Help please

ForeverArsenal said:

Hi

Wonder if anyone can help by recommending a **good and accurate pedometer**
pref online.

That depends on what you are expecting the pedometer to do for you. A
pedometer counts what it thinks are steps: the count of your steps over
a given distance will *never* be the same twice. Time of day, what you
had for lunch, your general level of fitness, the load you are carrying,
walking into a headwind: all of these will affect your stepcount for a
given route. I regard pedometers as neither use nor ornament.

It *is* possible to use stepcounting as an estimate to distance covered
/in extremis/: but this requires deliberate pacing, and is only ever
accurate over short distances.

The message <[email hidden]>
from "ForeverArsenal" <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Wonder if anyone can help by recommending a **good and accurate pedometer**
pref online.

Quoted message said:

Have had/tried argos £10 one but never gives the same reading twice.

Quoted message said:

I have found many for sale online,but would _if_ possible prefer
personal experience's of use,not to concerned about price,just want one
that's fairly accurate.

Get a GPS. That should be sufficiently accurate for you and, if you pick
the right one, an almost endless supply of other potentially useless
data. :-)

--
Roger

"ForeverArsenal" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi

Wonder if anyone can help by recommending a **good and accurate

pedometer**

Quoted message said:

pref online.

Have had/tried argos £10 one but never gives the same reading twice.

I have found many for sale online,but would _if_ possible prefer
personal experience's of use,not to concerned about price,just want one
that's fairly accurate.

The Argos one would give wide differences over known distance.Sometimes
say over a known mile it would be several hundred steps different..

My wife bought one recently, an Oregon Scientific, i think it cost 5.99. I
have been having a play around with it and have found it suprisingly
accurate. On a regular walk that I do with the dog I have had readings
between 10400 & 10500, this is a walk just under 6 miles in length . I took
it with me into the hills a couple weeks back and was less impressed, based
on 1 yard per step it showed that I had covered 22 miles in fact I had only
done 18½.

see Chelsea has just won again, that must be a bit worrying for you!

In article <[email hidden]>, Stuart
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

My wife bought one recently, an Oregon Scientific, i think it cost 5.99. I
have been having a play around with it and have found it suprisingly
accurate. On a regular walk that I do with the dog I have had readings
between 10400 & 10500, this is a walk just under 6 miles in length . I took
it with me into the hills a couple weeks back and was less impressed, based
on 1 yard per step it showed that I had covered 22 miles in fact I had only
done 18½.

Hi Stuart, may I suggest your step length is a bit optimistic!

Try pacing ten normal steps and measure the distance from back of heel
to back of heel over the ten steps. Divide the distance by ten and that
should give you your step length. Oddly enough, it sometimes works out
that you step length is the same as your inside leg measurement.
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

"W. D. Grey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Stuart
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

My wife bought one recently, an Oregon Scientific, i think it cost 5.99.

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

have been having a play around with it and have found it suprisingly
accurate. On a regular walk that I do with the dog I have had readings
between 10400 & 10500, this is a walk just under 6 miles in length . I

took

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it with me into the hills a couple weeks back and was less impressed,

based

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

on 1 yard per step it showed that I had covered 22 miles in fact I had

only

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

done 18½.

Hi Stuart, may I suggest your step length is a bit optimistic!

As for navigational purposes I am very well aware of my pacing, for flatish
ground 55 double paces per 100 metres is my measure. So It wasn't of any
great suprise to note from the pedometer that I am walking at 1760 steps per
mile (1 per yard)

"W. D. Grey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Stuart
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

My wife bought one recently, an Oregon Scientific, i think it cost 5.99.

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

have been having a play around with it and have found it suprisingly
accurate. On a regular walk that I do with the dog I have had readings
between 10400 & 10500, this is a walk just under 6 miles in length . I

took

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it with me into the hills a couple weeks back and was less impressed,

based

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

on 1 yard per step it showed that I had covered 22 miles in fact I had

only

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

done 18½.

Hi Stuart, may I suggest your step length is a bit optimistic!

As for navigational purposes I am very well aware of my pacing, for flatish
ground 55 double paces per 100 metres is my measure. So It wasn't of any
great suprise to note from the pedometer that I am walking at 1760 steps per
mile (1 per yard)

In article <[email hidden]>, Stuart
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

As for navigational purposes I am very well aware of my pacing, for flatish
ground 55 double paces per 100 metres is my measure. So It wasn't of any
great suprise to note from the pedometer that I am walking at 1760 steps per
mile (1 per yard)

You must be taller than average then. I'm 5' - 10" and my pace is 64
double paces per 100M.
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

Bitstring <[email hidden]>, from the wonderful
person W. D. Grey <[email hidden]> said

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Stuart
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

As for navigational purposes I am very well aware of my pacing, for flatish
ground 55 double paces per 100 metres is my measure. So It wasn't of any
great suprise to note from the pedometer that I am walking at 1760 steps per
mile (1 per yard)

You must be taller than average then. I'm 5' - 10" and my pace is 64
double paces per 100M.

I'm 6' 1.5" and come in close to the 'thousand (double) steps per Mile',
which is where Mile (=mille = thousand) came from. However pedometers
are notoriously inaccurate over hilly terrain, where they sometimes
don't register steps at all, or wind up counting about 10 for getting
over a stile or boulder (net forward progress = nil).

Personally I'm waiting for my walker's crisps one to see how far I trot
round the house and grounds when I'm not 'walking'. When I am walking, I
use the GPS, which is a heck of a lot more accurate.

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Outgoing Msgs are Turing Tested,and indistinguishable from human typing.

"GSV Three Minds in a Can" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Bitstring <[email hidden]>, from the wonderful
person W. D. Grey <[email hidden]> said

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Stuart
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

As for navigational purposes I am very well aware of my pacing, for

flatish

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ground 55 double paces per 100 metres is my measure. So It wasn't of any
great suprise to note from the pedometer that I am walking at 1760 steps

per

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

mile (1 per yard)

You must be taller than average then. I'm 5' - 10" and my pace is 64
double paces per 100M.

I'm 6' 1.5" and come in close to the 'thousand (double) steps per Mile',

That is a very small gait, do you walk with one hand pivoted on the hip
bone? :-}

Quoted message said:

which is where Mile (=mille = thousand) came from.
However pedometers
are notoriously inaccurate over hilly terrain, where they sometimes
don't register steps at all, or wind up counting about 10 for getting
over a stile or boulder (net forward progress = nil).

Agreed they are little more than a novilty!

Quoted message said:

Personally I'm waiting for my walker's crisps one to see how far I trot
round the house and grounds when I'm not 'walking'. When I am walking, I
use the GPS, which is a heck of a lot more accurate.

I still just use the map!

W. D. Grey <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Stuart
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

As for navigational purposes I am very well aware of my pacing, for flatish
ground 55 double paces per 100 metres is my measure. So It wasn't of any
great suprise to note from the pedometer that I am walking at 1760 steps per
mile (1 per yard)

You must be taller than average then. I'm 5' - 10" and my pace is 64
double paces per 100M.

If you think we're bloody well going to convert that into paces per
mile, you're mistaken!
(Unless PS is listening of course)......
--
Gordon Harris

"ForeverArsenal" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi

Wonder if anyone can help by recommending a **good and accurate
pedometer**
pref online.

Hi
Many thanks for all the replies re pedometer.

After reading the replies it seems that very few walkers in the group
use them.So after much online searching and reading some reviews
I've settled on this one..

http://www.totallyfitness.co.uk/fitnessaccessories/pedometers/index.htm

Afraid I'm not as fortunate as some with hill walks or much open ground
and roads much to busy to walk on with a dog around here( Essex).

Recovering from heart by-pass surgery so just wanted to get a fairly
accurate readout of the few walks I can do and to monitor progress.

Many thanks for your time...
BTW... those waiting for the walker's crisps
one's NOW they really are [censored] !!one in the draw.Make the £10 argos
one seem like a rolls . :-)

Quoted message said:

Barry.

If it ain't broke-don't fix it.

I noticed that Message-ID: <[email hidden]> from
Gordon Harris contained the following:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You must be taller than average then. I'm 5' - 10" and my pace is 64
double paces per 100M.

If you think we're bloody well going to convert that into paces per
mile, you're mistaken!
(Unless PS is listening of course)......

100 meter = 0.0621371 mile

therefore

Double paces in 1 mile = 64/0.0621371 = 1030

--
Geoff Berrow (put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs http://www.ckdog.co.uk/rfdmaker/

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 19:12:04 -0000, "Stuart" <[email hidden]> wrote:

| As for navigational purposes I am very well aware of my pacing, for flatish
| ground 55 double paces per 100 metres is my measure. So It wasn't of any
| great suprise to note from the pedometer that I am walking at 1760 steps per
| mile (1 per yard)

flattish ground? What's that?
I live in West Yorkshire where hills are the norm
Maybe that's why I would not have a pedometer, even a free one.

--
Dave F

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 13:34:33 +0000, Geoff Berrow <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I noticed that Message-ID: <[email hidden]> from
Gordon Harris contained the following:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You must be taller than average then. I'm 5' - 10" and my pace is 64
double paces per 100M.

If you think we're bloody well going to convert that into paces per
mile, you're mistaken!
(Unless PS is listening of course)......

100 meter = 0.0621371 mile

therefore

Double paces in 1 mile = 64/0.0621371 = 1030

That's how the Romans measured paces - from where you pick up your
foot to where you put it down. 1 mile = 1000 paces is pretty accurate
for me.

--

R
o
o
n
e
y

Having used a pedometers for walking and running they can be out by a good
20% dependant on the type of terrain you cross.
It's not the cheapest option, but a cheap GPS has a high degree of accuracy,
and E-Bay has a few older models appearing these days. May be worth a
thought?

"ForeverArsenal" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"ForeverArsenal" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi

Wonder if anyone can help by recommending a **good and accurate
pedometer**
pref online.

Hi
Many thanks for all the replies re pedometer.

After reading the replies it seems that very few walkers in the group
use them.So after much online searching and reading some reviews
I've settled on this one..

http://www.totallyfitness.co.uk/fitnessaccessories/pedometers/index.htm

Afraid I'm not as fortunate as some with hill walks or much open ground
and roads much to busy to walk on with a dog around here( Essex).

Recovering from heart by-pass surgery so just wanted to get a fairly
accurate readout of the few walks I can do and to monitor progress.

Many thanks for your time...
BTW... those waiting for the walker's crisps
one's NOW they really are [censored] !!one in the draw.Make the £10 argos
one seem like a rolls . :-)

Quoted message said:

Barry.

If it ain't broke-don't fix it.