>General Running>TM vs. Garmin
Hi all! Have a question for those of you that use a TM. I just got a TM yesterday. This morning I did a run on it and wore my Garmin forerunner 225 (I turned the GPS off) to see what would happen. The Garmin recorded 5 miles averaging 13: xx mm and the TM recorded a little over 7 miles with an average pace of 9: xx mm. I know effort was way more than a 13mm. (That was just an average...the first couple miles were recorded as 14: xx mm) on the other hand ther was no way I averaged a 9mm.... I didn't even do that for my last 5k!
What do you guys go with when recording a TM run?
My treadmill is ancient and I do not trust the numbers it gives. I just record whatever the Garmin (without GPS) reads. It sucks because the effort usually feels harder than the pace. The non-GPS mode seems to be heavily influenced by my recent runs. After my last half, I did a few run/walks on the treadmill that were a faster pace than I would have expected. Then I did a trail run in the snow, which was slow going. The next treadmill run, even though the treadmill showed a faster speed, was slower per Garmin.
an amazing likeness
I'd use the treadmill over the Forerunner. (1) treadmill is new and likely to be fairly ok in settings, (2) Forerunner without a footpod is trying to use the accelerometer (sp?) to sense foot strides...and it doesn't know your actual stride length.
I've done my best to live the right way. I get up every morning and go to work each day. (for now)
I just use my TM. I bought a VivosmartHR (without the GPS) a month or so ago. After I calibrated the stride length, I ran some 1 mile test runs on the TM. The largest variance was .04, but I still use the TM. Without the calibration, it was way off on both distance and pace. I imagine the 225 is the same if it can't be calibrated.
, (2) Forerunner without a footpod is trying to use the accelerometer (sp?) to sense foot strides...and it doesn't know your actual stride length.
I've been using my Garmin outdoors exclusively for the last two years, I'd think it would be calibrated to my stride by now???
I've had my 220 for about the same amount of time. It seems to adjust itself based on the prior runs.
I've never run a 6:20 mile in my life, but my Garmin fenix5 thinks that's what I run on the treadmill for 6-7 miles, when in fact I am running a 10 min mile pace. I think the reason is I probably have shorter stride/higher cadence on the TM, not sure there is a 30 percent variation though. The Garmin even asked me to correct the distance to calibrate my indoor pace, but reverts to that faster measurement. Other Garmins I have don't have this issue.
Treadmill stats will be more accurate than garmin with accelerometer (fancy pedometer) stats. Both are still not precise, so compare your effort @ pace on the mill to what you'd be running outdoors at a known distance and figure out if the mill is "close enough" or clearly not calibrated.
For logging the data, I'll usually manually enter the treadmill stats, or even round those to badger miles (eg: ran for 60mins, record 8mi because 7:30 pace is a safe average for my easy runs if I'm feeling decent). Or, if you already have your watch synched to auto-upload, add second entry manually to compensate for the missed distance if it's significant.
Not running for my health, but in spite of it.
I use a foot pod with my Garmin for treadmill runs and it is surprisingly accurate. With a 5-7 mile run, it'll be +/- less than a tenth of a mile. Close enough for me. The accelerometer is pretty much useless and all it does is piss me off with how wrong it is. The new foot pods self-calibrate with a few outdoor runs.