Strava vs Garmin accuracy

I've been commuting for ages but only recently started riding recreationally, so some friends recommended I get Strava, which I've downloaded to my iphone 5. As I've only just started using it I'm running it parallel with my Garmin 305.

As my iPhone has proper gps I was surprised to see discrepancies:

Garmin: 25.5 km total, max 70 kph

Strava: 26 km total, max 88 kph

Anyone have an opinion on which is the most accurate?

And how fast is too fast on a bike? I nearly soiled myself on a downhill section yesterday.

Comments

  • Has Strava just rounded it up ?

    You can upload your garmin to strava too - you could see what that makes of it ?



    I think the 88kph might be a spike - its almost 55 mph and that's seriously fast on a bike. I've only ever got near that down hill with a tailwind and really pushing for it.
  • I've yet to work out how to do that. Will look it up over the weekend. 

    that section was down a long 1:5 section with no headwind but I think it's a spike as well. Though that hasn't stopped me telling EVERYONE I WORK WITH.

    (They've started avoiding me)

  • And i don;t know if this is old news to you lot but this makes interesting reading: thieves using Strava to track fast riders on high-end bikes:

    http://www.uttoxeter-news.co.uk/News/Uttoxeter-cycle-thefts-lead-to-smartphone-apps-warning-20130309110405.htm

  • Oh yes - use your privacy function on strava. And lock down the garmin connect too.



    (personally I'd get a teeshirt made if I hit 55mph on the bike)
  • cougie wrote (see)
    Oh yes - use your privacy function on strava. And lock down the garmin connect too.

    (personally I'd get a teeshirt made if I hit 55mph on the bike)

    I got an IM finishers medal for doing 55+.... image

  • I only use my Garmin to measure my cycling but oddly when uploading to Garmin Connect and then occasionally Strava, they consistently show different average and top speeds (only fractionally) whilst clocking the same distance covered.

    Since I'm only using one recording device, this has perplexed me somewhat.

  • Was that Switzerland FB ? The descent through the forest (with added ambulances for extra fun ?)



    Aaah. Such larks !
  • That sounds like fun. mind you, I could mistake the Rusper to Horsham descent with an alpine forest, if I squinted, but then I'd crash.

  • cougie wrote (see)
    Was that Switzerland FB ? The descent through the forest (with added ambulances for extra fun ?)

    Aaah. Such larks !

    I think (from the last hundred times he's dragged this story upimage ) that it was Regensburg. He got used to the hill the first couple of times and really let it fly on the last lap....

     

    ...right, FB? image

  • cougie wrote (see)
    Was that Switzerland FB ? The descent through the forest (with added ambulances for extra fun ?)

    Aaah. Such larks !

    yep - that's the one - the cracking smooth straight descent down from Forch towards the lake. 69mph on lap 3.......down on the bars praying to myself not to get a tankslapper and crash!    they've banned the use of tribars on that section now as too many people crashed there as we saw

    EDIT: not Regensburg TE - I wasn't at that one - and yes, it's an old story but it's one of my only claims to fame - fastest pirate on a bike.  sometimes weight does have benefits.... image

  • fat buddha wrote (see)
    cougie wrote (see)
    Was that Switzerland FB ? The descent through the forest (with added ambulances for extra fun ?)

    Aaah. Such larks !

    yep - that's the one - the cracking smooth straight descent down from Forch towards the lake. 69mph on lap 3.......down on the bars praying to myself not to get a tankslapper and crash!    they've banned the use of tribars on that section now as too many people crashed there as we saw

    EDIT: not Regensburg TE - I wasn't at that one - and yes, it's an old story but it's one of my only claims to fame - fastest pirate on a bike.  sometimes weight does have benefits.... image

    3 laps? I guess they took that long straight out when I did it. But then I'm a pansy going downhill anyway! image

  • the old IMCH bike course had us doing The Beast and Heartbreak Hill 3x unlike the pansy 2 lap version now - we didn't have the long lakeside bit that's in the current route.  we cut straight up to The Beast about a halfway along the lake stretch.

  • Exactly how many races now have Heartbreak Hill....sure Wales had one last year too

  • I use the RUNTASTIC app, my bro used ENDOMONDO and my dad uses a GARMIN.



    We've a been out running before and they are all very similar. Maybe 10-20 seconds between them all and up to 0.02 of. Mile.
  • That's pretty close
  • I think most IM races like to have their own heartbreak hills. Must be in the franchise agreement.
  • OrbuttOrbutt ✭✭✭

    I think the GPS in the iPhone is not quite as accurate as that in the Garmin. 

    Before I bought my Garmin, I used several apps (runkeeper, Nike+) and some of the resulting routes that were plotted were very interesting - especially when it had me running through gardens or leaping tall buildings in a single bound. If only I were faster than a speeding bullet. 

  • cougie wrote (see)
    I think most IM races like to have their own heartbreak hills. Must be in the franchise agreement.

     

     

    Hope the don't take over the Outlaw course.....Oxton bank would be a bit of a Heartbreak hill let down

  • Flat Footed wrote (see)
    cougie wrote (see)
    I think most IM races like to have their own heartbreak hills. Must be in the franchise agreement.

     Hope the don't take over the Outlaw course.....Oxton bank would be a bit of a Heartbreak hill let down

    It's not a hill, more a speedbump and "Heartbreak Speedbump" just doesn't have the same ring to it!!

  • The discrepancies between Garmin and Strava aren't just down to different GPS receivers on different devices. I use my Forerunner 910XT to log my rides, and the Garmin (and Garmin Connect once it's uploaded) show different max speeds etc than Strava when the exact same data is copied across. On one ride in Spain recently Garmin reckon my max was 36.4, and from the same ride data Strava have it as 37.4. Think it's all down to how they process and smooth out the data. Personally I'm more inclined to go with the Garmin numbers, as they have a few more years of working with GPS than Strava

  • Garmin can be set to adjust for elevation, so on a hilly route the corrected distance and speed will be greater than on a flat route. 

    I don't think strava applies this adjustment.



    Edit: strava does apply an adjustment, but the method may be different to garmin's.
Sign In or Register to comment.