I received my 735 five days ago (on Monday) and I did my first 3 runs with Glonass ON and the last 2 runs with Glonass OFF. Is it just me or the tracks look much cleaner with Glonass OFF? To be honest, my Glonass OFF tracks are as good or even better than what I have ever seen in any of my watches (including A3P, A3V, FR235, FR630, FR10, 60CSx etc), they are that good. In all cases I set recording to 1-sec.
Funny I just tested this, this week and my tracks seem better with GLONASS on but it is very subjective and on different days so no real comparative results.
Funny I just tested this, this week and my tracks seem better with GLONASS on but it is very subjective and on different days so no real comparative results.
Agreed. It's super hard to have an objective assessment but I just wanted to share my subjective and limited opinion so far.
Some get best results with glonass ON and others just by GPS. It's very dependent on the area were you live. For example: here were I live, I only use GPS since glonass doesn't add anything.
One funny side note, when I do a mountainbike ride with my edge 1000 - I always have glonass ON. That setup seems to give me the best accuracy on MTB. While on the ROAD, I only use GPS. So there is no one fix for all ;)
Some get best results with glonass ON and others just by GPS. It's very dependent on the area were you live. For example: here were I live, I only use GPS since glonass doesn't add anything.
One funny side note, when I do a mountainbike ride with my edge 1000 - I always have glonass ON. That setup seems to give me the best accuracy on MTB. While on the ROAD, I only use GPS. So there is no one fix for all ;)
That makes some sense as on the road should generally be much better GPS reception so you don't need the opportunity to lock onto more sats than GLONASS gives.
Was saying the other day that never seen any meaningful studies into this. Don't think even DC Rainmaker has done anything.
My experience is that it doesn't seem to make a lot of difference. That said if you think you are getting "bad" tracks try the other mode to what you have used and see if get any better results.
Of course the nature of GPS and GLONASS is that one day things may look great but next day and with same route and it could be different...
And you probably need to qualify what you mean by GPS accuracy. If say you are on the wrong side of the road that is not necessarily a reason to think your watch is broken! Generally anything under 20m "out" is mostly to be expected which is of course wider than most roads.
I generally leave it on. Someone (related to hiking) did a bit of a piece a few years back, and a bunch of data. Basically it ended up with: Use GLONASS unless your route has issues, then turn it off. Which is pretty much where everyone sits on it.
It won't increase accuracy per se, but it gives you access to more satellites. Thus, it can help if you're in a tight spot. But again, every once in a while someone finds a route with weirdness (no matter the device company).
I always have both on, did the last run with just GPS and didn't see any differences... Then again, I believe the power usage difference is not that big either.
Interesting read (even though it's older already) and it says what I understood. Especially in urban areas with (higher) buildings GLONASS can really have a benefit. I think I'll just turn it on again, seems to work fine here...
I always have both on, did the last run with just GPS and didn't see any differences... Then again, I believe the power usage difference is not that big either.
Interesting read (even though it's older already) and it says what I understood. Especially in urban areas with (higher) buildings GLONASS can really have a benefit. I think I'll just turn it on again, seems to work fine here...
Nice find, interesting.
The article I remember was some guys doing it on hikes - I wanna say in California. Hikes that often had dense tree/canyon sections.
