This discussion has been locked.

You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Why is Garmin ignoring the GPS issue?

Hi,
It seems that with each firmware version that comes out, we are disappointed to find out that the GPS issues have not been address.
There's a 52-page thread on the GPS issues in the Fenix 5 and each time someone approaches you with hard proof that there's an issue, you dismiss him/her with various excuses.
https://forums.garmin.com/forum/on-the-trail/wrist-worn/fenix-5-5s/152984-gps-accuracy

Why not address the issue?
Give us a clear statement whether you are aware of the problems and are working on it or if we'll never get an accurate GPS reading on the Fenix 5.

I've switched from the Polar M400 (which was very accurate) to the high-end Fenix 5 and I was expecting at the very least to get similar GPS accuracy (if not better due to it being a high-end watch and due to GLONASS support).

But what I got is a watch that works horrendously when the GLONASS is on (routes are all over the place) and inaccurate routes with GPS only.

If this issue is not resolved, I will never buy Garmin again!

0 Ante over 6 years ago

I have done quite a lot of testing, comparing my f5 with other runners tracks and with my Samsung galaxy phone in the pocket (same side as watch). I upload to mygpsfiles.com and compare tracks. My f5 is most ig the time off track with an offset approx 10-15 meters. My phone is almost always right on track. Total distance is normally quite ok, 1-2% shorter than expected. I spend time updating open street map and need accurate GPS tracks. Is this a case for garmin warranty or should it be consider ok?

0 jonchild over 6 years ago

I got a Garmin Fenix 5 in January. Initially it performed well but lately the data is miles out.

i did a 20km cycle in the U.K. It unbelievably recorded it as 70.84km! I put it down to a sync issue with the speed sensor.

the next 2 runs I did looked about right but they were in Singapore.

I then did a run today in the U.K. which was about 7.5-8km. It recorded it as 11.96km.

I have never had any issues until the Fenix 5.

is there anything I can do to stabalise the distance issues? I was on GPS only but am going to try GLONASS as well to see if that helps.

i have no issues with my other garmin watches.

So tried another run this weekend. I ran with my Fenix 5 and my Forerunner 620 on the same wrist. My Fenix 5 had GLONASS switched on. The results were better than the massive discrepancies from my prior run and cycle.

Fenix 5 had a distance of 5.18km and the forerunner 620 showed 5.24km. That’s a difference of 1.1%.is that an acceptable level of error? Never had any issues with the forerunner 620,only the Fenix 5.

i intend to do some further tests wearing both watches. I will try with GLONASS switched off so it’s GPS v GPS as well to make it a true comparison.

0 bobble2 over 6 years ago

Everyone is free to think, whether he criticizes the inaccuracy or firmly believes that the critics only based on "wrong compare".
But if someone has the feeling that the Fenix is inaccurate for its application or area where it is used, "scientific methodologies" would not care/mind him.

But I would take a point that jonchild mentioned. GLONASS, that's very strange with it. With good boundary conditions (weather, sky,..) I do not notice any significant difference. But with bad wether, sky,... I get a faster fix, sound very good. But when I look at the track after that, you can see that the first few minutes (or more) the accuracy is very wrong and then catches again to a more accurace track. With GPS only it takes longer to fix but the result is better.(Not scientifically measured, but a personal feeling).

Does anyone have similar experiences? Is GLONASS very area dependent (US, Europe,...) ?

0 thomas_irming over 6 years ago

So tried another run this weekend. I ran with my Fenix 5 and my Forerunner 620 on the same wrist. My Fenix 5 had GLONASS switched on. The results were better than the massive discrepancies from my prior run and cycle.

Fenix 5 had a distance of 5.18km and the forerunner 620 showed 5.24km. That’s a difference of 1.1%.is that an acceptable level of error? Never had any issues with the forerunner 620,only the Fenix 5.

i intend to do some further tests wearing both watches. I will try with GLONASS switched off so it’s GPS v GPS as well to make it a true comparison.

I did a similar test yesterday, also with a Garmin Forerunner 620 as reference. The Fenix 5 had GLONASS turned on, and on the left arm. The Forerunner 620 was on the right. The 620 showed 30.01 km and the Fenix 5 29,69. which also is around 1.1 % different. As long as there is no trees or buildings to come in the way of the GPS/GLONASS signals, the two watches are very similar in reading. As soon as there are even the smallest buildings or trees the Fenix 5 seems to suffer.The instant pace is also close to useess on the Fenix 5, which of course can be better with a foot pod.
The attached file shows the difference between the two watches. Not very impressive.

0 jonchild over 6 years ago

I did a similar test yesterday, also with a Garmin Forerunner 620 as reference. The Fenix 5 had GLONASS turned on, and on the left arm. The Forerunner 620 was on the right. The 620 showed 30.01 km and the Fenix 5 29,69. which also is around 1.1 % different. As long as there is no trees or buildings to come in the way of the GPS/GLONASS signals, the two watches are very similar in reading. As soon as there are even the smallest buildings or trees the Fenix 5 seems to suffer.The instant pace is also close to useess on the Fenix 5, which of course can be better with a foot pod.
The attached file shows the difference between the two watches. Not very impressive.

I only had some 2 storey houses and no real tree coverage during my run. The majority of the run was in the open too so the difference in performance is still worse than expected.

i did a couple of runs in Singapore where the building cover is massive multi storey buildings. It performed ok but I didn’t benchmark it against the forerunner 620.

0 Jczero over 6 years ago

The GPS in this watch is aweful for the price. I went on a 10 mile hike and it gave me 12. Play sports with it on and it has almost double the distance my vivo active HR has with gps and the map is all over the place. I put it on treadmill mode today and go exactly what the vivo active gives me in GPS mode. Finally I play golf with it on too. My vivo active was spot on with yardage. The Fenix is constantly 3-5 yards off.

Basic a older cheaper watch made by the same company has far better GPS than the current Fenix line.

0 VRamos over 6 years ago

Hi,
i just sent back my fênix 5 due to GPS problems and want to change for another garmin. As I do triathlon, I might change for a 935, but I am afraid of GPS accuracy as well. Even thought about getting the old 735xt because of GPS. Any advise?

0 Seren over 6 years ago

Even thought about getting the old 735xt because of GPS. Any advise?

Get a Suunto?

0 AJRykala over 6 years ago

Hi,
i just sent back my fênix 5 due to GPS problems and want to change for another garmin. As I do triathlon, I might change for a 935, but I am afraid of GPS accuracy as well. Even thought about getting the old 735xt because of GPS. Any advise?

Lots of people seem to think the 935's construction (i.e non metal) does improve things.

0 michaelchan over 6 years ago

I ran the BMO half on Sunday and my fenix 5 registered 22.1k which is off by a km! The route is pretty straight and it was sunny. Advice from the agent from Garmin is to set recording to every second. I ran several BMO marathons in the past from 2000 up to now and have always tracked my run using a Garmin watch. I only noticed acceptable differences say around half a km for 44k. The fenix 5 is really disappointing!