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

Running mode vs hiking mode

Former Member
Former Member over 5 years ago

Hello everyone!

what are the differences in running mode vs hiking mode?  Frequency for GPS reading?  Something else?

I can't seem to find this info online anywhere.  Does Garmin have a detailed description of their different modes someplace?

Thanks!!

Mike

  • 0 over 5 years ago

    The most significant difference is that with running mode you get an activity of type "Running", while in hiking mode you get an activity of type "Hiking". Also, running-specific metrics, like for example running dynamics, performance condition and possibly several others, are not available in hiking mode.

  • 0 over 5 years ago

    Hiking won't attempt a VO2max estimate.

  • 0 over 5 years ago

    Frequency for recording should be set to 1s by you on all GPS enabled sports.

    Besides running dynamics/VO2Max and LTHR recognition, the biggest differences on the watch are the units. (min/km vs. km/h). 

  • 0 over 5 years ago in reply to BeneGi
    BeneGi said:
    Frequency for recording should be set to 1s by you on all GPS enabled sports.

    Agreed on the units issue you mentioned but I'm not sure about the above.

    The way Garmin watches are supposed to work:

    They always take sensor measurements every second (position, HR, altitude, speed, temp whatever) even when in "Smart" data recording mode. If there's no difference between the last measurement (say, if your position, HR, altitude, speed, temp etc) the watch skips the data-point and refers to previous. Mostly this was done "back in the old days" when devices had limited internal memory. Now, it makes little difference, except for syncing purposes when 1-second recording takes longer to upload the activity file.

    I personally haven't seen any difference in recorded tracks between 1-second and smart but I'm not moving very fast and other people (DCRainmaker?) suggest there's something else going on with how "smart" records data as it seems to cut corners. YMMV.

  • 0 over 5 years ago in reply to Otto-Destruct

    smart record cuts corners because it is not as smart as you quoted. If you do a corner and it is out of the interval and not big enough to fall into "change", it will be cut. Doesnt matter if you are running or hiking.
    Personally, I see the difference and track hiking in 1s. The watch is capable of tracking the whole day in this mode, so doesnt matter.

  • 0 over 5 years ago in reply to BeneGi

    And that's a valid point. Back in the day storage capacity on watches like the FR305 wasn't too great so Smart Recording was more important especially for the longer activities - not that you could go too long anyway as the battery life was severely limited. Newer models have much larger storage capacity so generating large .fit files is no longer much of an issue. I now use 1s recording exclusively. 

    Otto-Destruct said:
    I personally haven't seen any difference in recorded tracks between 1-second and smart

    I'm not convinced there is too much of a difference although it's been a long time since I've checked. But then, I'm never too worried about how the track looks like on the map as long as it's close enough. I'm much more interested in the recorded distance and time.

    On a lot of the trails I run it's uncertain whether the path on the map is a true mapping of the track on the ground - happens to be off more time then most people realise - and if the trail is under tree cover, narrow and windy no wrist mounted GPS is going to be able to follow the path even it was correctly located on the map.

  • 0 over 5 years ago in reply to Dr Phil

    The same for hiking:
    A lot of trails change after every winter in the mountains.