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

Survey for using instant vs step pace on the workout screen

JanH
over 4 years ago

As discussed here: https://forums.garmin.com/sports-fitness/running-multisport/f/forerunner-945/167532/bug-in-the-interval-workout-screen-with-pace-as-target-the-watch-doesn-t-use-instant-pace the garmin devices show the average pace during a pace-based workout step.

This can lead to issues as I describe here: https://forums.garmin.com/outdoor-recreation/outdoor-recreation/f/fenix-5-plus-series/172039/pace-target-data-screen-showing-not-actual-pace .

For a meaningful support during the workout (i.e. to keep the target pace), showing the step pace does not make sense (I-our-HO), as it does not give indications if you are currently too slow or two fast. Additionally, on the workout screen on the watch, it is not indicated that what the watch shows is an average/step pace and not the instant pace.

Garmin apparently thinks that step pace would make more sense, probably as instant pace frim GPS is tricky, as not very stable. I agree, the "instant pace" would need to be averaged over the last 10s maybe, but not more. To use the step pace might work for a 30s workout, but if the step is several minutes, obviously, the step pace is not a good indicator if you should go faster of slow down.

We (, myself and hopefully others) think that Garmin should let the user chose on what is displayed on the workout screen (gauge).

This is to find out, what the other Garmin users think. Thank you for participating!

  • 0 over 4 years ago in reply to JanH

    Someone at Garmin, could you please make it sticky until end of Nov? Thanks!

  • 0 over 4 years ago

    Come on Garmin, let’s get this sorted. Give the user the choice. I want to use instant pace as I use the VDOT O2 third party app you recently integrated.  Workouts are based entirely on pace and they are very difficult to follow properly with the current average pace gauge. You really need instant pace to accurately follow workouts.  You basically have this feature for heart rate. I get instant feedback on HR as to where I am I’m my zone. Let’s have the same for pace.

    Could you please, please please add this feature in your next Sprint?

  • 0 over 4 years ago

    instant pace makes more sense

  • 0 over 4 years ago

    Insatant Pace / HR / Power, whatever the workout is based on. Step pace would be fine as a secondary number. Or, it would be best if we can configure this screen.

  • 0 over 4 years ago in reply to sousekd

    voting should be possible again, if you would like to add your vote to the poll.

  • 0 over 4 years ago

    How is instant pace 5 - 10s average?

  • 0 over 4 years ago in reply to philipshambrook

    Due to GPS inaccuracy you need to average it over a few seconds, otherwise it would jump around wildly... 

  • 0 over 4 years ago in reply to JanH

    I get that. But that's not what I would call instant pace. 

  • 0 over 4 years ago in reply to philipshambrook

    In my opinion there are two different instant paces:

    1- instant pace of gps with FR945: a lot of threads described how this instant pace is very smoothed (more smoothed than the FR935, as @TimGrose noted)

    in my opinion is a 20-30 seconds average. This could be a good or a bad thing, depending on the preferences of the user. Probably it's the best that Garmin can give us with the current gps satellites and the Sony gps chipset. With instant pace of gps it's not very useful to have a 10 or 15 seconds because it would be too smoothed.

    2- instant pace of footpod. This is usually very reactive, and it would be nice to have the possibility to choose a smoother instant pace chosen by the user with a x-seconds average.

    The CIQ app RunPower by Flowstate has a datafield with 10-15-20 sec average instant pace. I wonder why Garmin in his top end watches doesn't give this type of x-seconds average pace as a native datafield, without using CIQ data field: maybe this could be the topic of another survey?