Related

Anyone else? Problems with pace accuracy and other issues.

Rafael Pr.

Hello. I'd like to know if anyone else has noticed anything abnormal with their 570, as I'll describe below.

Since January 2026, I've been in contact with Garmin international support. I've pointed out problems where the pace displayed on the device doesn't match reality, and also that at various times, during a constant run, the pace varies by 30 seconds or more, without explanation, without any actual physical change having occurred.

This hasn't been resolved for me yet. They compare several sensors, combining data on pace, stride length, and cadence, and in their analysis, all the data is in harmony, therefore the device should be working correctly.

But I believe something is wrong, at least with my 570. Yesterday I went for a run and I'm sharing the data comparison so that more people can draw conclusions by analyzing their own device if they're interested.

I retrieved the .gpx file (location data) from the aforementioned workout on the Garmin Connect website and compared it with the complete data also provided by Garmin Connect. I uploaded the GPX file to the website https://gpx.studio/ to view only the positioning/pace information and compare it with the data on the Garmin Connect website.

The conclusion I draw from the information is that (see images below):

THE GPS IS CORRECTLY RECORDING THE PACE AND LOCATION! At least it seems quite consistent to me.

In my opinion, the following could be happening:

INSIDE THE WATCH, THE SOFTWARE SUMS THE INFORMATION FROM OTHER SENSORS, AND SOMETHING IN THIS INFORMATION IS WRONG AND HINDERING THE OVERALL FUNCTIONING.

The device is experiencing a delay in pace information of at least 20 seconds when the pace or route undergoes a significant change.

Not to mention variations that appear out of nowhere, for example: I am running at a pace of 07:00 and suddenly it shows a variation (that did not occur) in pace to 07:35 and 2 seconds later it returns to 07:05.

The comparison I made is divided into 2 parts. The first is the first 2 minutes of constant running. Observe how long it takes for the watch to indicate more or less the exact pace of the GPS. The second occurs at the end of a constant pace (30 seconds) followed by 60 seconds of sprinting. Also observe how long it takes for the watch to indicate the correct pace when there has been an abrupt change in pace, comparing only to the GPS.

This, for me, is the biggest complaint about my device, the 570 (version 16.28).

Not to mention other minor problems:

Even with the updates, I still notice slowness when switching screens, especially when accessing menus where it tends to search for training information in the watch's memory.

Also, the problem is that when the watch is vibrating, if you turn your wrist to turn on the display, the display doesn't light up while the device is vibrating.

Is anyone else experiencing these problems or something similar?

Regards

analysis.pdf

  • 0
    See the file attached to the post: analises.pdf
  • 0

      have you been able to resolve your pacing issue ?

    I'm getting frustrated with this watch. Supposed to be an upgrade from my 255, but so far it's more of a downgrade as far as functions are concerned.

    Here goes: my daily routine is always the same: a 1/2hour jog at 8km/h (7.5'/hour) on the same treadmill.

    I got the watch 2 weeks ago and have therefore logged 14 of these jogs, and the cadence-meter is completely wrong. Now I understand it can be out of whack on a new device (as it was on my 255 when I got it), but it is supposed to calibrate itself after a few jogs. Except that in my case, the opposite happens: it started estimating my speed at 9'/km, and after 2 weeks, it's now evaluating my speed at 13'/km. And I can see that I as log my jogs, the estimated speed is drifting further and further away from actual speed, instead of converging towards it.

    On my 255, when I change running speed of my morning jog, it will adjust nicely after just 2 or 3 jogs, to be within 5-10% of actual speed.

    I fear that Garmin may have lowered the quality of their sensor(s) to finance their (arguably) better looking screen.

    Is there something in the settings of the watch that I may have missed that would prevent the watch from using properly its cadence-meter ?

  • 0 in reply to JRKingOfBeer

    Hello friend!

    Regarding the issue of pace problems on the treadmill, I haven't used this function because I don't like treadmills, so I don't know how it is! But if you're saying you've calibrated it more than once, and when repeating the same pace as the previous workout it's not tracking correctly, there must be something wrong.

    Check if your watch's unit of measurement for pace is set to kilometers or miles. That might be the problem.

    I recommend contacting international support: [email protected]
    They usually help.

    I had problems for months with the pace varying wildly, where I was at a constant pace and the pace would change abruptly, as if I were lost. But it was always in outdoor activities (GPS active). After months, some updates came out and fixed it!

    After researching a lot on the internet, added to feedback from other users and so many inconveniences I've had, and in fact there are still some! I think the hardware doesn't work well with the operating system proposed in this Garmin model. I've had several situations where the bottleneck in information processing is clear, and since I believe this is indeed a reality, I think it could impact the functioning of sensors, why not?

    Let's hope they continue to improve the device!

    I repeat, a lot has improved over almost a year, but it's a shame!

    Contact Garmin to try to resolve this and also draw your own conclusions!

    Let us know here so everyone knows what's happening with us!

    Best regards.

  • 0 in reply to Rafael Pr.

     Thanks for taking the time and looks like I'm not the only one and it could be a problem with the latest update.

    I have sent Garmin an email to the email you provided, let's see what they say... I will update.

    This is frustrating... we pay for a better product, we upgrade, and we end up worse off...

  • 0 in reply to Rafael Pr.

    You probably saw it but there is reply by Garmin KS in the 570 forum about a public beta release that has a fix for treadmill calibration,

    As far as a 2 second variation in pace goes (7:00 to 7:35) and I'm speaking just from my thoughts, that part doesn't seem like it would be part of an overall pace problem; If it's just a seldom, random occurrence. A short interference with the GPS signal could be responsible, though I'd guess in a perfect world I'd expect an offsetting pace (to interference pace) to be logged

  • 0 in reply to gxgene1

     Thank you for the response. I am jogging on a treadmill exclusively so I don't think there is matters of GPS to consider.

    The variation is from 7'30"/km to over 13"/km: the watch underestimates my speed by almost half. (' denotes minutes, " denotes seconds).

    Following  's suggestion I sent an email to Garmin and, to my surprise, I did get a response over the week-end. They are aware of the issue and the guy gave me 2 options: (1) wait until the next formal update sometime in Q3, or (2) join the beta like what you suggest.

    My issue with betas is that I don't know what Garmin is going to break that actually works otherwise, nor am I confident that I would be able to revert to the latest Alpha that actually works if I don't like the Beta that Garmin pushes so I don't really feel I have a choice, I'm going to wait Q3's update. My 4 years' experience with the 255 is that Garmin can absolutely break what works.

  • 0 in reply to JRKingOfBeer

    Oh, no no no, I wasn't suggesting you go the Beta route, just highlighting that a fix was in the works since it made an appearance in a Beta release.

    I am the poster child for not taking chances on updates. On my first Garmin watch, the FR245, Optical HR was full on screwed up after watch did an automatic update less than a week after I bought it. Since it was new, I took it back to the store, exchanged it and have had automatic updates turn off on it and my current FR265 every since (with a random exception). I am very judicious about vetting any update before it gains admission to my watches and not many do.

    The unfortunate part is while overall, in everything other than Optical HR the 265 is a very nice improvement over the 245, unfortunately the optical HR is the basis of so many other stats. I've only allowed the 265 to update twice which did not improve the HR and the later releases appear to be worse in that regard. I'm way behind in updates and happy to be there.

    I am fully in your camp about not going Beta (and checking forum feedback before opting in to a live public release).