Feedback for GPS 2.60

I've thought about looking into orienteering a few times as it looks interesting! But, alas, only so many hobbies can one do. I've done a fair amount of Geo-caching in the past and would never think about using the 945 for that as I would break out the trusty 60 CSx.

I believe your using the wrong tool for the job.

Well, I press lap on the control points, so then I can use those afterwards to get my GPS track and control points to match.

Which then helps a lot of fixing the track already, but still depending on the course I'll need to do extra adjusting if there's trails or some other points that I know I did see/use in the way. But that's always work that needs to be done. It gets pretty ok, but of course it would be nicer just to have the start and end point and everything just matches :D 

http://www.matstroeng.se/quickroute/en/ is what I like to use for having my maps done. And then it looks something like this:



Was visiting my parents in summer and did went to place that was totally new for me. Some mistakes of course :( 

But if there's local clubs try it :) It's not expensive hobby and it's really nice for getting your head empty of work or other stuff. You really can't orienteer without having all the focus reading the map and the nature.

And this is pretty off-topic but.. :D

Well, comparing a run from yesterday with an identical run last week I'd say GPS is... identical

Last week (older gps):

https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/4259988086

This week (2.60 gps)

https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/4280653627

Considering battery usage, think about the same as well... hard to say as battery depletion is not linear and with the last week run I had about 20% left to start with, yesterday 55% or so. Yesterday was decent though, liiiitle over 4% (gps only, connected to Polar OH1)

Did you have a good GPS lock at the start. We all like to think our pace is more stable than it is.Often it is not. 

Interesting that you think the F5 had better GPS. I seem to remember a massively long thread about the poor quality of the F5 in comparison to the 935.

True, but that was the original design of the 5.  They updated it a bit after launch and improved the GPS reception; Not entirely sure what they did, but there are monster ancient threads in the 5 forum if you're interested!

i think the 920 was good, the 935 got better but now the 945 took a step back; here are some relevant printscreens:

while i know there were several laps with the 945, i always follow the same path - and it's pretty messed up; the 935 tracked waaay better (just look at the 180 turn on the right side, the deviation in the 935 pic right below the 9 is because i sometimes use both of the paths :D)

Have you tried different combinations of GPS? I have found little difference but in general in this part of the world GPS is fine on its own. 

Is this repeatable? Again sometimes I find better days than others.

I have been swimming with mine and posted a comparison between the 945, F6 and Marq. there's not much difference and that is a very difficult environment. I have comparison runs with the 945 and F6/Marq that suggest they are all equally as good (or as bad if you are a sceptic lol!).

:D :D - i love the sceptic part. so - basically i did try both glonass and galileo combination, the track you've been seeing is recorded with glonass - as this was my main setting on the 935 as well and found that it delivered a pretty good track. 

regarding repetability here are some other snippets:

these are some snippets taken during the last 1.5 months - it had both good days and bad days, but as you can see, it's pretty inconsistent

i'll also tag Former Member and Garmin_ODQA, perhaps they'll share some ideas / opinions

I hope they can at least try to improve it somewhat with software updates (though of course if this is really a 'feature' of the new chipset, it will be limited by the hardware :-/ )