Pace accuracy

Former Member over 8 years ago

I just spent some time reading through (some) of the 55 page "GPS Accuracy" thread. Some of what I'm experiencing is touched on there, but I'm much more concerned about the pace problems I'm having with my F5 than laser-perfect distance accuracy. Specifically, I've noticed that my pace is all over the place during a run, even when I know I'm holding a very steady one. For example, here is the pace data from today's run:

I can understand some minor deviations, but when I'm running for several miles at what I know to be a sub-7 pace and look down at my watch and see "8:40", that's pretty darn frustrating.

Here's what the exact same run looked like two weeks ago with my old FR220:

Totally difference experience. What gives? Do I need to change the GPS settings on the F5 to something other than what comes default?

0 MalcolmLavery over 8 years ago

Same parkrun I've done 130 times:

FR630 v F5 pace >

I even turned down being a pacer at a major 10k race event because I didn't want to let 100s of runners down, as it was a popular pace.

0 FlipStone over 8 years ago

My best guess is that this is due to the less then stellar gps accuracy... Because of this there's a lot of jitter, deviations and that results in pace jumping around a lot more.

Don't think there's much you can do with settings (perhaps use another connect-iq datafield which bases pace on the last 5 or 10 secs) as I believe this is more a hardware thing and I don't really have faith in garmin fixing this with software releases. Reason for me to send back the F5 afterall and go for the 935.

0 chimpware over 8 years ago

Wow @ewaldchen, I would consider that decent pace chart, take a look at one of my recent 8 mile easy pace runs, where I maintained about 8:30 pace except on hills:

and this is on a run where I felt the GPS track was pretty decent and the overall distance accrual and lap distances were pretty accurate.

0 Former Member over 8 years ago

My best guess is that this is due to the less then stellar gps accuracy... Because of this there's a lot of jitter, deviations and that results in pace jumping around a lot more.

Don't think there's much you can do with settings (perhaps use another connect-iq datafield which bases pace on the last 5 or 10 secs) as I believe this is more a hardware thing and I don't really have faith in garmin fixing this with software releases. Reason for me to send back the F5 afterall and go for the 935.

I'm afraid I'll need to return the watch, too, as this is likely a deal-breaker for me if there's no way to fix it.

0 andi00000001 over 8 years ago

Of course pace is wrong when the GPS is so bad, that's the heart of the distance/time calculations. Just use a different watch on the other wrist for things like that, and keep the Fenix to look fancy.

0 Former Member over 8 years ago

Tried another run today with GPS+GLONASS turned on and got the same ugly results:

One second I'm running 8:30, then the next I'm up at 6:30? Not to mention the track has me running in the middle of a river for half the run. What a mess. Come on Garmin, get this sorted out. $600 needs to deliver way better results.
Gonna try with 1s recording tomorrow, but looking like this watch is doomed for a return.

0 webvan over 8 years ago

Annoying indeed...1 second recording won't help with pace/distance shown on the watch. Are you using the latest v2.90/GPS v4.30 version ? I'd found it did help somewhat.

0 tx911 over 8 years ago

Only way to get around this is to use a footpod for pace (Stryd) or use lap average pace

GPS will always have a lot more second to second fluctuation than a foot pod, but on average will be reasonably accurate.

Thus it is of very little use for instant pace, and I think most manufacturers even use a several second average for instant GPS pace.

If you want accuracy AND more precision, consider getting a foot pod.

0 Former Member over 8 years ago

Annoying indeed...1 second recording won't help with pace/distance shown on the watch. Are you using the latest v2.90/GPS v4.30 version ? I'd found it did help somewhat.

Yes, everything is up-to-date with the latest versions.

Only way to get around this is to use a footpod for pace (Stryd) or use lap average pace

GPS will always have a lot more second to second fluctuation than a foot pod, but on average will be reasonably accurate.

Thus it is of very little use for instant pace, and I think most manufacturers even use a several second average for instant GPS pace.

If you want accuracy AND more precision, consider getting a foot pod.

Appreciate the suggestion, but I feel strongly that I shouldn't have to invest any more money just to get the same results that my $250 FR220 was able to give me for years. I'm not expecting perfection or insane amounts of accuracy and I'm ok with some real-time pace fluctuation. At the same time I don't think it's too much to ask for smoother pace tracking that is able to stay closer to what I'm actually doing and without all these crazy peaks and valleys.

0 webvan over 8 years ago

Yes and no, a watch like the FR235 has very stable instant pace, courtesy of the smoothing that Garmin does and displaying only 5" increments. In fact it looks smoother in GC than the pace from a footpod that is not filtered and therefore much more "reactive". So with the FR235 (or the FR935 it seems) you get to pick what you want, on the F5 you're forced to use a footpod due to the degraded underlying GPS data, it shouldn't have to be like that, especially for a top end watch.