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.
I thought of that as well as the extra laps it has as it was part of a run / walk program, but even after the 30 minute ride home it wasn't uploaded, but the run from the 735 was.
Definitely not a big deal, if it is a bug I'm sure it'll be addresses rather quickly. All in all very happy with it so far.
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).
That's maybe the best Fenix track I've ever seen. Totally smooth, like he was on the bike. Was Smart recording on? Even so, a really excellent track. With an F3, I'd expect to see deviations, little arcs, as he passed each building and home.
That's maybe the best Fenix track I've ever seen. Totally smooth, like he was on the bike. Was Smart recording on? Even so, a really excellent track. With an F3, I'd expect to see deviations, little arcs, as he passed each building and home.
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).
Some seem to be suggesting that GPS track and the distance measured are two different things, how can this be the case? Surely the distance measured is from the GPS chip and if that is recording inaccurate tracks how can it record accurate distances?
Some seem to be suggesting that GPS track and the distance measured are two different things, how can this be the case? Surely the distance measured is from the GPS chip and if that is recording inaccurate tracks how can it record accurate distances?
What became very apparent with the Fenix 3 in the early days, is that there was a distance accrual algorithm going on inside the watch that was not simply adding the distance between GPS points. One could feed the recorded GPS track in to some software that re-calculated the distance, purely from distance between points, and get a different answer to what the Fenix 3 was recording to the accumulated distance log in the fit file and displaying on screen. So it's this distance accrual algorithm that got improved with incremental software updates on the Fenix 3, to the point that most punters were happy with the distance data they got. Garmin have never given any details of how this distance accrual algorithm works, one possible guess is that once GPS reception drops below a certain quality, the distance data is taken from, or at least compared with, data from accelerometer derived sources (like it does when indoor running with no GPS or should happen if you run through a tunnel and GPS lock is lost). With the Fenix 5 now having internal gyroscopes, there must be scope to refine such a distance accrual algorithm even further. Thus it's not strictly true to say that a poor GPS track equals poor distance; there's way more to it than that.
Thanks Crispin. So if the GPS is not recording a correct track yet the distance is being measured with the help of other means, what does that mean for other areas of the watches functionality that rely solely on the GPS like navigation, route finding, tracking back etc,etc? Or do they too use other means?
On the navigation side (the F5 seems to be the same as F3 as far as I can tell) if you have compass set to auto, the watch will orient to GPS direction if you are moving, but when you are static it will orient using the internal magnetic compass. The reason this behaviour is good is that if you are running with arm swing, then magnetic orientation would be a mess/all over the place when moving; so GPS direction is better here. Whereas when you are static, the GPS direction won't work or even worse will reflect an incorrect drift; but you are likely to have your arm still whilst looking at the watch, so the magnetic compass is more appropriate.
Edit: The one thing I have been pondering since Ray mentioned about the gyroscope capabilities in his preview of the F5 https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2017/01/hands-on-garmins-new-fenix-5-multisport-gps-serieswith-mapping.html, is whether this would be good enough to navigate a route with GPS off. I can't see any way to start navigating with the F5 without GPS on, and Ray does only mention that the gyroscope helps when in UltraTrac mode, but it would be interesting to know if it's technically possible.
26k long run today and I got a better overall distance :
FR235 : 26.00 km - Pace : 4'47
F5 : 26.06 km - Pace : 4'47
So that's a 0.2% difference vs 1% yesterday and the same pace vs a 3"/km difference.
Not sure why...I was wearing the F5 on the right wrist today vs the left one yesterday but I can't see how that would have an impact. Will monitor again tomorrow.
