Is a GPS that much more accurate than a Foot Pod

I have been looking at a HR and mile/speed machine.  Shop staff have been addiment a foot pod on my shoe is accurate for distance.  But I know how much my stride can vary depending on distance, terrain, general mood.  Are they considered that accurate?
«1

Comments

  • I have used a Polar 625 and a Polar R800SD both with foot pods and I think they are brilliant and I think personally they are very accurate for distance & speed.  I do not leave my house for a run without it.  They are both great heart rate monitors as well.  I used a Garmin 305 for a while and found the heart rate function to be lacking but had no complaints about signal or the distance/speed functions.  Hope this helps.
  • The missus uses a Garmin Neil, and its spot on for distance/speed, don't know about the HR function, she doesn't use it.
  • I am new to Garmin but have found it's pretty unreliable, so far, as far as distance is concerned.  8 + mile runs have shrunk to 4 and 5 mile runs.  No problems with the HR facility.  I have now invested some more sheckles in a footpod for the 305 and hope to use it as a complement to the GPS though the 305 doesn't use both feeds at once and it's one or the other.  A Garmin 50 with pootpod and HR chest strap would have cost £100, the 305 cost £140 (+ £30 for the footpod).
  • I used to use a Garmin all the time, but I found that if you do runs where there is a u turn, it sometimes misses out the turn and thinks you haven't run anywhere. Since I discovered www.mapmyrun.com where you can zoom down to pavement level and accurately measure all your routes, (click on the hybrid or satelite view rather than street map), I haven't used the gadget!
  • Or you can use www.gmap-pedometer.com and map your run then click on the hybrid button and you get it in technicolour glory i.e. birds eye photo of what you've just done.  Being a geek - my god, I just LOVE maps - it's how I get my kicks these days.
  • Well...my site beats your site!

    www.mapmyrun has a nifty elevation feature which will show how hilly the route is and also links to Google earth so you can 'fly' the route in 3D !!

  • I have a Garmin 405 with a footpod that I use for treadmill work.  (I also have an old 305 and they both work exactly the same with it)

     I find that the footpod is very accurate but only when I'm running at the speed it callibrated it at. 

    I only use the treadmill for fast stuff so I callibrated it at 16km/h and anything slower it measures as much slower.  To contrast, if I'm doing some intervals at say 18km/h it says I'm going a lot faster than I really am.

    Obviously if it is misreading the speed the distance going to be off too.

    Basically, you're right - the way you run has to be consistant for a footpod based system to be accurate

  • Oh my god, Plod, I'm so there with you. What a find!  [sneaks off to find paradise that is mapmyrun]

  • PS - the googleearth 3D view only works once you have saved your route. For some reason I find the .com version better than the co.uk version and the old mapping tool better than the new one - (it gives you the option when you first log on).

    The 'elevation' view only works once you have entered a start and finish point and is obtained by clicking at the very bottom of the map. I live in the sticks and if I click on the start and finish of my lane ( about 100m) it gives an accurate represntation of the slope. It is a top , free , site.

    Also have you discovered.... http://www.howardgrubb.co.uk/athletics/wmalookup06.html which is an age grade calculator that I use all the time to compare myself as a Vet 50 to the young whipper snappers who I train with. 

  • MapMyRun is useless!!!!  It doesn't work!

    My runs are a lot longer than that.............

  • Plod, indeed I have not, but I shall!
  • Neil, trying adding the .com bit !...

    www.mapmyrun.com   duh!

  • Sorry Plod, when I say it doesn't work, I'm not talking about accessing the websites, I'm talking about how much futher I'm sure I run....

  • Try clicking on the course profile bit.... some of my runs are disappointingly shorter than the time seems to indicate, but then when I see how hilly they were, I realise why they were short.

    I have to say, I find them to be dead accurate. In fact, my coach has roller wheeled some of the shorter routes and they were spot on.

  • Dodge - your garmin GPS being that inaccurate sounds a bit dodgy. have you updated the software on it at all (there was a few bugs which you need to download updates for)? - i've had mine for a couple of years and have always found it to be accurate to within about 10 feet or so.
  • I run with a Garmin 50 + footpad and the Missus uses a Garmin 405.  I've not calibrated mine, but over 19km on Sunday (according to mapmyrun) the missus measured 18.8km and I measured 17.2km.

     They reckon the footpod is about 90% accurate out of the box and 95% once you calibrate it.  I've never calibrated mine, but I think I should now I'm doing longer runs.

  • Dr.DanDr.Dan ✭✭✭

    I have a garmin 50 with foot-pod and hrm ... I had to calibrate the footpod but once I did that it is very accurate. You need to make sure you are consistent with where you place it on your trainer ... same foot and same lace position (I actually just keep mine on my trainer all the time).

  • Off topic a little bit . . . what do you guys consider hilly?

    My normal run measures at about 40m elevation - not sure if that is enough to slow me down.

  • I'm a track runner so I consider a sleeping policeman to be hilly!
  • Dodge - It sounds to me like you aren't waiting for a good satellite lock before heading off on your run. I wait until I have a GPS accuracy of less than 30 feet. Also make sure you are running all the latest software updates. Check on the Garmin.com website for information.
  • Thanks Lisa, I checked the software and Garmin says it's up to date.  I haven't read up on how to check the GPS accuracy but I'm only going to hang about so long for the sattelite finder thing to do its business, I want to run not stand about in the cold while it it goes back and forwards.  I don't think I've had a complete run logged by the 305 since the first time I used it which is a bit frustating.
  • Wait for good GPS accuracy = accurate distance

    Don't wait for good GPS accuracy = inaccurate distance

     The choice is yours!

    By the way, I place the 305 outside whilst I do my warm up and stretches. By the time I have finished it has got a good satellite lock.

  • Also if you want good accuracy with a garmin switch off smart recording so it samples every second rather than when you change direction etc.

    I think if you view the route in google earth thru' training centre it shows the stored GPS points on the map and if the route is twisty you can see how it has cut corners.

    The data storage is greatly reduced by switching off smart recording and you will need to download the data after every run, otherwise it may start to overwrite it.

  • Lisa Fox 4 wrote (see)

    Wait for good GPS accuracy = accurate distance

    Don't wait for good GPS accuracy = inaccurate distance

     The choice is yours!

    By the way, I place the 305 outside whilst I do my warm up and stretches. By the time I have finished it has got a good satellite lock.

    Or it should sort its signal out sooner.  The first time I used it it got a signal quickly but hasn't done since.
  • Dodge- how fast it picks up the signal depends on lots of things - on a clear day my garmin'll pick up the satellites within 30sec but if it's pretty cloudy or i'm in a built up area it can take 5 mins. also find if you move any distance (even just 10 miles) from the last place you used it it can take a while to pick up the signal again (have no idea why this is). when i lived in Newcastle and ran from the university it wouldn't pick up the signal at all until i was at least a mile from the buildings but in the countryside i 'd usually get a signal within a few mins. think most small GPS units take a while. the sensitivity on the 405 is better apparantly but i've heard that it's not as easy to use as the 305.
  • See, 5 minutes is way too long to be hanging about.
  • but you can switch it on, bung it on your window sill and then get your kit on  - by the time you're dressed and ready to go it'll have found the signal - simple. 

    should just re-iterate - 5 mins is the longest my garmins ever taken to find a signal when it's left stationary - it's usually more like 1. if yours is taking much longer than that if it's not being moved around then it might be worth getting it checked if it's still under guarantee.

  • Also another point to make is that every second recording is not necessarily more accurate. It is only more accurate for very fast switchback cycling events. For every day cycling and running activities then smart recording is the best option. Smart recording does not just record data when you change direction. It records every time there is a pace/heart rate/distance/cadence change. If that is every second then that is how frequent it records points. If there is no change for five seconds then it will record a data point at that point.
  • Lisa I did not say it only recorded on change of direction I said change of direction etc.

    Just for example I have just had a training session with the club and ran 5 1500m loops in town the first 2 with smart recording on and the last 3 with it off.

    The first 2 were within 3 m of each other at 1498m and 1501m (error could be down to exactly when I pressed the lap button) and the next laps with smart recording on were 1489, 1491 and 1490.

    Though not a scientific test I must admit, but try it yourself and see how you get on

Sign In or Register to comment.