Very poor GPS performance with the Fenix 5 - I've had enough!

So I went for my usual 10 mile run yesterday with the new F5.

Here is the route:

https://www.strava.com/activities/955234611

https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1694808792

In short, I was really disappointed with the Fenix 5. I was hoping to use it as a replacement for my old Forerunner 630 and HRM-Run strap, but after yesterday, I don't think I will be using the Fenix again for running.

Pace was all over the place - I'm not talking about real time pace, either, but average lap pace. Even mid way though a mile, the lap pace was very erratic - one minute I'd be doing a 7:30 min/miles, the next minute I'd be doing 8:30 min/miles, even though I was keeping a steady pace.

It was a route I have done many times. With my old Forerunner 630, I knew exactly where I would be - next to my house - when the 10th mile registered. With the Fenix, I had to run about 200m down the road past my house to register the 10th mile. The Fenix had told me that my average pace for the run was 8:30 min/mile, but to my surprise, after I had uploaded the run to Strava, I was told I had averaged 8:13 min/mile. Then I looked at the GPS track and noticed that the last 2 miles were all over the place. I live in a small city and there are a few relatively tall buildings near where I live, but it's not exactly NYC. I've never had issues before when running though the city centre, unless I had started a run without getting a GPS lock.

Also, the heart rate data from the optical sensor is completely meaningless, saying I averaged 177bpm and maxing on 200bpm, even though it was a recovery run! Earlier that day, during a cross country duathlon race, my average HR had been 133bpm.

I want to return the Fenix 5 now as it's useless for running. I expected better from Garmin since it's supposed to be their flagship money-no-object multi-sport watch.

I'm now seriously thinking about going down the Sale of Goods Act route to get a refund as the watch is not fit for purpose in consideration of the price of the watch and its stated claims. I think the issues with the watch are inherent and down to hardware design - something that isn't going to be fixed with a firmware update.

I think my experience is similar to others from reading the other posts on this board?

0 Former Member over 8 years ago

You're betting not? Hmm... I was one of the very first to own an SSU. This is my third. I've returned two because of various faults recognised by Suunto support. I have more than 100 posts on WatchUSeek SSU forum.
I do know what I'm talking about.

You think the F5 is more accurate and dependable than the SSU?

0 ChevronLugs over 8 years ago

You're betting not? Hmm... I was one of the very first to own an SSU. This is my third. I've returned two because of various faults recognised by Suunto support. I have more than 100 posts on WatchUSeek SSU forum.
I do know what I'm talking about.

Okay, you can spend money on watches and spend time by posting on forums. Doesn't tell me diddly about what you claim to know.

I do know what I'm talking about.

Show me the money.

0 Former Member over 8 years ago

You think the F5 is more accurate and dependable than the SSU?

No. I don't think is more reliable. At least not at this point in time. SSU is getting better but will never be a match in terms of battery life and GPS signal stability when compared to A3P. Is the physical design of the antenna.
FR935 seems a bit more reliable in terms of GPS signal based on my runs so far than F5 but is way overpriced IMHO.
I believe both Garmin and Suunto changed their strategy sacrificing functionality and raw performance for aesthetics and "smart" social features.
It just sells more watches to a much much larger customer base.

0 scotthunter2 over 8 years ago

Did you have GLONASS turned on, or were you running on GPS alone?

I had GPS and GLONASS enabled.

0 webvan over 8 years ago

Yeah, that about sums up my experiences as well (apart from the OHR, I have no complaints at all about that one... Every now and then it does act weird, but that's just the downside of wrist OHR imo and overall it performs pretty fine in my case).

I can imagine that GPS performance is good enough for plenty of people not really running specifically by pace or who use it more 'freely' so to say. But for me (where I want to train towards a certain pace for example, and also really plan my races pretty tightly) it's just not good enough. And you are also the more demanding user who runs (HAH!) into the limitations of this specific device. Overall it tracks kinda decent and overall stats seem fine, but it all is too noisy for me.

Hoping to get the 935 soon as I expect that to perform a whole bit better, but still waiting on it...

Could have made the exact same post, except after returning the F5 and being tempted by the FR935 I think that as a runner I'll just stick to my very dependable FR235 that has the "essential" Firstbeat metrics.

0 scotthunter2 over 8 years ago

I went out for a run again last night and again the watch struggled with a fix going through the high street of my local city. There are no skyscrapers where I live, just normal size buildings in a small city.

https://www.strava.com/activities/957852178/shareable_images/map_based?hl=en-US&v=1493144699

Really not good enough.

0 Al76 over 7 years ago

Hi Scott, I know this is a few months ago now. Just interested to hear what happened. I can see from your Strava that it looks like you've got a Forerunner 935 now. Did Garmin allow you to return your Fenix 5? Do you find the Forerunner more accurate?

Thanks...