Strava live segments is an important feature for me, because it is really fun. I had an Edge 520 before and it worked fine, but sometimes it lost the segment. Edge 1030 never loses the segment but the comparative times in real time are not accurate at all. I cannot rely on it. For example, I was trying to beat my PB this morning in a 2 km climb. I started at full power and after 200 meters the 1030 said I was 11 seconds ahead. When I reached 500 meters it said I was 15 seconds behind (all of a sudden). I tried to cut the lead for a little while, but I couldn´t do it, so I gave up. At home, I have compared today's effort and my PB and there is no such difference. The two efforts are pretty even, with a minimum difference of 1 or 2 seconds between them until I gave up. This happens a lot. The gap showed by the 1030 is not accurate at all. Edge 520 is far more accurate. With the 520 you know the actual gap during the whole segment and you can rely on it. I don't know if the algorithm of the 1030 is different, but it works worse. Please, implement the same algorithm or method used in Edge 520 for Edge 1030. Thank you.
This afternoon I rode 5 private segments. The first 2 jumped forward and back by about 5 seconds which wasn't too bad, the third by 25 seconds, on the 4th I stopped and added a gps accuracy field which looks like it doesn't actually work properly (see other thread). The fifth segment jumped around at the start and quickly my PB accelerated away from me so that it was 40 seconds in front of me at times then jumping back 15 seconds. With about 3 seconds left of the segment, and despite no real change in speed on a steady slope, I suddenly began to catch my personal best, closing to within 15 seconds. I noticed during all of the segments that were jumping that the distance ahead was just as jumpy, although it seemed to go in the opposite direction to the time.
Anyway, loading the effort into strava and coming the fifth segment to my personal best, the time behind curve goes in the exact opposite direction as to what was shown on the screen, ie as I got closer to the end strava reports I was losing time where the 1030 said I was gaining.
I have files and should have some screenshots but I'm not sure they'll show anything
On this mornings commute on one segment I was instantly 1:01 behind PB. This quickly changed to 1 second behind. The pacer was consistent until 200m to go where I went from 6 seconds down to having the pacer finish! Upon completing the segment I was given a new personal best by 5 seconds
with edge810 and gniza was perfect in old days.time ahead behind was consistent. you could also race against with any pb recorded in the past. you could select. but strava and garmin destroyed this good working system and they couldn't put something better instead of this. what a shame! i am using edge 1030 now but i will not use strava live segments after two months trial. it doesn't deserve any money..
I agree. I had strava premium but I preferred to use gniza as it seemed to work better. However, strava broke gniza so now I won't pay for the new strava summit.
I still don't have any opinion if E1030 is doing better or worse in Strava Segments (I've just made first ride through the segments with my E1030), but I have one observation:
Behaviour observed by many of you with inconsistent and jumping time gap might be caused actually not by your current ride but the ride which you're comparing to. I've found it while analysing my ride, see below an output from Strava Effort Comparsion:
As you could see, black icon is my current ride (E1030) and the purple - an old one (Edge 800). The chasing one moves smoothly along the path and the purple - it jumping which may give a perception of inconsistent reporting of time gap.
Track from Edge 1030 was recorded with setting "record every 1 second" whereas on Edge 800 - with "smart" settings, i.e. causing some optimisations. I believe, the only reasonable setting for everybody who plays with Strava Segments is this "1 second"
As I wrote, I'm still starting with Segments on E1030 but I wanted to share with you these thoughts.
It would be much more successful to try longer strava segments. The one you have used for a 500 meter test is too short to analyze the differences. must be checked in segments where the distances are greater and so you can see clearly the evolution of the differences
