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

Firmware Version 4.10 Discussion Thread

Former Member
Former Member
I just installed; all seems fine so far. Since the sticky announcement is closed, post your experiences here.

Sticky: https://forums.garmin.com/showthread.php?344357-Firmware-Version-4-10-Now-Available!
  • Not sure if this was introduced with 4.10; but auto lap is complete off during during training sessions on treadmill. Today I did a six kilometer run which the watch correctly recorded as approximately 6km (using a footpod).
    However during the run I got +/- 12 auto laps that were recorded each 1 km; so almost double the distance.
  • I upgraded to 4.10 before I headed out for a run this morning, the timestamps of my run and its GPS data were set to April 1st 2029. Had to manually change all the timestamps in the .TCX to import to Strava manually.
  • Step count appears accurate with v4.10. Don't know about before-vs-after comparison.

    My steps count & distance seem to be a lot higher today (after the update)
    I don't know if the step count is (likely to be) higher, now with firmware v4.10, than my watch was apt to report before the update from v3.30; that'll take some review of similar enough runs before and after the update to ascertain. However, I manually counted 1280±30 steps walking to the bus stop just now, and the watch registered 1262 steps, so as far as I'm concerned that's as accurate as I can reasonable expect from an activity tracker.

    The watch didn't pick up a single step on my 45-minute bus ride after I sat down, in spite of some bumpiness along the way.

    On the other end of my trip walking from the bus stop, I manually counted 1140±15 steps, and the watch registered 1126 steps. It's accurate, and it's not over-counting.
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 9 years ago
    Excellent, thankyou, great information, I'll see if it was just a one off today.
  • Why are we discussing about changes on WHR , when Garmin says that there are no changes in this update?

    The update has been deployed via BT to my FR235, but i'm not going to install it right now...it's working ok, and i preffer to wait a few more days, to see if there are big bugs.

    (i'm not trusting too much Garmin...specially after my Vivosmart stopped working after just 2 months... )
  • Why not?

    Why are we discussing about changes on WHR , when Garmin says that there are no changes in this update?
    I don't know about you, but I'll hazard a guess that most FR235 owners (including me) have no visibility of the detailed architecture of the product. Furthermore, even if it is the WHR module in the Sensor Hub that falsely reports a heart rate of 71 or 72 when it is first awakened from an idle state, there is nothing to say the logic layer of the firmware could not awaken the WHR module upon a wrist turn towards the user being detected, ahead of the Up or Down button being pressed, or the Heart Rate widget could suppress reporting of readings until it thinks the value is true, etc.

    In any case, rightly or wrongly users could have certain expectations of the new firmware, and discussing those expectations and whether they're being met in (experimentation with) firmware v4.10 is quite on-topic, even where the expectations are ‘misguided’ and do not place any obligation on Garmin to ‘fix’ a perceived issue in this firmware release or the next.
  • Why are we discussing about changes on WHR , when Garmin says that there are no changes in this update?

    The update has been deployed via BT to my FR235, but i'm not going to install it right now...it's working ok, and i preffer to wait a few more days, to see if there are big bugs.

    (i'm not trusting too much Garmin...specially after my Vivosmart stopped working after just 2 months... )


    Because there is also software which interprets the measurements from the HR sensor... And every update 'bugfixes and software improvements', might affect something in this area.

    Had cadence lock yesterday again btw, and must say GPS without GLONAS seems a bit sketchy (and no high buildings nearby in this case). With GLONAS it seems pretty smooth so I'll just leave that enabled by default. (Noticed it because it was disabled in the Other Activity by default.)
  • OHRM Crossover effect since update 4.10

    Hello,
    I had not seen the crossover effect until last 4.10 update. Since then, 3 out of 3 runs cadence locked with HR for the entire run.
    I do not know if it happened to some of you... or if it is any change in the update that have this negative effect.
    Until now OHRM worked, with some peaks, ups and downs, but usable. Now is useless obvioulsy.
  • I don't know about you, but I'll hazard a guess that most FR235 owners (including me) have no visibility of the detailed architecture of the product. Furthermore, even if it is the WHR module in the Sensor Hub that falsely reports a heart rate of 71 or 72 when it is first awakened from an idle state, there is nothing to say the logic layer of the firmware could not awaken the WHR module upon a wrist turn towards the user being detected, ahead of the Up or Down button being pressed, or the Heart Rate widget could suppress reporting of readings until it thinks the value is true, etc.

    In any case, rightly or wrongly users could have certain expectations of the new firmware, and discussing those expectations and whether they're being met in (experimentation with) firmware v4.10 is quite on-topic, even where the expectations are ‘misguided’ and do not place any obligation on Garmin to ‘fix’ a perceived issue in this firmware release or the next.


    Sorry, i was trying to be a little bit cynical. Garmin is not being so transparent with they customers lately....
    And their new products are less and less reliables...
  • Yes they don't/can't list out all the changes.

    About HR issues I'm not sure if you guys have seen the DCR Fenix3HR review but the sensor seems to perform a lot better than on my FR235 (and DCRs FR235 review unit) especially for intervals where it almost never "follows" the recovery sections. I can't see why it would perform differently though...