I would never rely on the current pace directly from my watch. It will give you erratic readings. Instead, the average pace will be OK. In my opinion, if you want to have a precise current pace you will need something like Stryd.
I would never rely on the current pace directly from my watch. It will give you erratic readings. Instead, the average pace will be OK. In my opinion, if you want to have a precise current pace you will need something like Stryd.
Haven't they just added a 'lap average pace' as well as current pace graph?
I expect to see average or current pace, interval time. But not a useless screen.
The change to current pace rather than step pace in workouts has been noted by others and seems an intentional change, as observed by me and others https://forums.garmin.com/outdoor-recreation/outdoor-recreation/f/epix-2/282955/current-pace-instead-of…
Generally pacing by the older GPS chips in the Fenix was a mess. Yesterday I tried it out and I put the PacePro Datafield beside a „current pace“ datafield on a 6-field activity watchface. The PacePro field shows the planned pace and the current pace…
Average pace or current pace? Current pace is typically problematic for GPS devices. I generally avoid that metric or use current lap pace instead. Also, I've moved this thread to the English forum instead of the German forum. You appear to know that…
You need Stryd if you want to have the best accuracy for distance, current pace etc.
Yesterday we had a virtual competition here where you run 5 km alone and upload your results afterwards. Current pace on my watch was consistently wrong, on my 4th km current pace was around 4:00 according to the watch while it took me 4:30 to complete…
