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

Accuracy of FR955 on the track ?

Waiting for mine but I was wondering if anyone had run with their FR955 on the track yet and if yes, without the track mode ? Reason I'm asking is that I sometimes run on 300 and 350 tracks and unfortunately the track mode cannot be set for these distances as it's "hard coded" for 400 meters.

I briefly owned an Epix 2 and found that without the track mode it was as inaccurate as GPS watches on a track, i.e. up to 5% more than the actual distance, be it in muti-band or not. Since I liked the screen I got the Venu 2 and incredibly I've found it to be crazy accurate on the track, anti-clockwise at least, never being more than 2% off and generally around 1%. It's so repeatable it can't be a fluke and I noticed that DCR had also mentioned that he'd found it the most accurate watch on the track when he did a comparison versus a Garmin watch in track mode.

0 taniwha33 over 3 years ago

I train on a 250m track twice a week. I had the watch on thursday evening, just before the session and did the training with the watch out of the box (no update).

Pace was better than the 945lte (which was already better than the F6 pro).

0 webvan over 3 years ago in reply to taniwha33

Thanks, sounds good, did you look at the lap distances ? Runalyze shows them down to the meter so you can see pretty precisely what's going on.

0 taniwha33 over 3 years ago in reply to webvan

My session was 3*1500, GC reports 1,51*2 and 1,50.

The same goes with the 2*500.

The lap with the 945lte was always reported as sub-250m, for example 500m (2laps) being reported as 0,49 on GC.

0 webvan over 3 years ago in reply to taniwha33

That's odd, GPS devices I've used always over reported the distance.

Anyway these are good results for the FR955, close enough to provide accurate pace on top of the times you'd be trying to reach at every 200/400 mark.