Related
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

Question on Running Cadence

slimshainy
over 7 years ago
did my second ever run today with the 935. I used the Dozen Run data field. Previously I have been using the tomtom multisport and so this is the first time I have ever had a live cadence reading during the run.

I noticed my cadence was around 165 at the start of the run so I reduced stride length and did more strides to get cadence closer to 180

I didn't feel like I was running faster as I was taking less effort but looking back at the data I was running pretty fast with less effort compared to my usual running.

So this got me thinking. How accurate is the cadence reading on the 935? I have heard about Stryd but thats expensive. Is the 935 accurate enough for my needs?

On a separate note I ran with both watches on and the Tomtom said I did a lot more steps and hence higher cadence but after doing a bit of research the tomtom has had a lot of complaints on step count/cadence accuracy. anyway this shows i previously thought my cadence was higher than it actually was over the last few years with the tomtom watch
  • 0 over 7 years ago
    Not heard of any issues with Garmin devices measuring cadence. They can do so via different ways too - RD-Pod, HRM-Run or HRM-Tri, foot pod, the watch itself. I've got a Stryd and no obvious difference in measurement between that and the 935 itself.

    That said it is usually quite hard to suddenly change style from a rather low cadence to a lot higher one (as you did) if your pace does not change. If you had sped up then usually that results in a slight increase in cadence naturally. Well it does for me.
  • 0 over 7 years ago
    thanks for the reply Tim

    It's good to know that there is no obvious difference between Stryd and the 935 itself for Cadence. That means I can stick with just the watch for now and think about purchasing something like a Styrd/RD pod in the future.

    As for pace not changing much, i did adjust the effort i put in to the strides. So i increased strides but used less effort. at least it felt like i was doing that. not sure if I am very good at changing styles or not but it seemed to work for me. hence why it felt like i was running slower. anyway I will have to experiment more...
  • 0 over 7 years ago
    Hi, slimshainy

    Only watch can't provide the accurate cadence. Your watch moving follow your hand not your body.

    Follow timgrose, for FR935 you need at least Running Dynamics Pod.

  • 0 over 7 years ago
    for FR935 you need at least Running Dynamics Pod.

    or any of the HRMs with running dynamics. While the watch does give you something I'm not convinced it's altogether accurate.
  • 0 over 7 years ago
    or any of the HRMs with running dynamics. While the watch does give you something I'm not convinced it's altogether accurate.


    When have compared results from a HRM-Tri and the watch (any one that measures it BTW) then found no significant difference.

    Have you contrary evidence?
  • 0 over 7 years ago
    The difference in output is noticeable - using watch and using chest strap. I deliberately chose two longer off road trail runs to keep the comparison in the same ball park. That said, for cadence, close enough is usually good enough anyway.

    If you want accuracy then I believe you need something attached directly to the body and not reading from a limb 'waving' in the breeze.
  • 0 over 7 years ago
    Strange. I thought all mine were open. Should be ok now.
  • 0 over 7 years ago
    Bit difficult to compare accuracy on different runs. The one with the 935 you appeared to stop (or walk?) quite a lot which has pulled the average right down. When you were running your cadence was in the low to mid 170s on both runs.
  • 0 over 7 years ago
    Somehow I knew you'd pick up on that :-) Hard to make comparisons on trails but try these - watch cadence and chest strap. They're clearly very different graphs with much more variation from the watch trace. I certainly prefer the more consistent output from the chest strap.

    Not something I'm overly concerned with as I said. But just noting that cadence from the wrist might not be as good as from a body mounted monitor. YMMV of course. For me it's moot anyway as I will always use a chest strap for the (usually) more consistent heart rate readings.