Speed and Distance Watches



S

Steve Shelton

Guest
Does anyone have advice or reviews on speed and distance devices? I think
that I would prefer one with GPS rather than the pedometer versions from
Nike or Polar. I would assume they are more accurate. The issue is the
size of the GPS receiver.
Thoughts?
 
I've used the Garmin Forerunner 201. It is a good alternative to the Timex
GPS, for instance, where you have to strap a pod the size of a hockey puck
to your arm. The Forerunner is a little bigger (wider) than a watch. I've
also used the Nike Elite. Both of them are pretty accurate. The thing to
note is that the Garmin can be affected by trees and, in general, not having
a clear view of the sky. I would have thought GPS would be more accurate,
but a couple of times I ran the same course and the Garmin came up with
different mileage (not by a lot, but still...). The Garmin also has the
Virtual Partner feature which is very cool.

The Nike needs to be calibrated, but right out of the box it is really
accurate. You won't even know the pod is on your foot and you get the
benefit of having a HRM too (although Nike sells one with only S+D, I think
it is the V10). Ultimately, I think I will be getting the Nike. The Polar
s625x is out or will be out very soon as well, which is like the Nike but
with altimeter too.

"Steve Shelton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Does anyone have advice or reviews on speed and distance devices? I think
> that I would prefer one with GPS rather than the pedometer versions from
> Nike or Polar. I would assume they are more accurate. The issue is the
> size of the GPS receiver.
> Thoughts?
>
>
 
On 2004-07-20, Steve Shelton <[email protected]> wrote:
> Does anyone have advice or reviews on speed and distance devices? I think
> that I would prefer one with GPS rather than the pedometer versions from
> Nike or Polar. I would assume they are more accurate. The issue is the
> size of the GPS receiver.

Both are quite accurate. I wouldn't say that GPS is any more accurate. I have
a "proper" GPS unit, and I think my fitsense is more accurate than it.

I suggest using google. THere has already been a lot of discussion in this
forum.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
This has been answered a lot but I have to add my $.02 because I LOVE my
Nike SDM - my hubby has the Timex Garmin and by the time he adds that GPS
unit and his radio - he might as well but running with weights in each hand.
He started out with the SDM and then went to the GPS. I love the SDM and
it is really accurate - assuming that the tracks I"ve measured it on are
accurate. I mean, we might be talking a small variance of .05 +/- but who
cares? - Linda
"Steve Shelton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Does anyone have advice or reviews on speed and distance devices? I think
> that I would prefer one with GPS rather than the pedometer versions from
> Nike or Polar. I would assume they are more accurate. The issue is the
> size of the GPS receiver.
> Thoughts?
>
>
 
"Linda and Pete" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> I love the SDM and
> it is really accurate - assuming that the tracks I"ve measured it on are
> accurate. I mean, we might be talking a small variance of .05 +/- but who
> cares?

Not to play devil's advocate, but I'm sure lots of people do.

cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON)
www.allfalldown.org
www.absolutelyaccurate.com
 
On 2004-07-20, Linda and Pete <[email protected]> wrote:
> This has been answered a lot but I have to add my $.02 because I LOVE my
> Nike SDM - my hubby has the Timex Garmin and by the time he adds that GPS
> unit and his radio - he might as well but running with weights in each hand.
> He started out with the SDM and then went to the GPS. I love the SDM and
> it is really accurate - assuming that the tracks I"ve measured it on are
> accurate. I mean, we might be talking a small variance of .05 +/- but who
> cares?

Exactly. Both are accurate enough for recording training milage Neither is
accurate enough to meet the same standards as a certified course.

I'm not sure why one would want better than 1% error anyway. Might come in
handy for measuring courses for intervals I suppose -- but unless you do these
on a track, factors like incline and terrain can easily have more effect on
your times than the 1% measuring error.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> On 2004-07-20, Linda and Pete <[email protected]> wrote:
> > This has been answered a lot but I have to add my $.02 because I LOVE my
> > Nike SDM - my hubby has the Timex Garmin and by the time he adds that
GPS
> > unit and his radio - he might as well but running with weights in each
hand.
> > He started out with the SDM and then went to the GPS. I love the SDM
and
> > it is really accurate - assuming that the tracks I"ve measured it on are
> > accurate. I mean, we might be talking a small variance of .05 +/- but
who
> > cares?
>
> Exactly. Both are accurate enough for recording training milage Neither is
> accurate enough to meet the same standards as a certified course.
>
> I'm not sure why one would want better than 1% error anyway.


Out of all the people on the group I would never expect our
resident type-A detail freak to post this! ;-)

(joking aside, it wouldn't bother me, either - but I am sure many
people would want/expect perfection for whatever reason).


cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON)
www.allfalldown.org
www.absolutelyaccurate.com
 
One dark day on Usenet, "SwStudio" <[email protected]> said
news:[email protected]:

> Out of all the people on the group I would never expect our
> resident type-A detail freak to post this! ;-)

Hmmm...I thought that was Doug.

Phil M.

--
If you can empty your own boat
Crossing the river of the world,
No one will oppose you,
No one will seek to harm you. -Chuang Tzu
 
On 2004-07-20, SwStudio <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Exactly. Both are accurate enough for recording training milage Neither is
>> accurate enough to meet the same standards as a certified course.
>>
>> I'm not sure why one would want better than 1% error anyway.
>
> Out of all the people on the group I would never expect our
> resident type-A detail freak to post this! ;-)
>
> (joking aside, it wouldn't bother me, either - but I am sure many
> people would want/expect perfection for whatever reason).

Because they're obsessive-compulsive. Seems to be a common trait among
runners. This could be more generally a trait of certain types of
athletes. I've noticed that several of the people on the weightlifting
newsgroups have this obsessive-compulsive thing too. Maybe this sort of
attention to detail is associated with consistency, which is assocaited
with long term success (success in this context just means sticking to
it)

Roger is unique in his lack of obsessive-compulsiveness. But I wonder if
he was like this when he was in his prime, or if he was just like every
other obsessive-compulsive runner.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Roger is unique in his lack of obsessive-compulsiveness. But I wonder if
> he was like this when he was in his prime, or if he was just like every
> other obsessive-compulsive runner.

You have to ask? I was just like you. And what's worse, you'll end up
just like me.
 
"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> On 2004-07-20, SwStudio <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Exactly. Both are accurate enough for recording training milage Neither
is
> >> accurate enough to meet the same standards as a certified course.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure why one would want better than 1% error anyway.
> >
> > Out of all the people on the group I would never expect our
> > resident type-A detail freak to post this! ;-)
> >
> > (joking aside, it wouldn't bother me, either - but I am sure many
> > people would want/expect perfection for whatever reason).
>
> Because they're obsessive-compulsive. Seems to be a common trait among
> runners.


Agreed - perhaps moreso with very competitive runners, though. It's
probable that the competitive urge is linked to type-A personality,
judging from what I've experienced. Obviously there are exceptions,
but it seems clear that it takes a certain mindset to work as hard as
some do to achieve their goals.

cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON)
www.allfalldown.org
www.absolutelyaccurate.com
 
"Steve Shelton" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Does anyone have advice or reviews on speed and distance devices? I think
> that I would prefer one with GPS rather than the pedometer versions from
> Nike or Polar. I would assume they are more accurate. The issue is the
> size of the GPS receiver.
> Thoughts?
>
>
I have a Garmin Forerunner 201. It is big, but hardly bulky. I have found
it very useful.
 
"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 2004-07-20, SwStudio <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Exactly. Both are accurate enough for recording training milage Neither
is
> >> accurate enough to meet the same standards as a certified course.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure why one would want better than 1% error anyway.
> >
> > Out of all the people on the group I would never expect our
> > resident type-A detail freak to post this! ;-)
> >
> > (joking aside, it wouldn't bother me, either - but I am sure many
> > people would want/expect perfection for whatever reason).
>
> Because they're obsessive-compulsive. Seems to be a common trait among
> runners. This could be more generally a trait of certain types of
> athletes. I've noticed that several of the people on the weightlifting
> newsgroups have this obsessive-compulsive thing too. Maybe this sort of
> attention to detail is associated with consistency, which is assocaited
> with long term success (success in this context just means sticking to
> it)

Weightlifting is very easy to measure one's workload. RepxSetsxWeight

>
> Roger is unique in his lack of obsessive-compulsiveness. But I wonder if
> he was like this when he was in his prime, or if he was just like every
> other obsessive-compulsive runner.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Donovan Rebbechi
> http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
Steve Shelton wrote in message
<[email protected]>...
>Does anyone have advice or reviews on speed and distance devices? I think
>that I would prefer one with GPS rather than the pedometer versions from
>Nike or Polar. I would assume they are more accurate. The issue is the
>size of the GPS receiver.
>Thoughts?
>
>

Any thoughts on how the Nike SDM would do on recording distances accurately
over choppy singletrack which causes a great variation in stride length and
style? For example, when going down difficult sections (especially on snow)
I often do a type of gallop instead of a regular stride. In this type of
running, one foot does not pass the other foot much if at all. Using this
downhill style you don't fall, even on ice. Also I'm assuming the GPSs
don't work very well with a great deal of tree cover found on many trails.
Any trail runners have experience with the SDM (or other unit) or have found
a good way to get distances on trails, or even off-trail?

- Tony
 
On 2004-07-21, Tony <[email protected]> wrote:

> Any thoughts on how the Nike SDM would do on recording distances accurately
> over choppy singletrack which causes a great variation in stride length and
> style? For example, when going down difficult sections (especially on snow)
> I often do a type of gallop instead of a regular stride. In this type of
> running, one foot does not pass the other foot much if at all. Using this
> downhill style you don't fall, even on ice. Also I'm assuming the GPSs
> don't work very well with a great deal of tree cover found on many trails.
> Any trail runners have experience with the SDM (or other unit) or have found
> a good way to get distances on trails, or even off-trail?

A unit like the SDM will probably not give you very good results on uneven
trail surfaces. Your best bet would be to get some sort of GPS unit that allows
you to upload the tracks. You can then use computer software to "retouch" the
tracklog. This will work fine for logging milage, as long as you just have
sporadic dropouts (as opposed to not being able to get a lock at all). Keep
in mind that people do use GPS units for hiking all the time, so they shouldn't
be completely useless on trails. Neither type of unit is good enough to use as
a "speedometer" IMO.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
I've used a Fitsense for about a year now and I am getting reasonably accurate
& consistent speed/mileage readings (less than 2% variance measured against
known distances). However, it took me months to figure out that I need to
place the foot pod at EXACTLY the same spot on the SAME shoes in order to get
the same reading(s) for a particular route. I don't know why the manufacturer
doesn't make this clear (or maybe I missed it?) on the instruction booklet.

Bert
Houston
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back