Garmin pace not accurate reddit. Garmin doesn't take weather into account.

Garmin pace not accurate reddit . Or some other means accurately measure the treadmill speed. There is this guy who tests the accuracy of many smart watches and compares them to dedicated health trackers for accuracy. I don't consider the fenix line a runners watch because they're too heavy and bulky. Thanks for your help. Stressing about whether or not my pace is accurate wasn't helping me mentally so I got over it fairly quickly - a 2 hour run is still a 2 hour run regardless. g. While running, it displays my pace as much higher than it actually is. So distance, time, splits, and pace will be accurate. It's particular Garmin models that are having issues, which points to a different solution / cause. In the end, I used it without HR chest strap because it was pretty accurate. Instant Pace based on GPS will never be accurate. The data for the first 3 miles seems very accurate to what I would estimate my pace to have been. Dec 14, 2024 · Pretty accurate for me, if not underselling my longer distance performance. r/Garmin is the community to discuss and share everything and anything related to Garmin. The garmin wesiite has hints and tips to make it more accurate. I'm having an issue with my new Garmin 255S and I'm wondering if anyone else is having this issue. The Garmin foot pod tries to measure the length of your steps, not just your cadence. Got the Pace 3 a few days ago. Yes there's are runners here who use footpods. Today I ran a 5k and tried to use my Garmin to pace myself. And I used Avg Pace to make sure I was on track for my goal time. I've compared my results with friends who use different Garmin watches and also with data from my iPhone 15 Pro in hand. Thus it estimates your VO2 based on that. As confirmed from stryd support average run pace is calculated at the end from “distance from GPS”/total time. 25 mile). Using GPS and glonass like others have said is a good idea. LT pace is usually considered what you can sustain for an HOUR. For a decent amateur it’ll be somewhere a bit slower than 10K pace—the faster you are the closer it’ll be to half marathon pace. Mainly use the P3 for road running so key for me is seeing miles, pace, cadence - and this watch acquires GPS super fast and is very accurate even downtown in a very large city. I would not choose anyone of That said, the footpod is not perfectly accurate as well — it's accuracy depends on calibration and your running style (easy pace, race pace, and sprinting can all give different margins of error). folks that have problems with chest straps, are rare. Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now Current Pace not accurate Running df4 . The pace over 1 mile is very accurate in normal conditions. Cool. It only takes weather forecast into account, at the time you start the run (like weather doesn't change), of a weather station that might by quite far away and wind isn't a constant factor (there are wind gusts and buildings). Hi everyone, I am currently trying to find a good way to get accurate step counts when using the Instinct on a treadmill desk so that my arms are not swinging. I use an epix gen 2 and a hrm pro plus when I run and it says my lactate threshold is at 5. But the Lap Pace gives you a good idea of your current pace. Check them out. So at least that sounds consistent enough for a casual jogger and for me. ) I’m about 5 weeks into training for my first marathon. Though my wife's watch gives pretty unrealistic 5k predictions, like 23:00 when she runs 25:XX currently. I think a big part of Garmin being accurate is tied to having accurate data for MAXHR and/or lactate threshold in the watch. Problems with gps: it’s line of sight, so you need a direct link to three satellites, and buildings are interrupting this communication/accuracy. the Garmin one) are quite accurate for the pace they are actually calibrated to (as they are using stride length for calculations). I've read that Stryd is pretty much always accurate (and it better be, given it's price), but I haven't used it myself. But sadly most TM's are not good - so they will show a different milage vs reality. I know it's not a lot but I've really come a long way. When im running, the pace on the Vantage V just jumps all over the place, sometimes with a difference of 2 min/km. We ran the same pace, next to each other, the entire run. 25/mi pace. Then everyone will tell you that you can't expect the watch to keep an accurate pace and now you need a footpod. 18 votes, 53 comments. In terms of the altimeter, I'm comparing it to a dedicated GPS device that displays topographic maps and consistently accurate elevation info. I run with a Garmin on each wrist (there's a story behind this) and they are generally within a few hundredths of a mile. Average Pace will be decent but if you want accurate instant pace your best bet is a foot pod. There are a number of threads about that on Garmin Forums. I have a forerunner 935 for 4 years. Depending on the total length of the run and the amount of paused time, the difference can be significant. Heart rate monitor is among best in the market. I’ve sold my Pace 2 before COROS released their web portal but I can’t imagine it being better than Garmin’s. None of the watches show the same pace at a given time. HRV readings during activities are enabled by default if you use compatible accessories, though are not shown in Garmin Connect. 5km and having lap alerts on is great, and you can customize data if shows you. I have a Garmin and found two factors that affect accuracy: physical location and GPS settings. My Garmin Instinct Tactical (Circa 2019) is fully updated and is having problems maintaining an accurate pace and distance. Functions matters. The current pace (as others have mentioned) just various too much to be a good guide. When I upload the runs to Strava, it shows the correct pace. Whether you run, cycle or swim, this is the place to be. Posted by u/CallEvery - 13 votes and 49 comments Now that Garmin has dropped their price till 11/19 and Forerunner 245 price is same as Coros Pace 2, what should i go for? I was all set to buy Pace 2 due to the price factor earlier. I have a fenix 6 and the "in the moment" pace is frequently wrong. For example, I do a few minutes of squat jumps, manually measure my HR as 170. Also setting auto-lap to about 0. More like elite half-marathon pace. There is no benefit to getting a HRM Run over a HRM Dual unless you think you might switch to a Garmin watch in the future. This is because GNSS satellites typically are correct to roughly 5-20 feet. However, what is troubling me is that my Garmin Forerunner 235 distance and pace never match my treadmill’s data. A Garmin watch with the same features would cost twice as much. Pace 2 looks very plasticky but not bad. I didn’t count all of my laps, but the Garmin seemed fairly accurate (1 400m lap = . e. I think this issue is somewhat less prevalent with the newer watches when you enable multi-band but I don't have one to confirm. You're best bet to get decent pace is to use average lap pace or average lap speed. I'm really hoping the marathon time it predicts is accurate but not holding my breath! Treadmills are not accurate either so what are you going to calibrate with? If you really care about pace/distance on a treadmill, get a Stryd pod. Still not overly helpful for intervals. It can provide this estimate because Garmin (FirstBeat technologies) have lab-tested athletes for VO2 and then looked at their HR and pace. I’m starting to second guess myself. Garmin just a bit more social functions/badges etc. For example; I ran an 8’44” min/mi pace for my last marathon but my watch said I was running an 8’40” pace. Just curious if anyone has found that this feature is an accurate predictor of race pace. I've had a gps watch for 13 years and have never used current pace. This subreddit is an unofficial, non-affiliated community, run by the users, to embrace and have conversation about the products we love! In urban canyons or woods GLONASS also can improve the number of visible satellites, but it very often does not improve real-time pace info because the positional solution is still crap due to multipath and bad geometry. I've read that the Ambit was typically better than most, but still probably not very accurate. What a joke. I keep reading the treadmill is more accurate but that pace seems always so much slower than how I feel I’m going and the watch pace seems more accurate. I have had the charge 2, I've tried a Garmin, an Apple Watch, and a random cheap brand and they all tracked my heart rate at similar levels during certain activities, give or take a tiny percentage, with the charge 4 I can be ready to collapse and having palpitations but it still shows me maxing out in the 130s and still in the cardio zone. I believe the literature shows that doing this 30min protocol is one of the most accurate ways to determine LTHR outside a lab or doing a full 60min test, but doing a 20min all-out effort and taking -5% is a decent approximation that's sometimes used in running and often I previously had garmin vivoactive 3 (not a high end garmin watch) that I used to track a 5km run. In my own runs, Strava always gives me a higher pace than Garmin because every stop at a traffic light, every brief moment where I paused (without pausing the watch) is excluded by Strava, but not by Garmin. Hello My watch has been working good for the last 3 months but lately acquiring GPS not working the first time when I enter running, I have to closecand open it again, also GPS is giving me crazy paces I am a beginner+ runner but it gives me pace of 1min 27sec / km while it should be around 5min 15sec, I tried update to firmware 2. Did 20 x 15 second sprints this morning and each sprint was showing between 4:30 - 6:20 pace. I can usually set a rather leisurely pace that I can keep easily for the 3 miles at around a 10:30 / mile pace (hills, etc). But I… The Polar map and pace graph show drops in the pace which correlate with the map "low accuracy GPS" sections, but the Strava map/pace plots, for the exact same run, show no such drops in the GPS. I think this is Cadence lock. A Garmin foot pod can give a consistent pace, though not a correct pace. (No way for your trainer to know either. Garmin also rounds the current pace it resports to 5 seconds. Things like: Swimming at a constant pace Tumble turning instesd of touch turning Strong push off the wall Only one stroke per lap And, unfortunately for me, swimming fast! The location has a lot of tall buildings and apparently the GPS readings won't be accurate. Personally I've been a stryd user for a long time and I'm happy with it. So in theory it should be able to measure your speed. It seems to be drawing the map accurately, but not computing the distance—hence pace is off. The pace reported by the watch is not a pure GPS instant pace. I'm trying to figure out what could have been different but I can't come up with anything, but just for anyone reading this, the Pace 3 can absolutely be super accurate. 5, but same issue I even tried factory reset same issue. Garmin shows 165 after a few seconds, Coros is at 120 for 20 seconds, but eventually gets to 155 or so when my HR is already slowing down. I think the newer generations are supposed to be more accurate. Not much more value. I have the garmin foot pod, which I believe has been discontinued but I'm sure there's still stock out there or used on ebay, and it works well enough for indoor running. Total time / laps = swim pace. And yes, the "treadmill" option is just running without GPS. They are pretty similar. but its probably at least in the ballpark. The rest will adjust to the new data. Only the newer Garmin Pace Pro data can also be shown as a datafield on any data screen you like so it‘s possible to combine it with HR. You will get better really fast. I think this is very possible. Even looking at lap pace over the first 10-15 seconds of your interval is probably not going to be accurate. I know that you can, through connect IQ, download data screens showing a rolling pace (for example on a 30sc interval), which is much more accurate than the instant pace offered by Garmin. If I use Stryd or NPE Runn to measure distance - i'm much closer - Stryd within +/- 60 meter - NPE Runn within +/- 150m. Fine for slow steady pace but not for changes in pace especially when you’re a stride runner and not cadence runner (I. But I still think that it's not giving correct data. Garmin is more accurate than the GPS on your phone accessed by Strava, in my opinion. Bought the Pace 3 because my old GPS watch was not getting support anymore. Went for a 5 mile run yesterday and noticed a discrepancy with Nike Run Club App. Especially when running on trails that have trees over hanging them. The distance and time were accurate but pace just reads --:--. Trail running still not. Understanding the Zones The phone doesn’t cheat, it uses wifi (access points send beacons which advertise their id) for way better accuracy in populated areas. My current watch will have a delay of 0. That will give you basic time ahead/behind Garmin labels Zone 2 as "Easy," while it's traditionally considered the primary aerobic zone. Has anyone switched from the Garmin 245 to the Coros Pace 2? A couple things that are often annoying about my Garmin is that it occasionally will take quite a long time to find a satellite signal and depending on where I am running it will have difficulty giving me an accurate pace. Stryd is the most accurate, but runalyze actually takes your marathon form into account for the prediction of your marathon finish time, where Garmin just acts like someone who only runs 5ks could suddenly run a marthon in a great time. So one day you could have a workout aiming for 180bpm and your pace is 4:00 and other days the pace could be 4:10 for example at the 180bom target, however your body only knows effort, it doesn't know pace so training at that intensity still improves you where as pushing the pace to 4:00 and say having a 190bpm HR could lead to over working. Fitbit/Garmin estimates get messed up if not worn 24/7, but not sure how accurate those are to begin with. I welcome you to look at any FIT file produced by the watch and see how much it is jumping. e increase stride length with increased pace instead of increased cadence/steps per minute). The Pace 2 has an amazing feature set. That makes it more difficult to pace accurately, for example during races. Anyone having problems with Garmin since last week's update? Three of us swam together on Saturday - and our watches recorded very different distances, and swim paces. I was wondering if there was a way to set up a pace alert working with such rolling pace ? Probably a dedicated app or something ? Thanks in advance Garmin's algo is not perfect - so without extra help - i'm often +/- 500m on a 10k run. I will have accurate distance, which was mainly my problem, instantaneous pace from Stryd and power from Stryd. The suggested pace is often way too high, the training effect isnt as big If your HR is off It’s not really a “more accurate” but different. If the magnetic storm (which is happening, 100%) was affecting GPS worldwide or even regionally there would be far more info about it and everyone's devices would be affected. Garmin's zones start at a lower percentage (65%) compared to traditional systems (around 85%). The magentic storm isn't affecting GPS. So your lap pace will usually be correct, even when your immediate pace is shown as being too slow. I'm sure it's not extremely accurate, but you calibrate it by running with it outside a few times and it doesn't grossly disagree with the treadmill. Current pace sucks for most gps watches, especially on trails. Make sure your HRM is not being used for pace and distance. Garmin TM tracking without a foot pod or other help is "marginal" even if you have done outside runs. 11 miles, 12:39/mi, 52:03 Apple: 5. Also, Series 6 market share is still low, in general, previous versions have larger accuracy issures. Now i have zero problems with that and my pace almost increases daily or my HR drops 1-2 BPM. Exactly. ) Chest straps are almost always very accurate, at least the quality ones such as Garmin Dual and Polar H10; the exceptions, i. Not so happy with the many bugs that are in garmin software. The real-time accuracy of pace can vary a lot depending on the model. My max recorded HR is 183, a bit above my calculated (51M) and I can happily run 10k in the orange/red but it's not a conversational pace. What are people's opinions on the different shoe pods (stryd, Garmin, etc)? Current pace is a disaster for just this reason, it is too inaccurate over short time scales. I found the same with my charge 4. The new HRV feature is automatic and records this value several times and averages the value from a moment (while sleeping Try swinging your arms faster and you’ll see how it changes pace accordingly. The series 6 is getting closer to a proper garmin in terms of track accuracy, but using the same watch, and different sites, will always give differences. So I ran with the Strava app for a day and my pace and time was so different from the Nike run app that I am starting to doubt myself! I am able to run at a km pace of 8. On the Garmin 255 is steady, so I use both watches. GPS is connected. did you burn exactly 3880 active calories today? probably not. I can only guess, but IMO, the Beat app is not properly implementing the API to the Android (what about iOS???) GPS feed. A commonly used test protocol for LTHR is to do 30min all-out, and take your average HR over the final 20min as your LTHR. A stryd would help, but I think 200 euro is too much for pace (yes, I know, a stryd can do more). This smooth out the pace. I was talking specifically about accuracy not other features. Which Garmin method are you using to calculate your heart rate zones? Garmin has more than one method and the methods provide different results. If you go edit the activity you can adjust the actual distance you ran. You can import Garmin data into tools like Runalyze to see them. so pace being accurate is never my main concern. (I know there are hundreds of factors that the watch can’t track, just looking for real experience. I have found my FR265 and HRM-PRO to not be very accurate. Don't worry about it showing vestly different pace than you currently have on the treadmill, as the watch takes time to "adjust" to your pace, so if you're not going in a constant one, it'll differ. They are also much more responsive to pace changes when doing intervals. If it's not a hilly course and the grade-adjusted pace aspect isn't super significant, and alternative is to use the "set a target" feature and just specify your distance and desired completion time (or pace time) goal. When I'm tracking my workout, the Pace 2's altimeter is accurate enough (give or take 5 metres or so). The newer Stryd tended to be be more 'jumpy' with its live pace reporting6:55 /mi then it would flip to 8:00 or 8:45 /mi or something literally within seconds. Don't tell me this cannot be more accurate because it absolutely can based on my experience with another brand. Garmin for me was off by about 3 minutes. I’m not trail running; just around my neighborhood in Queens, NY. It appears instant pace on my Fenix 6X Sapphire has a consistent bias towards a slower than actual pace, often by 0:30-1:00 min/mile. In the same boat. My tip: Extend the view. The Runn sensor is super accurate. 8. With garmin the distance was usually 4,99km and with one run I did with GW6 it was 5,01km. It seems the bias is worse on more challenging terrain, for example on trails or under tree cover. I wound up finishing my 5k in 20:24 which is 6:35min/mile avg, so my Garmins avg pace was inflated by over 20 sec/mile. The fenix is good if you want your watch to look expensive, you explore and bang up your watch. Welcome to our community for all things related to Garmin watches. Amazfit has the lowest accuracy of any smartwatch/smart band. Suunto was 2nd. Nearly all GNSS watch systems can "drift" to one side. Pace 2 have running power at least. However last night that easy pace on the treadmill was more like 11:10/mile. will not track you correctly. These are very accurate on treadmills and have the added benefit of providing accurate pace outdoors when GPS might be bad (buildings, trees etc). Since GPS works by line of sight, running near tall buildings, highway overpasses, etc. From my understanding, the race predictor just uses your VO2 max to predict race time, and the VO2 max calculated from watches in not very accurate because it just relies on heart rate data, and is going to be hugely influenced by things like weather, and what kinds of hard workouts you're doing, etc. The issue arises because my training sessions include warm-ups, stretches, and other activities before starting t Pace 2 is single band and according to reviews pace 2 pace is not as accurate. It is usually slower, then will sometimes speed up when I slow down my pace (though not always). For science, I wore both watches tonight and was stunned at how inaccurately the Apple Watch tracked my distance (which explains my miraculous pace). And yes 5min/km for couple kilometres is very achievable even for a casual runner. Today my watch is suggesting a "43 minute run with 6x1km intervals at 3:50/km pace". Garmin watches are featureloaded with things you never use (or don’t work that well) After 2 suunto’s, 1 tomtom and 1 garmin my next watch will probably be a Coros. If money isn't an issue I'd go with a Stryd. Accurate pace on everyday runs Hey everyone, I’m using an Epix Gen 2 for track sessions. But not the pace 2. Maybe you can use Google Earth’s measurement function to track how far you went? And your watch will have the time accurate - so perhaps that will resolve your problem? r/Garmin is the community to discuss and share everything and anything related to Garmin. Yes, it's not as accurate as the old SiRF chipset used in the Polar V800 and other older gen watches, but it has much reduced power requirements meaning longer battery life. It is quite possible that soon to be released Forerunner 955 will have the same chip. I only use lap pace, and in a race will keep my laps at 1 mile. If you set target heart rate, while it's harder to control than pace, it's easier to hit the exact exercise load Garmin is looking for. Not only it isn't accurate but it is also biased towards slower pace. I have a Garmin 225 currently that i had bought in 2016. Two of us had updated one hadn't. Not having the 5 seconds give a false sense of accuracy which gps cannot provide. Garmin uses the 5 seconds to get a more smooth current pace. Apparently I'm a Time Lord with two hearts. All I’m looking for is something similar to a non-GPS watch. Is this just the case on a fenix 5, and the newer watches are accurate? Or do trail runners who run through woods just not know what pace they're going. This subreddit is an unofficial, non-affiliated community, run by the users, to embrace and have conversation about the products we love! The first 3 miles of this run were in moderately forested area but on a paved trail that's a roads-width so there's less tree coverage directly over the path. While you are correct in that the Series 6 seems much better than previous versions DC Rainmaker stops short of saying that it is as accurate as a Garmin. All we ask is that you be fair, reasonable, don't flame anyone and don't post affiliate links. Here were the results: Garmin: 4. 2. Instant pace is not good when based off GPS. 50 pr km pace and 177 bpm. I have a runn device that is super accurate. I'd skip Galileo until more satellites or dual band is available. Obviously that’s not accurate at all. Like it's not even funny how much better the Pace 3 did. I would have been better off buying a 245, HR strap and footpod and spent about the same. The whole idea of using the watch while swimming is that you get pretty good distance and pace numbers. I come from a Garmin Fenix 6 pro. Not marathon pace. COROS is a great watch to strap on for training, then either wear all day or take off when not working out. Too bad users just throw more money into a workaround (buying a Stryd) rather than demanding Garmin to fix this obviously flawed pace algorithm. The past couple of workouts, my current pace during the workout is much different than the recorded interval pace once the workout is done. Batterylife used to be great but is now reduces to ok. (I've gone from 2min/100 for open water to 3min! Welcome to our community for all things related to Garmin watches. See if that helps When I’m doing a preprogrammed run using my Fenix 5s, it’s using some kind of average pace (maybe 10-15 seconds?) on the main data screen, and then telling me that I am not in the desired zone until I’m well into to interval. Please read more carefully what "unproductive" means in the Garmin documentation. I know my Fenix 6 is actually less accurate than my old Forerunner 235, for instance. I am not sure if this has anything to do with how I got injured in the first place but at the very least while dealing with a knee injury I find that moving up and down in pace (mostly down) on a dime trying to make the watch happy instead of focusing on the most efficient/safe I‘m running by HR so I have to switch between race pace and heart rate frequently. It shows multiple heart rate reports for the same time of day when I'm working out, one from the bike and one from the fenix. DCR himself chimed You’re so wrong about this. Running indoor is atrocious, it's way too warm, no wind to evaporate your sweat with no company other than your reflection in the window. Suunto was better, but not as accurate as Garmin. at your weight, its possible to burn ~630 calories per hour of walking at the average walking pace (3mph) just by walking around at that pace for 5 hours in the day (and no other work) you already get close to the 3880 active calories. In general you're asking for the Pace Pro Course creation tool in Garmin Connect (or some other Pace Pro Course creation tool) to dynamically adjust pacing strategies in one or multiple ways. Mine is oddly accurate at the moment with a supposed VO2 max of 60 I ran a 17:01 5k two weeks ago and a 1:18 HM last week. I've found the Heart Rate Reserve method to be much more accurate than Max Heart Rate and it provides for a bit faster pace in Zone 2 that's more in line with perceived exertion. I had to go into my sensor settings on my watch. I suppose 1km would work as well. Posted by u/boise208 - 2 votes and 7 comments I'm experiencing issues with my Garmin Epix Pro, particularly with the distance calculation. Yeah the 945LTE looks like a cheap watch but I like that understatement. I was running with another person who was using a Garmin Watch. I've been tracking my training sessions, particularly my 5km runs on the track, but I'm struggling to get an accurate average pace for the 5km interval or for each 1km interval within it. This subreddit is an unofficial, non-affiliated community, run by the users, to embrace and have conversation about the products we love! Some of the Garmin heart rate straps provide pace/distance data, but they suffer from the same problems as the wrist-based estimates. I(45M) started running this summer and I have an inflated VO2 Max of 55 on my Forerunner 255 which I think is affecting my "Today's Suggestion". Any fixes on the watch pace? My advice is try to lock in your pace/form even if it too high/low and gradually increase/decrease it as necessary. This. Also ironic how it is terrible at reading the "pace" you are going (pun not intended) in the moment or even a few second after. Pairing it with something like Stryd helps a lot, but is an expensive workaround. For intervals and/or changing pace fast they are as useless as the watch itself. Other thoughts… as others have said, you will need to ensure you have enough mileage and intensity to drive up your VO2. Not sure if fenix 5 have similar issues. Garmin calls Zone 3 "Aerobic," but this intensity is more commonly referred to as "Tempo" in other training systems. With the pace 3, it always says I have 180+ HR during my easy jogs when I'm more at 130-140bpm. I've got a Garmin 745 and I'm looking to get a shoe pod (specifically just to give me more accurate pace and distance readings on my treadmill, which isn't calibrated perfectly). Yes you are correct. Is the high VO2 Max the reason for these crazy suggestions? I've had to drop my pace as a novice runner as I build base fitness. It provides accurate real-time pacing on the road too, unlike GPS. I started a pace based program, but i have to use my garmin to pace me, and use my Polar Vantage V for the data. I’m using the built-in running app and the pace has been very inaccurate during my runs. This subreddit is an unofficial, non-affiliated community, run by the users, to embrace and have conversation about the products we love! But from a pace perspective I had Avg Pace and Lap Pace. One of my complaints when I first read about PP was that it appeared to be a product and not a platform. The sub is free from influence of Garmin's marketing arm. I tried moving the watch upper in my forearm even if it's uncomfortable but it does not help. Not very responsive to your specific situation, i’m sorry. Garmin doesn't take weather into account. Pace 2 in many scientific reviews came out as one of the worst. And the combination of those 2 works really well in my view. so I had both watches with the same standard Garmin pace datafield (there is no smoothing etc there so it's not that) and watching the watch on my left wrist show a completely r/Garmin is the community to discuss and share everything and anything related to Garmin. Pretty boring tbh. A month later you'll show up again and be like this thing isn't keeping anything close to an accurate pace. I have HRM Swim strap, so I get the HR data. Garmin is kind of pessimisic for swimming, it's clearly aimed at runners and bikers. The one gripe I have about this watch is how damn ugly it is ha ha ha ha Up to the half marathon it has been pretty accurate. Yes, indeed, Fenix 6 series pace accuracy is awful, nearly unusable for running in my experience. Goal pace targets are not realistic, because the pace you can do varies based on where you're running, the grade, what you've eaten so far, the temperature, humidity, your clothing, and a number of other things. But there are some data fields which calculates at a specific distance so it is more accurate than the default ones. The organizers prefer Strava or Garmin. Watches compensate for this inaccuracy by not calculating (and showing) the pace for every second, but calculate the distance for the pas few seconds (could be 5, could be 10). You probably have these three settings: GPS, GPS+GLONASS, GPS+GALILEO. Why is this feature so badly covered by Garmin? It seems like a huge feature, since the GPS pace is so easily muddled, and accurate pace is so useful. Even after I calibrated the run when I was done My stats show that I only hit a 6:40 pace. App matters. Two things that really need to be considered here. Current pace with gps just isn't very accurate. This is ruining my marathon training. Track Mode on some of the listed watches seems interesting, but I’d honestly rather have a perfectly working manual mode. Note: I use a garmin outside w/ gps to track pace, mileage, HR etc. Accurate manual splits. It is largely due to Garmin's faulty algorithm. The thing was wonky, it had me at paces of 6:40/mile for mile1, 7:00/mile for mile 2, and 6:55 for mile 3. This subreddit is an unofficial, non-affiliated community, run by the users, to embrace and have conversation about the products we love! lol I'm on a Garmin Reddit so I suppose I should of expected that reply. No it is not. I have scientific data to prove that. If it really bothers you just focus on overall pace or lap pace where these sort of inaccurate dips should not be an issue. 1-1 second which makes my interval splits inaccurate. Heart rate readings are inaccurate. And if that’s the case, what do you all The 245 uses a Sony GPS chip widely used in other Garmin watches and also competitors such as the Polar Vantage. Garmin’s virtual partner/racer are just the same and only available on a special page. The watch's accelerometer detects my flip turns to count the laps. Watch uses HRV readings during activity for calculation of LTHR, what's why chest strap is compulsory for lactate threshold test. I don't use the zwift pod anymore. In short, it means that your current training (probably based mostly on your last activity in comparison to the previous week's activities) is, as far as the watch can tell, not producing (or not likely to produce) improvements in your fitness. My set up at the moment is: Top: Average Pace Left: Timer r/Garmin is the community to discuss and share everything and anything related to Garmin. So I usually find there to be a slight difference between my garmin and nrc, but usually chalk this up to the slight delay in setting one off after the other, and chalk pace differences up to the garmin being slightly more accurate as it’s on my wrist versus my phone in my armband Garmin also does not handle the data well. The lab said nearly every 2nd person comes in expecting similar numbers to their watches however they soon learn the reality that those numbers are overstated by some 30% most of time. My dad and I both have Garmin 245s that are less than two years old. Then I can read off Average Pace and Last Lap Pace for an idea of how I'm tracking. Forerunner Example: Default Garmin pace 6:05 Running df4 Does anyone know how to make the Garmin forerunner 245 GPS more accurate? It was inaccurate for my last 2 marathons. Just figured this out after months of frustration regarding pace and distance on my Forerunner 965. So, my plan is to turn of Auto Lap, and hit the Lap button at each km marker (missing one won't matter much). There needs to be a better way to get official race routes into Garmin Connect (and Strava as well as other watch platforms). I started a 80/20 program, and im coming back from Garmin. So I have accurate distance and accurate average pace at the end but also instant pace from stryd. I have the zwift pod and the runn sensor. This subreddit is an unofficial, non-affiliated community, run by the users, to embrace and have conversation about the products we love! I have a fenix 6 pro, i have tried the pace or the average pace and it seems due to gps issue it does not work accurately. Run slower. I was researching this topic recently - the general consensus seemed to be that the cheap footpods (e. To clarify further to the OP: the “HRV Index” seems to be a replaced feature as it was a manual feature intended to be used in the morning before moving around (or when at rest for a significant amount of time) for accuracy of the measurement. Even if i connect the hr strap to the watch it's still clearly not accurate somehow, which boogles the mind. Pace Pro is fine without a route map, of course, but it's so much better when there is a route. Our objective is to moderate with the lightest possible touch. I'm slowly seeing my pace increase with lower HR but the pace is still annoyingly slow! Pace 2 has a 2 week battery life, very accurate HR reading (for a wristwatch), and has all the training features GARMIN has like sleep tracking, fatigue tracking, load impact, and training programs. When I’m on the treadmill my Garmin always has me going at a faster pace than the treadmill. I feel my Garmin is incredibly accurate for swim pace because of this method. Heck, even an ancient Forerunner 610 had way more accurate pace. We pause at a stop light or water stop for a few seconds, start running again and it won't show any pace for miles. I first calibrated my step count and I should be at 5,000-6,000 steps for one hour at 3 km/h. The first is, which watch(es) are you looking at from Garmin. Seemed more accurate for her at the HM distance but I can't recall what its actual prediction was for the last race. Is there any way to fix this? Or is it time to get a new running watch. This leads me to think the Pace 2 isn't tracking this stuff very well outside of workout mode. That would be way way worse than what the watch is reporting. You don't need accurate GPS or instant pace for hiking etc. I was tired of all the inaccurate estimates and assumptions Garmin likes to make. The only other watch that has the same chipset is Coros Vertix 2, but Garmin seems to have better algorithms and/or better antenna design so it is more accurate. My new HRM-PRO seems fairly accurate too, recent upgrades by Garmin to the run dynamics gives it pace tracking indoors. That was one of the main reasons I upgraded to Fenix 7 which is far more accurate. Because they are not placed on your foot, they can't measure stride directly, only predict it based on your cadence and other movements. Wanted to share in case anyone else was having this issue. Recently got a Forerunner 245. Especially with this watch. I find the VO2 max a fun little piece of entertainment but not much more. The forerunner just looks more premium and I do wear it all the time so I care. Not very accurate, in my experience. About two software updates ago both of our watches started randomly not showing pace after pauses. A few weeks ago i couldnt do a BE run without some short walking. And I thought of enrolling myself for a 3K virtual run just to motivate me further. However i prefer the predictions from runalyze and stryd. Even more confounding, is that it’ll my forerunner is not consistently slower or faster than my treadmill. Coros seems to lag, and often underreports. I have a great TM - calibrated and validated - which does not slip (checked with person running on it + calibration wheel) My brother have an Odin (China TM) - his speed / distance accumulation is about 30% off vs reality. I have found that using multi-band not only nails my exact track direction and pace, but also nearly always hits the exact spot I'm in. It always suggests some sort of Olympian workout for me. Look / materials. Both watches upload to strava almost immediately. GPS accuracy, algorithm accuracy could all influence "current" pace. It’s expensive, but well worth it IMO. At the end of the run my Nike app said I had run 4 miles at a 12/mi pace and her watch said 5 miles at a 10. If you're looking at a more instantaneous measure of pace (like Garmin's instantaneous pace) it's probably going to be inaccurate. The treadmill is obviously going to be pretty accurate for pace, however the Garmin devices consistently underestimated pace by about a minute. The best solution (if you care that much) is a footpod like Stryd. If Garmin does not have that then it has absolutely no frame of reference to give an accurate prediction. When I hit the lap button, there is a predefined amount of time from start to finish, with a lap total. So it actually thought I was running at 7:20 minute. GALILEO should offer all of the benefits of GLONASS without any of the downsides. Honestly best way is to learn to pace yourself, and just make small adjustments based on your average pace data field, or if you're not running in steady pace the whole run, lap yourself and look at lap pace. 34 miles, 9:45/mi, 52:10 If you want to do intervals and have your pace changes recorded, then you either need a smart treadmill that can broadcast pace data or an external device. Not sure if 55 have some interesting features now days? At least Pace 2 got walking as activity now. HR is still to high for Recovery run? Walk fast. Honestly that’s why I switched to COROS. yfohq xfuwd qinvkq vnrsxc hbvskev fpcaui qtbkbgj bfh yplly kytv