Pedometers, walking pace and suchlike.

Nick Maclaren said:

How do pedometers work?

Not very well.

Quoted message said:

are they very accurate?

They can be, but only if you are walking on flat even ground
with a steady stride. Not much use for walking over uneven
and steep terrain.

Quoted message said:

what is the average walking pace of the average man?

My legs are probably a bit shorter than average, but it
takes me 11 paces (footsteps) to cover 10 metres on flat
ground. So if I wanted to walk 300m I'd count 330 paces. [1]

Quoted message said:

what would the maximum pace be for Mr Average.

No idea.

[1] How do I know my pacing? GPS. Infinitely better than a
pedometer in every respect. Forget pedometers, they're
old technology and they don't work very well. Get
yourself a GPS.

Paul
--
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukwildwales.fsnet.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

My legs are probably a bit shorter than average, but it
takes me 11 paces (footsteps) to cover 10 metres on
flat ground. So if I wanted to walk 300m I'd count 330
paces. [1]

Normally one counts double steps - eg each time the right
foot (say) hits the ground, so your count would be 55 per
100 metres. I suggest this is too low a number - it should
be more like 65/70 for you.

Don't forget take the count having gone up a slope and
down a slope.
--
Bill Grey billboy.co.ukbillboy.co.ukOpen ↗

In article
<[email hidden]>, Phil Cook
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Paul Saunders said:

W. D. Grey said:

Normally one counts double steps - eg each time the
right foot (say) hits the ground, so your count would be
55 per 100 metres. I suggest this is too low a number -
it should be more like 65/70 for you.

Come on Bill, my legs aren't that short! :-)

Well my 100m is 62 paces so something is out if you
are at 55.

And I'm 64 normal double steps for 100m on flat & easy
terrain - I'm 5'7" so a similar height to Paul.

--

dscs.demon.co.ukdscs.demon.co.ukOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

In article
<[email hidden]>, Phil Cook
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Paul Saunders said:

W. D. Grey wrote:

> Normally one counts double steps - eg each time the
> right foot (say) hits the ground, so your count would
> be 55 per 100 metres. I suggest this is too low a
> number - it should be more like 65/70 for you.

Come on Bill, my legs aren't that short! :-)

Well my 100m is 62 paces so something is out if you
are at 55.

And I'm 64 normal double steps for 100m on flat & easy
terrain - I'm 5'7" so a similar height to Paul.

I use a GPS to measure distance, but since so many of us are
around 5'7" why are outdoor trousers only supplied in one
length for 7ft giants?
--
Gordon

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

Quoted message said:

How do pedometers work? are they very accurate? what is
the average walking pace of the average man? what would
the maximum pace be for Mr Average.

So many questions, so little time.

And, so many answers :-) Why not shell out for a GPS? At
least you'l have the latest technology to use on your walk!
But not really required in the UK.
--
Regards, Chris
--
Bird sightings based around 'Craven' Skipton, North
Yorks. craven-birds.co.ukcraven-birds.co.ukOpen ↗ Outgoing mail is
certified Virus Free. Checked by the Norton auto-updated
anti-virus system.

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul
Saunders <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

W. D. Grey said:

Normally one counts double steps - eg each time the right
foot (say) hits the ground, so your count would be 55 per
100 metres. I suggest this is too low a number - it
should be more like 65/70 for you.

Come on Bill, my legs aren't that short! :-)

No I know that - I've seen the picture :-)

Quoted message said:

Actually I've noticed when crosing rougher ground that I do
12 or 13 steps per 10 metres, but it's definitely 11 steps
on a good flat path.

An experienced walker I know reckons for him - 65 double
paces /100m and he's taller than you, not much but taller.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Don't forget take the count having gone up a slope and
down a slope.

I haven't tested it on slopes, just on flat ground. I'm not
particularly interested in paces anyway, that's a technique
more useful for compass work.

Of course - you should perfect your compass work, it's so
important, but then you have GPS for emergencies :-)

We'll have to do field trials on pacing - I'll bring the
long tape measure .

--
Bill Grey billboy.co.ukbillboy.co.ukOpen ↗

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

Quoted message said:

use a GPS to measure distance, but since so many of us are
around 5'7"
why are outdoor trousers only supplied in one length for
7ft giants?
--

Hawkshead seem to have the formula right as far as trouser
leg length is concerned. With a gut like mine my trousers
seem to be far too long in the leg for my waist measurement.

Hawkshead short leg are fine, the Regular are about 3"
too long. I'm
30.5" inside leg.
--
Bill Grey billboy.co.ukbillboy.co.ukOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>, Adrian
Godwin <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Maybe it depends on why you want to measure the distance ?
If it's for navigation (how far along this bearing / path
have I moved) then a GPS is far superior

Sssssssssshhhhhh! watch your language :-) :-)
--
Bill Grey billboy.co.ukbillboy.co.ukOpen ↗

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

Quoted message said:

How do pedometers work? are they very accurate? what is
the average walking pace of the average man? what would
the maximum pace be for Mr Average.

So many questions, so little time.

Have a look at:

walking.about.compedaccuracy04 2.htmOpen ↗

--
Regards, Chris
--
Bird sightings based around 'Craven' Skipton, North
Yorks. craven-birds.co.ukcraven-birds.co.ukOpen ↗ Outgoing mail is
certified Virus Free. Checked by the Norton auto-updated
anti-virus system.

Paul Saunders <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Adrian Godwin said:

I've had equally unreliable readings from GPS :
anything up to 20% different between people walking in
the same party.

Eh? How can that be? GPS is not that inaccurate. Are you
walking in bad reception conditions? How are you actually
interpreting the GPS data? What are you measuring?
Distance? Or are you calculating paces?

I've given up arguing the toss about GPS, if people don't
understand how to use one how can they learn to use a
compass with precision?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If you want to know how much effort you've put into a
walk (for fitness etc.) then maybe a count of steps
however inaccurately they're scaled) is actually more
useful.

There is no way that I'm going to go out walking and count
every single step I take! I enjoy data collection but I'm
not going to go to that extreme!

Concentrating on step counting is an excellent way to make a
walk utterly boring, or to get lost, IMHO. :-)
--
Gordon

"Nick Maclaren" didn't ask, but Pete the Troll did

Quoted message said:

How do pedometers work? are they very accurate? what is
the average walking pace of the average man? what would
the maximum pace be for Mr Average.

So many questions, so little time.

Interesting question, and on topic Pete (or is it
Jonathan?), so why use someone else's name to post and
not your own?

Anyway, back to the question, personally I haven't found
mine accurate at all. They measure a certain type of body
movement, assume it's a stride. The fancy ones then work out
mileage via a standard stride for each step but if you walk
on rough ground you very seldom take a standard step so it's
difficult to set them up accurately. Also what may work on
one walk will not on another over different terrain
i.e. set up for a flat walk it would be useless on a hill
walk. 4mph is a reasonable pace on flat ground.

--
Regards Bob

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Swansea prom...

Excellent venue for starters :-)
--
Bill Grey billboy.co.ukbillboy.co.ukOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I will certainly test my pace again since it's caused
such a fuss.

Just did a cursory check on mine, a double step measures
1.6m that gives 63 double paces per 100m.

When going at speed <g> this could increase slightly to
perhaps 1.7m giving 59 double paces/100m

Must give this a go in earnest!
--
Bill Grey billboy.co.ukbillboy.co.ukOpen ↗

In article <j_kDc.3660$4y3.38899862@news-
text.cableinet.net>, Sandy Birrell
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I remember correctly Bill you said previously that your
inside leg measurement was 30.5"" which, x2= 61" = 1.55
meters which is approx. your step length. I wonder if that
applies to everybody?

Interesting thesis, but of course the I L measurement is
for trousers.
--
Bill Grey billboy.co.ukbillboy.co.ukOpen ↗

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul
Saunders <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I rarely walk with GPS owning friends

True :-)
--
Bill Grey billboy.co.ukbillboy.co.ukOpen ↗

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

Quoted message said:

Concentrating on step counting is an excellent way to make
a walk utterly boring, or to get lost, IMHO. :-)

When in work we sometimes had to measure the ground for
Underground cable ordering. This was done in hundreds of
feet. Can you imagine the phrases which were uttered when
the question was asked "Was that 2600ft or 2700ft?" This was
an easy mistake to make and caused much frustration
- the error usually occurred when we were distracted by some
third party.

Counting paces could end in a shambles so easily.
--
Bill Grey billboy.co.ukbillboy.co.ukOpen ↗

In article <CJmDc.3720$qB4.39964790@news-
text.cableinet.net>, Sandy Birrell
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I checked my step length three times and it came out as
59", or close to it. My inside leg size, for trousers, is
29.5" x 2 = 59". Quite a coincidence 🙂

You may well have created "Birrell's Law" for pacing -
well done.
--
Bill Grey billboy.co.ukbillboy.co.ukOpen ↗

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I checked my step length three times and it came out as
59", or close to

it.

Quoted message said:

My inside leg size, for trousers, is 29.5" x 2 = 59".
Quite a coincidence

🙂

59" Is that one step or two?

If it is one then it is a "Giant step for mankind" :-)

--
Bill Grey billboy.co.ukbillboy.co.ukOpen ↗

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

Quoted message said:

nside leg 30" Double step = 56/54/57 Average = 55.66' So
3" out ;-)
--

You're not trying hard enough :-)
--
Bill Grey billboy.co.ukbillboy.co.ukOpen ↗