5x today loose 2 % distance each lap.
My observations with calculated distances for trails by e.g. Google Maps or STRAVA is that they are often wrong, at least for me. So it could be, that the real distance might be very closed to what your F5X, or FR 620 measures. Based on a normal distribution, 80% of the data from the F5X are between 1.68 km and 1.72 km. Difficult to say what the reality is...
I have no idea what Strava does with their distance calcs. Sometimes my Strava distance is equal to Garmin Connect distance, sometimes it is way off. Example this weekend - 50km trail race. F5X showed 49.69km (I paused the watch accidentally during the race and lost 300m). Strava upload showed 52.2km!!!
Given that Strava time is constant = Garmin Connect, Strava always skews the pace towards the low end.
Strava recalculates distance from the actual GPS points and because Fenix tracks are so wobbly it adds to the total distance. Distance reported by the Fenix is corrected on the watch.
So recently 'upgraded' from a TomTom Spark to a fenix 5. Couldn't be happier with most things but it's the GPS that I'm worried about, especially after reading all of these comments.
My partner and I (who still uses a TomTom) ran along a park path, and here's her GPS compared to mine.
- TomTom
- fenix 5
Here's our little jog side-by-side yesterday running north along this path. (I was running on the left.)
My F5X has performed very well in training in the ~5 weeks that I've had it. This weekend was its first big outing (50km trail race) and it performed flawlessly in the GPS & elevation departments.
Actual distance was 49.69km (I accidentally paused the watch for about a minute during the race so I actually think final distance would've been bang on 50km), actual elevation was +2,047m (vs. 2,051 in the course description from the race organisers). Navigation was on the entire time based on a GPX I've downloaded from Strava and other than a few minor glitches, the watch kept me on the course the entire time (i.e. every time I checked).
Whilst I know some people have had shocking experiences with their F5 watches & have posted evidence to prove it, I am posting the above to give F5 users hope that a lot of users do have very positive experiences and that Garmin does improve their products from one generation to the next. My F3 (non HR) did not deliver this sort of performance.
Well, first of all the F5X has different hardware compared to the F5 and F5s which might explain part of it...
Also, can you please post the garmin connect link so we can see for ourselves how well it behaved? That you are happy with it is great of course, but that doesn't mean everybody would be...
I returned the Fenix5 because of all the issues, loved the looks but couldn't live with the performance. I just received the 935 but because of a foot injury I can't really test it extensively atm, though I must say the F5 easily beats it in the looks/feeling department (unfortunately ;) ).
I returned the Fenix5 because of all the issues, loved the looks but couldn't live with the performance. I just received the 935 but because of a foot injury I can't really test it extensively atm, though I must say the F5 easily beats it in the looks/feeling department (unfortunately ;) ).
I am about to return my 935. As shown in the 935 forum, the tracks are a little bit better, but the distance was always the same to my f5. I know there are a little wobbly tracks but I cannot justify to myself to spend more money (got the f5 with discount) for the 935 and don't really like the looks. It was easier if the 935 has a reasonable price.
Also, can you please post the garmin connect link so we can see for ourselves how well it behaved? That you are happy with it is great of course, but that doesn't mean everybody would be...
Who cares? If he's happy with the tracks and performance that's all that matters.
Who cares? If he's happy with the tracks and performance that's all that matters.
Well,
1. Because I'm just interested
2. Because I wonder how the 5x performs compared to the 5
3. Because it gives more info to other users compared to just the words 'works great for me' from a specific user. It's more objective.
Sure, the most important thing for the specific user is whether or not he or she is happy with it, but for other users doubting about buying for example and actual example helps a lot more...
Went for a group trail run with some of the slower paced runners in out club on Monday. Here is the route, it was a lot of trial and quite a lot of covered forest areas:
11mile Social Club Run >
Let me know what you think of the track. 1 sec recording with GPS + GONASS
