Garmin Fenix 6 Pro distance measured much shorter than Vivoactive 4 and Google Maps

If you need a beta tester let me know.

I think when I tested your 1st release we could find no shortness issues with the .FIT files I sent. 

If you can please support old and new algorithms in one PRG and even better write both to .FIT at the same time ;)

They we can use on old and new watches and get consistent results.

@AndersB - so my last run used your CIQ field and there is barely any difference between what my Fenix 6 Sapphire records vs your own algorithm.

To me I think this supports my view as I said a few days ago that we dealing with faulty devices, not faulty algorithms when these large distance issues occur for a small minority.

Hi, 

I cant send the PRG files at the moment. The new algorithm is not good enough (for me) yet so I don't want to share right now. I need to fix some things before, then I will release it. Takes a lot of time because I want to test the changes with own runs. 

My CIQ data field is also short on distance but I'm working on a way to improve that. 

One recent finding from my side is that both distance and pace in the watch is working better if I'm more fit. So, the problems is worse when I'm out of shape. Probably connected to that I'm using different running techniques when I'm fit or not. Varied running technique in the same activity worsens the problem for me. I have speculated about this before but now when I'm looking at the data its getting more clear. Of course other things affects this issue also. Discussed many times.

My own deviations are within Garmins tolerances but I still thinks that it can be improved.

Can you share a link to the activity on Connect? Maybe by PM if you don't want to share it here in the forum. 

Did you try wearing the watch on the inside wrist? Any improvements?

Hi. I did not find any particular improvement with this...

In my experience it might improve track quality (less tendancy for the track to be offset to the left) but there is no impact on distance.

These are how my watches measure...from todays run. I wear then all normally. 0.02 miles deviation over 7.15 miles. Way way better than consumer GPS error margins. The black Fenix 6 was paired to a caliberated Stryd (x102.1 track caliberated) to provide another distance crosscheck for the 255 and Sapphire Fenix 6.

Again if your Fenix is significantly short vs another watch worn at the same time or the watch worn by your running partner,  its very likely to be faulty in my view.

If you are in the EU or UK since the full Gallileo constellation became live, you should get very good results with GPS + Gallileo.

I buy Fenix 6 and there is same problem with shorter distance compare older Fenix 3.

Its an interesting problem!

So as you see above, I do not have a distance problem. But if I examine my GPS tracks from the 7.15 mile run above I did yesterday, the track quality for my Fenix 6 Sapphire is a lot better than the black Fenix 6 Pro, especially with tree cover when the black Fenix 6 Pro gets a large offset whereas the Forerunner 255 and Titanium Fenix 6 have very close tracks that are very hard to tell apart with tree cover.

The black Fenix 6 Pro is performing worse than the 6 Titanium for GPS track quality - due to the poor quality of the black Fenix 6 Pro without using a Stryd I think distance would have been too long due to the track wandering so badly adding excess distance.