Forums >Gears and Wears>How accurate would you say that garmins are?
Baby bean!
Goals:Finish C25K
I'm slower than a herd of turtles stampeding through peanut butter, but I run.
Good Bad & The Monkey
To be fair, online mapping tools also have an error rate.
And this: never map using mapmyrun when you can map using RunningAHEAD
I'm running somewhere tomorrow. It's going to be beautiful. I can't wait.
Poor baby
Menace to Sobriety
Neither are precise. My Garmin can be off by a bunch depending on the number of trees, buildings, tunnels, turns, etc. On an open relatively straight course its not too bad, but throw in lots of corners, heavy foliage, tall buildings, etc, its going to be all over the place. Over time, if you run the same course alot, I think it averages out pretty close to accurate, but day to day is another story. I have places that I nearly always lose contact between May and Oct, just because of the leaves. Fall and winter, hardly ever.
Map my run is probably going to be more accurate and more consistant. Obviously the tighter the scale, the better, but even then, its probably unlikely that you'll measure the exact path that you run, weaving around, cutting or squaring corners, etc.
Sorry for being long winded. Short answer MMR is probably a little more accurate and way more repeatable.
Janie, today I quit my job. And then I told my boss to go f*** himself, and then I blackmailed him for almost sixty thousand dollars. Pass the asparagus.
mine is pretty accurate ... at least more than accurate for us normal mortals. Usually head out of my development on the same first 1 - 1.5 then change route based on distance and always hot the 1 mile autolap right between the same two mailboxes each time, would say +/- 50 feet and that is probably more from my running corners, etc.
Really more concerned about consistency versus 100% accuracy as I do not think any of us are setting world records. If i get consistent readings even if results are off by a few seconds per mile then you have a usefull measuring tool.
I think the garmin issue is more of an "experience" factor. Runners that "grew up" running without technology cant understand why people can not survive without it, afterall they figured out how to run without it. Kind of like I as a parent who grew up in the 70's can not really appreciate "the need" for all the technology (ie - ipods, cellphones, etc.) that kids cant live without today...All we needed was a pair of sneakers and a ball and if we were missing one or the other we improvised! Now if electricity goes out for 1/2 hr kids start to go through withdrawal like a crack addict.
Anyways .... For $150 my 305 is an extremly accurate piece of equipment and very valuable training aid, to help hard headed runners like me not run/race too fast.
"It's supposed to be hard. If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it. The hard... is what makes it Great!
Since I know I don't run perfect tangents, have to weave in traffic, veer off for water stops, etc. I would guess that it typically shows awfully close to what I actually ran.
Out and back courses usually throw it off by a larger margin. I think the 180 degree turn throws off the garmin. I notice this both in training and in races. The distance and lap pace both take funny jumps immediately after a turnaround.
"I aim to misbehave."
an amazing likeness
Completely inaccurate and useless, you might as well be walking on the sun. Except when they are accurate and measuring your location on the 3rd rock within a few feet of certainty. Unless you're waving you arms around while running the tangents perfectly. Or running on a course that doesn't measure as per the Garmin.
When all these happen, it is perfect. Otherwise just a darn good approximation. Darn good.
Acceptable at a dance, invaluable in a shipwreck.
I even use it sometimes to do 1/2 mile and mile repeats on trails. I don't care if the distance is 100% accurate. What matters if the effort/time factor.
Options,Account, Forums
After that I got too tired of measuring to check the rest.
It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.
Thank you for taking the time to read my signature!
My elevation accuracy always seems off, but I'd guess that this is because 100' seems like a lot more vertically than horizontally.
------------------------------------- 5K - 18:25 - 3/19/11 10K - 39:38 - 12/13/09 1/2 - 1:29:38 - 5/30/10 Full - 3:45:40 - 5/27/07
I've found it to depend a lot on what kind of landscape you are in. In my suburban location, it is extremely accurate. When I upload and look at a map, I can see what side of the street I was on, if I moved from the road to the sidewalk, etc. I've even used it on a track and had one lap consistently come out to .25 miles. However, I've seen that accuracy decrease markedly in a city and even fall apart altogether when used in Manhattan and Chicago. My elevation accuracy always seems off, but I'd guess that this is because 100' seems like a lot more vertically than horizontally.
speaking of Chicago, I wore my garmin during the Shamrock shuffle and while on lower wacker drive, I lost contact with the satelites. What was suppose to be an 8K race, turned out to be about 5.5 miles. Afterwards, when I plotted the course with the garmin software, it was quite comical to see where it showed that I had ran.
That was good to know this can happen before this fall's marathon -- assuming the marathon course also goes underground for a while.
Apparently 4 laps around my local high school track is 1.05 miles around lane 1. There is also an elevation change of 60 feet. It must be a gradual hill, looks pretty flat to me.
OK ... I forgot to say .... The Elavation accuracy is 100% crap and never look at. Maymyrun or othertools are generally pretty accurate and if really want to plan ahead /review impact of elavation have to cross match.
Garmins are definitely accurate enough to be a useful training tool, but not accurate enough to certify a course. For whatever reason the accuracy is poor when running on the track, but I find it very accurate when running most other places.
I am running the Chicago Marathon in the fall and will probably wear an ordinary wrist watch. Since I would end up hitting the lap button on my Garmin every mile in the marathon, I figure I might as well wear a lighter watch to keep track of my splits. It really won't take too long to type in the splits to RA anyway and don't want it distracting me if I do lose the signal.