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

1030+ gradient issue II

8958970
over 3 years ago

 

Garmin-Blake

 says:

"After reviewing internally, we have found that the devices showing a delay in Grade by up to 10-15 seconds are operating within our expectations. 

For users seeing the delays in Grade of 20-30+ seconds, please reach out to your local support team as this may be hardware-related and may require an exchange."

A delay of 1-3 seconds is acceptable in practice. For longer delays, remove this information from the display. It's useless.  

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to GarminNut

    It isn't flat where I live.  Personally I just don't see the need to have the gradient on display.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to Wongataa

    EDIT: Each to their own I guess. Gradient displays are really helpful when dealing with "false flats" on a road bike.  They are also very helpful from a safety perspective when figuring out a descent on a mountain bike.  I use a much different technique when descending a 10% grade then when descending a 20% grade, so I don't go flying over the handlebars.  It's good to know the gradients when climbing, so that I know the spots I need to be careful in when I do the return descent.  

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to Wongataa

    Currently there are two issues both very important and one related to another I think, and it is very well described in the other thread:

    - Elevation data presents a long delay (almost 20 secs). This is key for a race, when you have to climb 3 "2000m's" you have to ensure what is left in each climb to push hard or to keep fuel. Actually elevation have a big delay with real data, so you will NEVER KNOW what more you have to climb. I ensure you this is very very frustating. 20 secs in elevation data is a lot.

    - Gradient data long delay. I Think is related to the first one but has their own issues, for me in particular this is not a big issue, is anoying and useless in the way is working, as it not working well as it does not reflect the current gradient data.

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    Complete nonsense from Garmin. The lag is ridiculously bad. Every other bike computer I had prior to 1030 /1030+ reported good grade readings almost instantly. My Wahoo’s Grade readings are instant. 

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to Wongataa

    It's not just the real time gradient on display, it's also the lag on altitude data in the .fit file. Any analysis you do using that will obviously be skewed.

    In the end it does not matter if it makes sense or not - garmin competitors are obviously able to get this working as it should, hell, even older garmin devices work as they should, so it's really either garmin's incompetence or unwillingness to fix this.

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    I owned older 800, 1000, 1030 models so far, but none of them had the problems described. The Edge 1030 Plus has this gradient issue. It was a mistake to buy this device.

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    Garmin, We still have this problem!

  • 0 over 3 years ago

    This is the reason my next unit will likely be a Wahoo. If Garmin believes that a 10-15 seconds is acceptable, what else will they consider acceptable when they are unable to fix it or do not consider something like this a problem? Was contemplating an upgrade to my Edge 1000 and Edge 820...no way.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to riprazor

    If NASA had a similar approach as GARMIN, Apollo 11 would never land on the moon.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to 8958970

    The $152 billion helped.

    The Apollo program’s total cost was about $25.4 billion, about $152 billion in today’s dollars.