Speed and Distance Watches

Discussion in 'General Fitness' started by Steve Shelton, Jul 20, 2004.

  1. 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?
     
    Tags:


  2. teknofyle

    teknofyle Guest

    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?
    >
    >
     
  3. 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/
     
  4. 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?
    >
    >
     
  5. SwStudio

    SwStudio Guest

    "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
     
  6. 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/
     
  7. SwStudio

    SwStudio Guest

    "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
     
  8. Phil M.

    Phil M. Guest

    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
     
  9. SwStudio

    SwStudio Guest

  10. np426z

    np426z Guest

  11. 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/
     
  12. np426z

    np426z Guest

    "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.
     
  13. SwStudio

    SwStudio Guest

    "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
     
  14. Sam

    Sam Guest

    "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.
     
  15. Sam

    Sam Guest

    "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/
     
  16. Doug Freese

    Doug Freese Guest

  17. Tony

    Tony Guest

    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
     
  18. 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/
     
  19. 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
     
Loading...
Loading...