Are these "Electronic GPS Devices" more harm than good? Lets talk Devices. (Read 252 times)

Unless your pauses are so long the watch is timing out (x10 models time out at about 5 minutes) it would be strange that they need to re-acquire signal each time.

 

That said, I don't pause my watch at stoplights (unless the stop is going to be more than a minute), I am  getting a break and likely can run a bit faster once I resume, thereby overstating my pace.  Although Auto pause should work OK for any pause over a few seconds if you want only to measure your running time.

Pauses maybe up to 2 minutes depending. Couple times on a short run, multiple times on a long run. In any case, I couldn't seem to get any reasonable pace information. Even using  1 mile auto lap it was giving me 11:45 per mile when I was doing 9-10 per mile, which can be demoralizing. I think I just need to learn how to use the damn thing.

And now, Cons:

 

1)  It decharges after a few days when the "satellite track" portion is not being used.  (IE.  It forgets what day it is, so after recharging, most of my runs reflect as Jan 1st.

Solution, turn it off, or get a Garmin (you can turn those off).

 

2)  When in satellite mode with a full charge, it runs out of battery at about 8 hours.  (In my case, it died at near mile 40 of the JFK-50 I was running).

Solution:  Run faster. 8 hours should be plenty of time to finish 50 miles.  ;-)  

Or, put two watches on and start one watch an hour before the first one will die  (I've actually considered this).

 

3)  It takes time to start.  You don't just hit "start", it takes time to find the satellite and connect like a traditional chrono would, so by the time you start it, you may be 1 minute into your race already...

Solution:  Get a new garmin or tomtom.  Both pre-load sat locations now.  My garmin took 5 seconds to get a signal yesterday.  That's a game changer for "electronic gps devices." 

Or, use that time to stretch. If in a race, just make sure when you line up it's ready to go and cycle through screens every now and again so it doesn't turn off (and I agree with you, that is annoying).

 

4)  It doesn't track the mileage accurately.  At mile 26 of the JFK race, it said I was at 27.2.

Solution: Complain to race director.  ;-P

Or, learn to run their tangents. 

 

5)  It doesn't track the pace accurately.  This weekend I did a 10-mile race, it consistently said my pace was 7:42, 7:55, 7:58, 7:45,.... but consistently in the upper 7's....   (When I actually completed the race, my goal was 7:59 pace or faster, but I was disappointed to see my pace was 8:10)

Solution: Send that POS back.  Sounds like it doesn't track correctly.  I'd be annoyed too.

 

Main point:  There seem more cons than pros with the Nike!  -- Is Garmin or any other device any better?

I've never used the Nike, but my garmins have rocked.  Currently on the new 220 and it's even rockiner than the previous one I owned.  And better than the Timex I had. 

 

 

Someone please tell me what is so great about running with an "inaccurate" GPS device.  

Nothing

 

I am tempted to go back to the "clock on the wall" method.     Any thoughts?

This is more accurate?  :-P

Seriously though.  I hear you.  These things have their bugs.  You just have to realize that when running with them you may have issues but you may have none.  This year in the NYCM my garmin was wonky and it would move from a 9 min pace to a 17 min pace and back again, even though I was holding a steady pace (I was a pacer).  That was annoying.  BUT, every mile was exact or within seconds of the actual mile marker clock, so at least it did that correctly.

I think one of the valuable aspects of GPS watches not mentioned yet is the ability to train using HR data (if you like to train this way).  The other thing I'm interested in is measuring some of the new metrics with the Garmin 620 to see if they will be useful in training.

The newer watches also make it so easy to upload daily training.  Pencil/paper is cool old school, but just pushing a button to do a wireless upload when walking through the door is something I can't wait to try.

Finally, I have found the average pace function useful to keep me from going out too fast during the first few miles.  As I've gained experience, this becomes less of an issue, as the pace readings become confirmatory more than anything else.  There's also no other easier, more convenient way to record a detailed race experience, which is a very useful thing to me.

You certainly don't need one to run fast/well, but I think for me, a GPS watch's good >>>>>> harm.

This morning it was really nice.  Couldn't run on the sidewalks or follow my usual routes (where I knew the distances) because of snow on the sidewalks and too much traffic on the main roads.  So, I just wandered around on smaller neighborhood roads until I hit the miles I wanted.  Didn't have to plan and try to remember a route in advance.  Just ran.  Tried to get it to come out to 11 miles by the time I got back to the house.  It worked out to 11.1.  Good enough.  That's the beauty of running with GPS to me.  Just run and let the watch count the miles.  Oh, and everyone will say I'm biased, but it's a fact that almost all Garmin devices are better than that stupid Nike watch, for lots of reasons.

+1 on the route changes.  I was a relatively late adopter on the GPS watches, and I haven't changed my behavior much as a result of having one.  But this... this is so helpful.  If a road is closed or I miss a turn or take a detour, I can just run and I don't have to remember where I went and map it.

Also, like KL Duke, it has kept me more honest about pushing the pace, and I'm a stronger and faster runner for it.

I have a Soleus 1.0 - they don't make it anymore.  It was very basic and didn't even upload data.  I've been very happy with it.  It gives you just the pace and the time, although it CAN do lap splits.  They make a new model which DOES upload data ($99!).  Really easy to use, and great for those of us that are more likely to be frustrated by a watch that is too gadgetty.

 

I suppose that is one of the advantages to having been a runner (on and off) for 25 years before getting my first running GPS.  I enjoy using a GPS as a tool to make my running data collection easier and more meaningful, but neither my Garmin nor my Timex regular stopwatch can tell me how hard I ran. My legs and lungs tell me that.  The watches only tell me what I accomplished for a given level of effort, and that tends to be a big variable from one day to the next.

I feel the same way.

I have pretty low tolerance for fiddling with stuff while I run, and I am pretty comfortable putting in a day's work without having to know all about the work that I did. So, I don't use the GPS much at all. I don't use a watch much at all for that matter, but that's cause I am not really training right now.

When if I ever get back into heavy training, I will probably use the GPS more to track my progress in training -- because I will care whether tempo effort turned out to be 6 flat or 5 forty-five.

I don't think I will ever use the GPS on easy run days because "an easy hour" or "an easy 45 minutes" is about as precise as I ever need to be. Sometimes, though, it is cool to use it when I am on new terrain just to sorta see the path I traced, and every now and then when an easy run turns into a tempo I wish I had my Garmin on so that I could geek out about how miles 6-8 were at x pace.

As someone new to running, and training on my own, the GPS helped bridge that "you'll know it when you see it" gap.  That is, experienced runners say "run by feel" but as a new runner you have zero idea what that means.  Because I'm not a fan of talking to myself (I've heard most of my jokes), I didn't get what "easy" paces were until I got a GPS.  Then I found out I was running _way too hard_ on all of my runs.

Since joining a training group, i now have a lot better idea of my 5K and Marathon paces.  So much in fact that I just don't look at my watch during races and instead run by feel.   A training group is probably a better investment than a GPS, but the watch is a nice second.

Are these "ICE devices" more harm than good?

I've always used my feet or a horse to get from pointt A to B.  Sure, I'd get fancy and note features and obstacles along the way and make a mental note of them for tracking purposes.

Then I got real fancy and bought a Porsche.  I've had it for a couple of weeks now and use it to pick up my new GF ( I met her the day after I took delivery of the Porsche).

Pros:

1)  Faster than walking

2)   Nice stereo, the harpsichord really sounds good on the Baroque station.  JS  Bach freakin Rocks!

3)  New GF  (  

Cons:

1)  $3.599 to go 14 miles??

2)  Yellow slips handed out by less than cheerful officers make it hard to close the glove compartment

3)  I don't even wear gloves

4)  Keep losing the GO fob

4)  WHERE IS THE FVCKING STOP BUTTON!!!!!

I hear Lockheed makes a pretty nice flying machine.  Maybe I'll switch, does anyone have one of these winged things?  Thoughts?

Seriously.  Technology, either you adopt or choose to live in the past.