Pace and distance problem - considering Stryd Wind V3

1.  If you set the Stryd for pace and distance always, this is the data that appears in Connect.  I don't use Strava, but I don't see why it would be different.

2.  I have V2 (no wind) and I find it very accurate. You may have to calibrate it, but that's easy enough and in most cases unnecessary.  Some say they need to calibrate for different shoes, but I've never had to do so using the Stryd for a couple of years and 4-5 pairs of shoes.

3.  Pro. Accurate pace compared to GPS.  More accurate distance.  There was recently a debate on the F6 forum about the Stryd not being accurate for distance.  One with such a hatred for Stryd that they'll chime in as soon as they see "Stryd" in the title :). Independent studies and my own experience show it's actually better than GPS distance. Running Power.  I'm sold on Running Power and no longer train by pace or HR.  I personally have seen gains training with power over the latter two. 

Cons. Probably not a good idea to use on trail runs where you're running through puddles and small creeks. 

3.  Pro. Accurate pace compared to GPS.  More accurate distance.  There was recently a debate on the F6 forum about the Stryd not being accurate for distance.  One with such a hatred for Stryd that they'll chime in as soon as they see "Stryd" in the title :). Independent studies and my own experience show it's actually better than GPS distance. Running Power.  I'm sold on Running Power and no longer train by pace or HR.  I personally have seen gains training with power over the latter two. 

Cons. Probably not a good idea to use on trail runs where you're running through puddles and small creeks. 

True..can't wait for this thread to explode :-)

I also have no negatives using stryd, it has it's quirks, I noticed it needs to be quite solidly attached to your shoe (so it can't wiggle around whilst runinng) to give accurate pace and distance but as soon as you get that sorted, it's accurate and easy to use.

+1

But now there is one small minus-a paid subscription for advanced features.

Also don't be suprised if your VO2max drops. Stryd affects training status and VO2max, it tends to decrease for a while but in my case new numbers were closer to to my VO2max measured in lab. Garmin seems to me a bit optimistic with my VO2max when running with GPS pace/distance :) 

There was a really big thread discussing Stryd here which is a bit of a eyeopener as pretty much discussions on Stryd elsewhere tend to be heavily moderated (their own official Facebook page as an example) https://forums.garmin.com/outdoor-recreation/outdoor-recreation/f/fenix-6-series/262579/stryd-is-not-all-it-s-cut-out-to-be-maybe

1) If you set up Stryd to be the source of pace and distance, yes

2) I would say that if you run under good clear open skies, Stryd is worse for distance accuracy than GPS - take a typical 5k run, you could quite easily register 2850m or 3150m on any given day, depending on your shoe selection and pace. While you can calibrate Stryd this doesn't solve the shoe change issue or even that reported distance is quite clearly effected by your running pace - the calibration factor simply is a distance multiplier, it doesn't solve any underlying inaccuracy in the device. Stryd's distance errors are also cumulative, if you are 2% short every mile, this can REALLY add up over long runs - ie a half marathon you can quite easily end up 1/4 mile short of the official length (annoying when you PB!) and this is easily seen when compared with the official course length and indeed other GPS watches!

I do think for pacing vs. Garmin's own instant pace reporting, that Stryd is generally better - for example with a Fenix 6 if you are trying to rum to 8:00/mi pace, you will often find your device swings between 6:30/mi to 9:30/mi with no change in your own pace, while Stryd pace is more consistent. I think only the 'instant pace' use case is the only compelling argument for Stryd ownership personally, certainly for distance I'd take my chances with GPS, as more than likely it'll do better than Stryd. 

3) See above

If you google, you can find a lot of reports about Stryd being inaccurate (usually distance too short or too low vs. an official event course) - to be fair, you see the same reports about GPS! I think for better instant pace, you can make a case for Stryd, but that really is only because Garmin instant pace is so poor. Only a tiny tiny minority of runners use footpods, as it's really a band-aid over a solution that really should be solved GPS side (with the help of new chipsets hopefully)

I would not run without my Stryd (V2 or V3) - I have been using Stryd since the Pioneer Kickstarter. 

The V3 Wind part is a gimmick IMHO. My outdoor runs are in a place with a lot of wind - and the Wind part is "hmm" at best. It measures at your foot level - which in the UK means if there is a lot of plant growth on either side - your feet are in a wind tunnel - while the rest of your body might not be. It is better for "wide open" stretches.

The new "subscriber" features are not worth it. The training plans are so 2000's - so completely static plans. Sadly Stryd have removed some of the advanced reporting unless you are a subscriber to their training plan. IMHO - a stupid move. I have done the 6 month paid trial - and I will NOT be renewing.

Where Stryd shines is as a footpod. Both for indoor and outdoor runs. I have my Garmin Stryd settings set to Calibration Auto = OFF / Factor = 100% - Indoor = Always - Outdoor = Always. 

The Stryd for me match perfectly as long as I remember to tell it my current weight within 1 to 2 kg. If I'm more of than that it shows. 

My Stryd match my treadmill almost perfectly (My treadmill is well calibrated) - and I have a RUNN sensor on the TM as well. Both measure very close. The RUNN sensor is slightly more "imperfect" than the Stryd. My treadmill and Stryd are within about 100 meters on 10k run. The RUNN are usually 100m+ to 300m- on the same. 

Outdoor runs with Stryd - vs with Garmin GPS. Well I think my Garmin has gotten better - but I find Stryd is more consistent about the distances. No two  runs are equal but I have my "routes" and Stryd data is more "repeatable" where Garmin is hit and miss. Sometimes Garmin will show within 100m of Stryd on a 8k run - but mostly not. Mostly it will be +200m/-400m. But mostly "minus" - and I think the minus's are from sharp turns. All runs are paved road - with at least 180deg clear view of the sky (along the seafront). 

So as I said I use Stryd always - apart from in a few instances where 1. I have forgotten to charge the Stryd / 2. I have forgotten to take the Stryd out of the charger. So that is when I get opportunity to check :) the distances on Garmin GPS... (GPS Setting GPS+GLONASS - 1 sec updates)

So in short - ANY Stryd is better than no Stryd. I think the V2 is the best followed by V3 (wind). V1 of the footpod had all kinds of issues running down the batteries to the point where the Stryd would not turn on and could not be recharged. I have not seen that with V2 or V3.

My experiences with Stryd is that it is incredibly accurate for flat runs but can provide incorrect distances if there's a bunch of hills. I've taken mine to the track and compared it against markers as well as GPS and it's always either as accurate or more accurate than GPS. Running around my local routes which don't have my elevation changes it's been very accurate.

I used it during a recent half-marathon and it tracked over 14 miles for the total run. There was a ton of large hills on the run which I think is what gave it issues. I ran after that with the same setup (however on flat roads) and it was again very accurate. The only conclusion I've been able to draw from my experiences is that my device is not great with major hills. I've since started shifting back to mostly GPS only runs... for what that's worth.

Brian-ADR said:

that my device is not great with major hills

And that will likely be because the stride shortens/lengthens on hills. Footpods work best when the stride length is reasonably consistent.

Yep, it's a bummer because I would have liked to use it for races but it can be challenging to find a flat enough course out here in the PNW. I'm just happy I was using a PacePro plan as well otherwise I'd have been completely off with pacing and running strategy.

hmm - my average runs has 40-120m on 5-12 km of in- and decline - with some accents > 10% (I live on a rather steep hill) and have not had any issues (UK South Coast)