Settings->Audio prompts-> Power alert "Average power 65536W" during ride when power meter not connected

When I'm riding a bike without a power meter the average power alert gives an erroneous number.  Even the likes of Sir Mark Cavendish in his prime would have struggled to average this much power over 5m let alone 5km.

The "Audio prompts" configuration applies across all types of cycling activities so the only way to avoid this error is to turn off the alert when riding without a power meter which would be bothersome.

Obviously the erroneous high number needs to be fixed, but going beyond that it would be good if the power alert was only generated when a power sensor is connected.

Alternatively if this is not feasible the following would help:

- make it configurable by Activity profile. For example I could set the alert for Road bike but unset it for Bike Commute.

- if the lap average power is zero then don't generate the alert. There's no point generating the alert if there's no data.

Top Replies

All Replies

  • This is being fixed in the 23.15 beta

    • Fix power meter audio prompts playing when sensor is disconnected

    I submitted this to product support on 07/03/2025 so this is a quick turnaround - thanks Garmin!

  • Obviously the erroneous high number needs to be fixed, but going beyond that it would be good if the power alert was only generated when a power sensor is connected.

    Not that it really matters to the end user, but the explanation for both of these issues is that 65536 is used internally in certain contexts to mean "no power value".

    This means that code which handles power has to take that special case into account. And in this case, there must be new/changed alert code which did not do that. So it's likely a single bug which caused what looks to the end user as 2 separate issues.

    Ofc the real questions are:

    - how could this suddenly start happening when Garmin has been dealing with this special case in its own code for probably 20 years now?

    - how did this get past testing (either automated or manual)?

    - why do the same kind of bugs pop up over and over again (we've also recently seen issues like incorrect distance / time alerts with big numbers like 4 billion)?

  • A possible explanation is that:

    - Few people have enabled power audio prompts

    - Few people have enabled audio prompts who ride other bikes without power meters

    - Few people can be bothered to report such errors and enjoy the amusement value of being told that the average power they are putting out is the same as a Renault Zoe electric car at full throttle.

    And combine that with some issues with their software architecture, and general development error handling philosophy.  It would seem obvious to me that you only do something with a piece of data - e.g. produce an alert - if the relevant data is valid and/or the sensor producing it is present, else it could cause the watch to crash by trying to process an invalid value.  That doesn't seem obvious to Garmin.  There should be standard piece of code that is either executed automatically by the architecture, or that every programmer uses to validate a field. Rather than have an additional separate data element that indicates whether the data element is valid, Garmin, for what ever reason, is using a "special" value within the data element, which risks what has happened here - that the "special" value is processed as though it were a valid power value, which should never happen.

    It took an exchange of 10+ emails to successfully report this bug and have Garmin reproduce it even though it is very simple to reproduce and can be done anywhere without needing to go anywhere near a bike or power meter.

    - Confirm the power audio prompt is enabled in GCM
    - start a bike activity (without waking up any nearby power sensors)
    - press the lap button
    So I don't begrudge anyone for not reporting it.
  • And combine that with some issues with their software architecture, and general development error handling philosophy.  It would seem obvious to me that you only do something with a piece of data - e.g. produce an alert - if the relevant data is valid and/or the sensor producing it is present, else it could cause the watch to crash by trying to process an invalid value.  That doesn't seem obvious to Garmin.

    Yeah, I think I tried to address that above by explaining that 65536 is probably used internally as an invalid value for power. Obviously somebody didn't realize that and/or forgot, when making a change to the alert code in question. (well the actual invalid value for power in certain cases would be 65535, but the general point is that 65536 probably isn't meant to be valid data.)

    It's not that Garmin literally forgot to handle errors, it's that there's a certain scenario which is indistinguishable from valid data if you don't know what you're looking for. There's a subtle difference between not handling a certain error and not even knowing that something is an error in the first place.

    That's the point I was trying to make. It's very similar to the issue with the spurious time/distance alerts that have gigantic values (e.g. 4 million/billion-ish) that was reported recently.

    The explanation is not meant to absolve Garmin - quite the opposite, as it shows that Garmin is not able to reliably work with their own system that they should have full knowledge and control of.

    The only point is that what seems to you to be two separate issues -  "erroneous high number" and "power alert [should only] be generated when power sensor is connected" - are actually probably 2 symptoms of the same issue: 65536 is internally used to signify that power data is invalid and the alert code should realize that fact.

    By the same logic, seeing a spurious distance alert of 4 million or billion km is probably not 2 separate issues, but just 2 symptoms of the same issue.

    So I don't begrudge anyone for not reporting it.

    Neither do I, my point was that this kind of thing happens with Garmin all the time, and I don't think it should be the job of end users to find this stuff as if we are unpaid beta testers (oh wait).

    I do agree that Garmin has systemic problems with software. Users have been complaining about this forever.

  • I would not be surprised if the fix for this issue in 23.15 is just to add an if-statement e.g.

    if lap average power<65536 then queue average power audio prompt

    ...which of course we know would be just more of the same poor programming practice.