Now not really a fair comparison as the f5 track I was hiking (laying out where I would plan to run) and the 935 I was running (well if you can call it that, I only averaged 10:55 / mile pace as this was a really tough trail for me). You can see that the f5 tracks are not nearly as good though and the distance accrual is interesting as well as in Garmin Connect vs MyGPSFiles recalculation:
f5 Garmin Connect - 6.43 miles
f5 MyGPSFiles - 7.04 miles
935 Garmin Connect - 6.05 miles
935 MyGPSFiles - 6.12 miles
Now I did have a slightly longer track on the f5 as I took a side trail for a small bit that I did not include in the run on the 935, so the 6.43 from GC seems accurate, but you can see how much manipulation GC is needing to do on the f5, vs the 935, which only has about 1% difference.
Really happy I made the switch the more I look at the data.
BTW ignore the Pace Charts on mine, I was using a Stryd and the terrain did not allow many portions where I maintained a steady pace really.
Be careful with running with a flat Stryd if you have the data field still enabled and use Strava.
I did just this myself the other day and Strava takes the Stryd cadence as the cadence as so my cadence on Strava is all zero. Not the end of the world of course but a bit of a PITA.
Yeah I should have posted about that, I noticed this when I had all the Stryd dropouts that my cadence in Strava was crazy wrong.
Be careful with running with a flat Stryd if you have the data field still enabled and use Strava.
I did just this myself the other day and Strava takes the Stryd cadence as the cadence as so my cadence on Strava is all zero. Not the end of the world of course but a bit of a PITA.
Interesting...I will certainly watch out for that going forward. Checked the Strava activity once more and, luckily, pace looks alright!
V800 - 7.08 miles (99.8% concordant with iPhone)
935 - 7.01 miles
It was interesting comparing the two runs in Sporttracks. I could see by comparing the pace tracings exactly where the 935 lost it a little bit. The 2 pace tracks were almost identical for the first 36 minutes, then the 935 got more erratic, which I also noticed during the run.
Comparing the GPS tracks, they are both very smooth, but again the V800 more closely mirrored where I actually ran, while the 935 was slightly shifted over at several points. I think the 935 is very adequate GPS-wise, but the V800 still wins by a slight margin in this regard.
Where the Garmin wins: display (colors nice, better watch faces and information on the watch face), the "gadgety" tech aspect (e.g. running dynamics, ABC display, performance metrics, etc.), better integration with third parties (e.g. STRYD), better use of the foot pod (e.g. pace from pod and distance from GPS), and automatic syncing with the Connect app. Optical heart rate is really nice in terms of all day HR monitoring, which I think the V800 will get before too long.
Polar wins in the nuts and bolts data of GPS and heart rate, as well as Polar Flow vs. Garmin Connect (subjective).
Overall both really good units. I wish Garmin still used the SirfStar chipset as I fell like this is the reason for Polar's superiority in terms of GPS.
Interesting - have you still got both devices? Of course you would logically expect far more jagged tracks hiking than running. What recording rate on both devices? In this terrain every second will make things appear more jagged.
TBH that snippet does reveal too much - tracks that are what less 10m apart is well within what you can expect from consumer GPS devices.
I agree, but in my N of 2 runs the V800 has been more consistently on my running path, while the 935 has been shifted but is otherwise pretty smooth.
I have a feeling the SirfStar chip is just a little better piece of hardware, but the 935 is well within expectations.
I really have no interest in trying to prove one better than the other, but I have used Polar for many years so obviously I'm curious about which is more accurate.
This is the pace track for the run with 935 and V800 shown. You can see where the 935 (in red) becomes more jagged at about the 36 min mark.
GPS accuracy is largely all about antennae design and placement. Modern Garmin watches are "flat" and so not have the lump where the antennae used to be say on the 305 and 910. The V800 form factor is still a bit "old school". So while the chip maker may have some impact it is rarely that simple.
