ACCURACY OF GPS (205)

I ran the Oxford Town and Gown yesterday, which apparently was an accurately measured course etc. My Garmin 205 managed to measure as 6.4 miles. Not only that I managed to average 6min/mile over the 6.4miles. My first 4 mile splits were 5.40, 5.43, 6.02, 6.02, which i find very unlikely. My actual finishing time of 38m36s gives an average of around 6m18s/mile, which is much more feasible. How is this possible? Can the GPS actually measure a mile 'long'?? Anybody else have similar? There is always going to be discrepiciencis in mile markers, but the above seems very odd.

Comments

  • JoolskaJoolska ✭✭✭
    GPS is not 100% accurate, for starters. I don't know how accurate a 205 claims to be (I have a 305) but 0.2 over 6.2 miles is only 3% 'extra'. And mile markers are rarely at exactly mile intervals: they usually rely on a lamp-post, etc., being in the right place. Didn't do T&G so don't know - try the race reviews and see if others had the same problem?

    Also, in terms of 'long' miles, remember that an accurate course requires you to take the 'racing line': if you overtook people and/or crossed the road to go to a fluid station and/or got pushed wide on corners, etc. you will not have followed the racing line and may well have covered more than 6.2 miles.

    I often find that my mileage on my regular 5 and a bit mile loop varies by 0.1 - 0.3 of a mile.
  • Thanks for those explanations. In future i am only going to use the GPS in races as a guidetogether withtiming myself according to mile markers etc. It can be a bit misleading running by GPS only, as i found yesterday. My mileage splits were rather optimistic to say the least.
Sign In or Register to comment.