Garmin Edge 305, anyone use it?

Per Jason Spaceman:

Quoted message said:

Also, does the Edge 305 record your route and let you download it
afterwards and plot it with Google Earth?

I've got the 301 and it definitely does that.

GoogleEarth|Tools|GPS, but you have tb a subscriber to "GoogleEarth Plus". The
freebie version doesn't support it.
--
PeteCresswell

Jason Spaceman said:

Also, does the Edge 305 record your route and let you download it
afterwards and plot it with Google Earth?

J. Spaceman

yes, it definetly does -- here's the link to a site that plots your
routes on Google Maps.

http://www.motionbased.com/

fwiw, if I were to buy a new GPS set-up I'd probably look into the
wearable Garmin Forerunner 305 -- then you can use it not just on one or
two bikes-- but you'll also be able to use it for running or any type of
activity away from the bike.

Jason Spaceman said:

I noticed that one of the Paris-Roubaix riders used a Garmin Edge 305
GPS/cyclocomputer yesterday (seehttp://tinyurl.com/2hyjfm).

Has anyone tried these? How do they calculate altitude data? Using
GPS, or using some sort of barometric sensor to measure changes in air
pressure? And which would be the more accurate of the two?

Also, does the Edge 305 record your route and let you download it
afterwards and plot it with Google Earth?

J. Spaceman

A freind of mine has one. It uses both to determine altitude, but he
complains it does not have a manual calibration feature. Like he knows
how high his house is, but it always tries to do it itself, and since
his rides start out with some immediate up and downs, and weather
shifts, it takes a while to for the altitude measurement to settle
down and sometimes is off a bit.

Joseph

Quoted message said:

Jason Spaceman said:

I noticed that one of the Paris-Roubaix riders used a Garmin Edge 305
GPS/cyclocomputer yesterday (seehttp://tinyurl.com/2hyjfm).

Has anyone tried these? How do they calculate altitude data? Using
GPS, or using some sort of barometric sensor to measure changes in air
pressure? And which would be the more accurate of the two?

Also, does the Edge 305 record your route and let you download it
afterwards and plot it with Google Earth?

J. Spaceman

A freind of mine has one. It uses both to determine altitude, but he
complains it does not have a manual calibration feature. Like he knows
how high his house is, but it always tries to do it itself, and since
his rides start out with some immediate up and downs, and weather
shifts, it takes a while to for the altitude measurement to settle
down and sometimes is off a bit.

Joseph

Yes that's very annoying. You have to wait for about 1 minute before it
displays the correct altitude.

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu (http://www.nb.nu)

Lou Holtman said:

Quoted message said:

Jason Spaceman said:

I noticed that one of the Paris-Roubaix riders used a Garmin Edge 305
GPS/cyclocomputer yesterday (seehttp://tinyurl.com/2hyjfm).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Has anyone tried these? How do they calculate altitude data? Using
GPS, or using some sort of barometric sensor to measure changes in air
pressure? And which would be the more accurate of the two?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Also, does the Edge 305 record your route and let you download it
afterwards and plot it with Google Earth?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

J. Spaceman

Quoted message said:

A freind of mine has one. It uses both to determine altitude, but he
complains it does not have a manual calibration feature. Like he knows
how high his house is, but it always tries to do it itself, and since
his rides start out with some immediate up and downs, and weather
shifts, it takes a while to for the altitude measurement to settle
down and sometimes is off a bit.

Quoted message said:

Joseph

Yes that's very annoying. You have to wait for about 1 minute before it
displays the correct altitude.

Lou

As I understand it, because of the peculiarities of where he lives, it
takes much longer than 1 minute. If it wasn't so "user-friendly" and
had some advanced settings options he could set it as he wishes.

Joseph

Lou Holtman said:

Quoted message said:

Jason Spaceman said:

I noticed that one of the Paris-Roubaix riders used a Garmin Edge 305
GPS/cyclocomputer yesterday (seehttp://tinyurl.com/2hyjfm).

Has anyone tried these? How do they calculate altitude data? Using
GPS, or using some sort of barometric sensor to measure changes in air
pressure? And which would be the more accurate of the two?

Also, does the Edge 305 record your route and let you download it
afterwards and plot it with Google Earth?

J. Spaceman

A freind of mine has one. It uses both to determine altitude, but he
complains it does not have a manual calibration feature. Like he knows
how high his house is, but it always tries to do it itself, and since
his rides start out with some immediate up and downs, and weather
shifts, it takes a while to for the altitude measurement to settle
down and sometimes is off a bit.

Joseph

Yes that's very annoying. You have to wait for about 1 minute before
it displays the correct altitude.

Depends on how you define "correct". I've recorded the elevation for
an hour with the unit lying in my backyard. The result was, more or
less, a periodic sawtooth. The amplitude was around 10-20 meters,
which, I suspect, accounts for its optimism on accumulated climbing.
I assume this is due to the motion of the GPS satellites.

--
Joe Riel

Quoted message said:

As I understand it, because of the peculiarities of where he lives, it
takes much longer than 1 minute. If it wasn't so "user-friendly" and
had some advanced settings options he could set it as he wishes.

FWIW, I have similar issues with my eTrex unit, and I live in rolling prairie
country, for the most part. It simply takes longer to lock onto enough
satellites to get a good 3D fix, and if you have to deal with trees, canyons,
skyscrapers, or heavy overcast, that just adds to the time to lock in. I can
get a 2D fix by the time I hit the end of the driveway, but my topo profiles
are always wacky for a good block or so before they settle in, unless I wait
out in the open for a minute or two before I leave.

--

__o Kristian Zoerhoff
_'\(,_ [email hidden]
(_)/ (_)

Joe Riel said:

Depends on how you define "correct". I've recorded the elevation for
an hour with the unit lying in my backyard. The result was, more or
less, a periodic sawtooth. The amplitude was around 10-20 meters,
which, I suspect, accounts for its optimism on accumulated climbing.
I assume this is due to the motion of the GPS satellites.

What was the period of the oscillation?

Kinky Cowboy*

*Batteries not included
May contain traces of nuts
Your milage may vary

Kinky Cowboy said:

Joe Riel said:

Depends on how you define "correct". I've recorded the elevation for
an hour with the unit lying in my backyard. The result was, more or
less, a periodic sawtooth. The amplitude was around 10-20 meters,
which, I suspect, accounts for its optimism on accumulated climbing.
I assume this is due to the motion of the GPS satellites.

What was the period of the oscillation?

I looked again at the data. I really need to take more data to get a
better handle on this, the actual data is not really periodic (my
memory was wrong). The elevation started at 145 meters, increased
linearly to 163 meters in 20 minutes, then dropped quickly to about
148 m and stayed there for 10 minutes, then increased linearly to 168
m in 10 minutes, then dropped linearly to 148 m in about 5 minutes.
There are also a few spikes.

I have the 302, my wife has the 305, which includes a barometic
pressure sensor; I have a plan to compare the two, but haven't got
around to it.

--
Joe Riel

Quoted message said:

Jason Spaceman said:

I noticed that one of the Paris-Roubaix riders used a Garmin Edge 305
GPS/cyclocomputer yesterday (seehttp://tinyurl.com/2hyjfm).

Has anyone tried these? How do they calculate altitude data? Using
GPS, or using some sort of barometric sensor to measure changes in
air pressure? And which would be the more accurate of the two?

Also, does the Edge 305 record your route and let you download it
afterwards and plot it with Google Earth?

J. Spaceman

A freind of mine has one. It uses both to determine altitude, but he
complains it does not have a manual calibration feature. Like he knows
how high his house is, but it always tries to do it itself, and since
his rides start out with some immediate up and downs, and weather
shifts, it takes a while to for the altitude measurement to settle
down and sometimes is off a bit.

Ah another "Edge Annoyance".

Garmin's hand-held units with a barometric altimeter have a manual
calibration function.
They also have the automatic "keep it adjusted by reference to error range
on GPS height", which is very clever.

Other "Edge Annoyance" I know is that you can't get the current position on
the screen in any sensible coordinate system. So, if you were referencing a
paper map for navigation, its seriously deficient compared to a hand-held
GPS.

- Nigel (GPS user for cycling, but its a Vista Cx )

--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/

Nigel Cliffe said:

Quoted message said:

Jason Spaceman said:

I noticed that one of the Paris-Roubaix riders used a Garmin Edge 305
GPS/cyclocomputer yesterday (seehttp://tinyurl.com/2hyjfm).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Has anyone tried these? How do they calculate altitude data? Using
GPS, or using some sort of barometric sensor to measure changes in
air pressure? And which would be the more accurate of the two?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Also, does the Edge 305 record your route and let you download it
afterwards and plot it with Google Earth?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

J. Spaceman

Quoted message said:

A freind of mine has one. It uses both to determine altitude, but he
complains it does not have a manual calibration feature. Like he knows
how high his house is, but it always tries to do it itself, and since
his rides start out with some immediate up and downs, and weather
shifts, it takes a while to for the altitude measurement to settle
down and sometimes is off a bit.

Ah another "Edge Annoyance".

Garmin's hand-held units with a barometric altimeter have a manual
calibration function.
They also have the automatic "keep it adjusted by reference to error range
on GPS height", which is very clever.

Other "Edge Annoyance" I know is that you can't get the current position on
the screen in any sensible coordinate system. So, if you were referencing a
paper map for navigation, its seriously deficient compared to a hand-held
GPS.

- Nigel (GPS user for cycling, but its a Vista Cx )

--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster athttp://www.2mm.org.uk/

I agree. On the whole a great (but expensive) unit. I was seriously
disappointed when I found out my new GPS would not tell me my
location.

Joe Riel said:

Kinky Cowboy said:

Joe Riel said:

Depends on how you define "correct". I've recorded the elevation for
an hour with the unit lying in my backyard. The result was, more or
less, a periodic sawtooth. The amplitude was around 10-20 meters,
which, I suspect, accounts for its optimism on accumulated climbing.
I assume this is due to the motion of the GPS satellites.

What was the period of the oscillation?

I looked again at the data. I really need to take more data to get a
better handle on this, the actual data is not really periodic (my
memory was wrong). The elevation started at 145 meters, increased
linearly to 163 meters in 20 minutes, then dropped quickly to about
148 m and stayed there for 10 minutes, then increased linearly to 168
m in 10 minutes, then dropped linearly to 148 m in about 5 minutes.
There are also a few spikes.

I have the 302, my wife has the 305, which includes a barometic
pressure sensor; I have a plan to compare the two, but haven't got
around to it.

Your results suggest that the unit was doing some post processing to
interpolate between fixes.

+/- 20m is about the best you can hope for with GPS
http://gpsinformation.net/main/altitude.htm so your 156.5m +/- 11.5m
was well within spec

I don't know how the barometric altimeter on the Polar S720 calibrates
itself, but it reliably identifies my desktop as 72ft ASL, which
agrees precisely with Google Earth.

Kinky Cowboy*

*Batteries not included
May contain traces of nuts
Your milage may vary

Kinky Cowboy said:

Joe Riel said:

Kinky Cowboy said:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:34:15 -0700, Joe Riel <[email hidden]>
wrote:

>
> Depends on how you define "correct". I've recorded the elevation
> for an hour with the unit lying in my backyard. The result was,
> more or less, a periodic sawtooth. The amplitude was around 10-20
> meters, which, I suspect, accounts for its optimism on accumulated
> climbing. I assume this is due to the motion of the GPS satellites.

What was the period of the oscillation?

I looked again at the data. I really need to take more data to get a
better handle on this, the actual data is not really periodic (my
memory was wrong). The elevation started at 145 meters, increased
linearly to 163 meters in 20 minutes, then dropped quickly to about
148 m and stayed there for 10 minutes, then increased linearly to 168
m in 10 minutes, then dropped linearly to 148 m in about 5 minutes.
There are also a few spikes.

I have the 302, my wife has the 305, which includes a barometic
pressure sensor; I have a plan to compare the two, but haven't got
around to it.

Your results suggest that the unit was doing some post processing to
interpolate between fixes.

+/- 20m is about the best you can hope for with GPS
http://gpsinformation.net/main/altitude.htm so your 156.5m +/- 11.5m
was well within spec

Garmin's barometer (at least in the Vista C/Cx range) does some averaging of
the GPS height to keep the barometric reading within the envelope drawn by
the GPS height. I've seen a graph or two where someone did some quite
careful experiments on this, but can't put my hands on it.

Quoted message said:

I don't know how the barometric altimeter on the Polar S720 calibrates
itself, but it reliably identifies my desktop as 72ft ASL, which
agrees precisely with Google Earth.

It doesn't calibrate itself; there is nothing for it to calibrate against !
Your reading is pot-luck.
You are supposed to re-calibrate it regularly at known altitudes. Regularly
depends on the weather; if the weather pattern is very stable, the
calibration might be Ok for a few days, if there are a lot of changes, then
the calibration can be out in a few hours.
Changes in the weather can push an uncorrected barometric altimeter up or
down by several hundred feet.

- Nigel

--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/

On Apr 16, 8:42 pm, Jason Spaceman <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

....snip

Has anyone tried these? How do they calculate altitude data?

Quoted message said:

J. Spaceman

I have the Edge 305 HRM with Cadence.

I understood the altitude was calculated by the GPS fix, the same as
on units like the Etrex. GPS altitude is not absolutely accurate but
it is 'relatively' accurate and it seems fine on mine except that on
fast descents the elevation line is sometimes (rarely) drawn as a
series of steps because the processor obviously can't react quickly
enough.

How fast the unit stabilises seems to depend on how many satellites it
can get a fix on. In Eastern Australia the unit can 'see' a lot of
satellites and reacts quickly. In Western Australia there are only
four visible and it takes a long time.

This is not a mapping device - it's a bike computer. It's not intended
to guide the user to or from specific locations. It has a crude
waypoint system but if navigation is what you want, it's the wrong
choice.

What impresses me is the accuracy of the plot - it clearly shows which
side of the road I've ridden on and where I've ridden off the road to
stop. This was handy when the cadence sensor fell off (long story.) I
just looked at where the cadence data stopped (map view on the PC) and
retraced my ride and there it was.

It's also like owning a wind tunnel. You can perform roll down tests
on a long hill to fine tune your tuck position (hit Lap reset between
runs) and see which gives the fastest speed.

Too many good things to list here - Virtual Rides with yourself,
create workouts, take it on any bike (but you only get cadence on the
one with the sensor fitted obviously.) Use the map dumps as title
slides if you create photos on a cycling holiday. You can use it to
determine your aerobic threshold using the Conconi method .
Terrific (expensive!) training tool - I love it.

Kinky Cowboy said:

Joe Riel said:

Kinky Cowboy said:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:34:15 -0700, Joe Riel <[email hidden]> wrote:

> Depends on how you define "correct". I've recorded the elevation for
> an hour with the unit lying in my backyard. The result was, more or
> less, a periodic sawtooth. The amplitude was around 10-20 meters,
> which, I suspect, accounts for its optimism on accumulated climbing.
> I assume this is due to the motion of the GPS satellites.
What was the period of the oscillation?

I looked again at the data. I really need to take more data to get a
better handle on this, the actual data is not really periodic (my
memory was wrong). The elevation started at 145 meters, increased
linearly to 163 meters in 20 minutes, then dropped quickly to about
148 m and stayed there for 10 minutes, then increased linearly to 168
m in 10 minutes, then dropped linearly to 148 m in about 5 minutes.
There are also a few spikes.

I have the 302, my wife has the 305, which includes a barometic
pressure sensor; I have a plan to compare the two, but haven't got
around to it.

Your results suggest that the unit was doing some post processing to
interpolate between fixes.

+/- 20m is about the best you can hope for with GPS
http://gpsinformation.net/main/altitude.htm so your 156.5m +/- 11.5m
was well within spec

I don't know how the barometric altimeter on the Polar S720 calibrates
itself,

It doesn't.

Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu (http://www.nb.nu)

In article <[email hidden]>,

lightninglad said:

On Apr 16, 8:42 pm, Jason Spaceman <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

....snip

Has anyone tried these? How do they calculate altitude data?

Quoted message said:

J. Spaceman

I have the Edge 305 HRM with Cadence.

I understood the altitude was calculated by the GPS fix, the same as
on units like the Etrex. GPS altitude is not absolutely accurate but
it is 'relatively' accurate and it seems fine on mine except that on
fast descents the elevation line is sometimes (rarely) drawn as a
series of steps because the processor obviously can't react quickly
enough.

_ It has a barometer in it, one thing I have noticed is that
downloaded tracks seem to have a much greater variance than
is indicated by the cumlative totals on the device. I wonder if
the tracks have the GPS altitude rather than the barometric
corrected altitude in the device. Or perhaps the device has a
better smoothing algorithm than whatever www.motionbased.com
is using.

_ It is a very nice if expensive bike computer, a pretty crappy
navigational GPS. If you're mostly bike riding, I would
definitely get the 305 over the 205 if you want to know what's
going on while you ride. The 205 is fine as a data recorder, but
is very difficult to read while riding and offers fewer bells and
whistles for the bike rider, in addition to it's shorter battery
life. ( They have significant software differences as well )

_ Booker C. Bense

Joe Riel said:

Kinky Cowboy said:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:34:15 -0700, Joe Riel <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Depends on how you define "correct". I've recorded the elevation for
an hour with the unit lying in my backyard. The result was, more or
less, a periodic sawtooth. The amplitude was around 10-20 meters,
which, I suspect, accounts for its optimism on accumulated climbing.
I assume this is due to the motion of the GPS satellites.

Quoted message said:

What was the period of the oscillation?

I looked again at the data. I really need to take more data to get a
better handle on this, the actual data is not really periodic (my
memory was wrong). The elevation started at 145 meters, increased
linearly to 163 meters in 20 minutes, then dropped quickly to about
148 m and stayed there for 10 minutes, then increased linearly to 168
m in 10 minutes, then dropped linearly to 148 m in about 5 minutes.
There are also a few spikes.

I have the 302, my wife has the 305, which includes a barometic
pressure sensor; I have a plan to compare the two, but haven't got
around to it.

--
Joe Riel

"You ain't seen nothin yet" Joe

Here I go on my annual rant about barometric altimeters lacking
temperature correction.
I have seen on my old Casio altimeter watch gain as much as a 400-foot
caused by
little other that temperature gain.
So a 60' to 70' variation ain't nothin compared to ~400'

Altimeters lacking temp compensation are virtually useless & not worth
their asking
price regardless how cheap. And there are a lot out there.

Oddly many even have a thermometer in the unit, but not connected to
the altimeter. You can ask a sales person if it is temp corrected &
they say yes, it has a thermometer, which is a non-sequetor.

Another similar rant is about speaker phones that are not duplexed.
A non-duplexed speakerphone is also useless. You might as well be
talking on a walkie-talkie.

Thanks. I needed that, John

Actually, this could help someone from spending money on a useless
product.

Booker C. Bense said:

If you're mostly bike riding, I would
definitely get the 305 over the 205 if you want to know what's
going on while you ride. The 205 is fine as a data recorder, but
is very difficult to read while riding and offers fewer bells and
whistles for the bike rider, in addition to it's shorter battery
life. ( They have significant software differences as well )

Huh? Near as I can tell, the displays are identical for the two,
as is battery life (not great for either).

--
Joe Riel

battery life = 8hrs on my 305

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

Quoted message said:

Booker C. Bense

Quoted message said:

If you're mostly bike riding, I would
definitely get the 305 over the 205 if you want to know what's
going on while you ride. The 205 is fine as a data recorder, but
is very difficult to read while riding and offers fewer bells and
whistles for the bike rider, in addition to it's shorter battery
life. ( They have significant software differences as well )

Huh? Near as I can tell, the displays are identical for the two,
as is battery life (not great for either).

--
Joe Riel