Speed and Distance Watches

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 hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

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?

Steve Shelton said:

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 hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

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 hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

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

Linda and Pete said:

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 hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Linda and Pete said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

unit and his radio - he might as well but running with weights in each

hand.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

He started out with the SDM and then went to the GPS. I love the SDM

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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 hidden]> said
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

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

"Phil M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

One dark day on Usenet, "SwStudio" <[email hidden]> said
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

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.

When it comes to the ladies, perhaps! hehe ;-)

cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON)
www.allfalldown.org
www.absolutelyaccurate.com

"Linda and Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

but who cares? - Linda

Indeed.

SwStudio said:

Quoted message said:

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 hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

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 hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

SwStudio said:

Quoted message said:

Exactly. Both are accurate enough for recording training milage Neither

is

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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 hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

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 hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

SwStudio said:

Quoted message said:

Exactly. Both are accurate enough for recording training milage Neither

is

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

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/

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

Quoted message said:

One dark day on Usenet, "SwStudio" <[email hidden]> said
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

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.

Innocent! INNOCENT! 🙂

-DF

Steve Shelton wrote in message
<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

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

Tony said:

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