How Garmin Footpod works?
+2
Stephanie
Jerry
6 posters
Page 1 of 1
How Garmin Footpod works?
Brief read online. It seems that the cadence is always right, but stride length has error by design. If the stride length is different than the calibrated one, the pace's accuracy varies too.
So, if I want to use the footpod to a marathon, I should recalibrate with my MP?
Can I activate footpod to record my cadence while use the GPS to pace?
So, if I want to use the footpod to a marathon, I should recalibrate with my MP?
Can I activate footpod to record my cadence while use the GPS to pace?
Jerry- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 2712
Points : 1006505
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Where I'm Loved
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Jerry wrote:Can I activate footpod to record my cadence while use the GPS to pace?
Yes, that's how I use it. Hopefully someone can help you with your other questions.
Stephanie- Poster
- Posts : 245
Points : 4963
Join date : 2011-06-22
Location : Canada
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Yes, if you want to use the footpod for distance in the marathon calibrate it at MP. The advantage to using the footpod is that the battery lasts a lot longer if you don't use the GPS. The downside is that it isn't as accurate as the GPS. I typically use the GPS for distance and the footpod to monitor cadence.
Jim Lentz- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 1171
Points : 6664
Join date : 2011-06-15
Age : 62
Location : Downers Grove
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Jim Lentz wrote:Yes, if you want to use the footpod for distance in the marathon calibrate it at MP. The advantage to using the footpod is that the battery lasts a lot longer if you don't use the GPS. The downside is that it isn't as accurate as the GPS. I typically use the GPS for distance and the footpod to monitor cadence.
Ha, I always thought the footpod is more accurate than GPS.
Jerry- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 2712
Points : 1006505
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Where I'm Loved
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Jerry wrote:Jim Lentz wrote:Yes, if you want to use the footpod for distance in the marathon calibrate it at MP. The advantage to using the footpod is that the battery lasts a lot longer if you don't use the GPS. The downside is that it isn't as accurate as the GPS. I typically use the GPS for distance and the footpod to monitor cadence.
Ha, I always thought the footpod is more accurate than GPS.
Martin VW would agree with you, but you are both wrong
JohnP- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 1226
Points : 6546
Join date : 2011-06-15
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
JohnP wrote:Jerry wrote:Jim Lentz wrote:Yes, if you want to use the footpod for distance in the marathon calibrate it at MP. The advantage to using the footpod is that the battery lasts a lot longer if you don't use the GPS. The downside is that it isn't as accurate as the GPS. I typically use the GPS for distance and the footpod to monitor cadence.
Ha, I always thought the footpod is more accurate than GPS.
Martin VW would agree with you, but you are both wrong
Haha, never used it and probably got the idea from VW.
Jerry- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 2712
Points : 1006505
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Where I'm Loved
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
The "which is more accurate" debate doesn't have a clear winner. It depends on many factors.
GPS accuracy is based on where the Garmin thinks it is compared to where it really is. These are never the same. The "thinks it is" location is where the Garmin calculated its location based on the satellite signals received. From that spot, if you draw a circle around it using the X ft accuracy as the radius, then the actual location of the Garmin would be within that circle. On short distances, the error range could result in significant differences. The longer the distance traveled, the more these errors tend to cancel each other out, but they never cancel out completely. If you look at a recorded route, the path always seems to zig-zag all over the place. Quality of the signal plays a huge factor. Running in a straight line through a wide-open corn field on a clear day will give you better results than winding through downtown Chicago with the typical mid-west overcast. Running in circles around the track creates problems too because the more you change directions, the more inaccurate the GPS is.
The foot pod's accuracy is not location-based, but stride-based. This means the distance calculated is based on how far the accelerometer thinks it traveled with each stride. Garmin claims that this can be 99% accurate when properly calibrated. If the calculated stride length is 99% of the actual stride length, this 1% error becomes more significant the further you run - 1% of 26.2 miles is significantly more than 1% of 400 meters.
The main issue with the accelerometers is the number of factors that impact the accuracy. If you calibrated the foot pod using the left shoe of an everyday trainer and then run with it on the right shoe of a pair of racing flats, it will not calculate the same. Running speed plays a factor. If your stride length changes with speed, then running at anything other than the calibrated speed will create more errors. Factoring in all the things that impact accuracy, Garmin still claims that it should be within 95% accurate.
So which is better? It depends.
If I were running in Chicago with all the building that mess up the GPS accuracy, I think I'd use the foot pod and accept that it would be 99% accurate (or close to it). In a Nebraska corn field, the GPS would probably be better.
Don't get me started on the accuracy of the Garmin GPS with significant changes in elevation.
Also, some would argue that the GPS is more accurate because airplanes use them and they have to be accurate. Yes, airplane GPS receivers are much more sophisticated than a little strap on running watch. Airplanes also use altometers to calculate altitude based on barometric pressure.
GPS accuracy is based on where the Garmin thinks it is compared to where it really is. These are never the same. The "thinks it is" location is where the Garmin calculated its location based on the satellite signals received. From that spot, if you draw a circle around it using the X ft accuracy as the radius, then the actual location of the Garmin would be within that circle. On short distances, the error range could result in significant differences. The longer the distance traveled, the more these errors tend to cancel each other out, but they never cancel out completely. If you look at a recorded route, the path always seems to zig-zag all over the place. Quality of the signal plays a huge factor. Running in a straight line through a wide-open corn field on a clear day will give you better results than winding through downtown Chicago with the typical mid-west overcast. Running in circles around the track creates problems too because the more you change directions, the more inaccurate the GPS is.
The foot pod's accuracy is not location-based, but stride-based. This means the distance calculated is based on how far the accelerometer thinks it traveled with each stride. Garmin claims that this can be 99% accurate when properly calibrated. If the calculated stride length is 99% of the actual stride length, this 1% error becomes more significant the further you run - 1% of 26.2 miles is significantly more than 1% of 400 meters.
The main issue with the accelerometers is the number of factors that impact the accuracy. If you calibrated the foot pod using the left shoe of an everyday trainer and then run with it on the right shoe of a pair of racing flats, it will not calculate the same. Running speed plays a factor. If your stride length changes with speed, then running at anything other than the calibrated speed will create more errors. Factoring in all the things that impact accuracy, Garmin still claims that it should be within 95% accurate.
So which is better? It depends.
If I were running in Chicago with all the building that mess up the GPS accuracy, I think I'd use the foot pod and accept that it would be 99% accurate (or close to it). In a Nebraska corn field, the GPS would probably be better.
Don't get me started on the accuracy of the Garmin GPS with significant changes in elevation.
Also, some would argue that the GPS is more accurate because airplanes use them and they have to be accurate. Yes, airplane GPS receivers are much more sophisticated than a little strap on running watch. Airplanes also use altometers to calculate altitude based on barometric pressure.
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Tim M wrote:
The foot pod's accuracy is not location-based, but stride-based. This means the distance calculated is based on how far the accelerometer thinks it traveled with each stride. Garmin claims that this can be 99% accurate when properly calibrated. If the calculated stride length is 99% of the actual stride length, this 1% error becomes more significant the further you run - 1% of 26.2 miles is significantly more than 1% of 400 meters.
So if we stride different length than the calibrated, Garmin blame on us.
Thanks for the info, Tim.
Can I assume the cadence is straight forward and always accurate by Garmin?
Jerry- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 2712
Points : 1006505
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Where I'm Loved
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Yes, the cadence is always accurate.
Jim Lentz- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 1171
Points : 6664
Join date : 2011-06-15
Age : 62
Location : Downers Grove
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Jim Lentz wrote:Yes, the cadence is always accurate.
Cool. I may buy one later. Just curious about my cadence.
Jerry- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 2712
Points : 1006505
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Where I'm Loved
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Jerry wrote:Jim Lentz wrote:Yes, the cadence is always accurate.
Cool. I may buy one later. Just curious about my cadence.
Count one foot strike for 30 seconds any time you are running. Its not hard to do. You want the number to be 45. Adjust as needed if it is not. You don't need a footpod to simply count.
Chris M- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 1061
Points : 6032
Join date : 2011-06-14
Age : 55
Location : Washington, DC
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Chris M wrote:Jerry wrote:Jim Lentz wrote:Yes, the cadence is always accurate.
Cool. I may buy one later. Just curious about my cadence.
Count one foot strike for 30 seconds any time you are running. Its not hard to do. You want the number to be 45. Adjust as needed if it is not. You don't need a footpod to simply count.
Yeah, like you really need the $400 610.
Jerry- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 2712
Points : 1006505
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Where I'm Loved
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Jerry wrote:Chris M wrote:Jerry wrote:Jim Lentz wrote:Yes, the cadence is always accurate.
Cool. I may buy one later. Just curious about my cadence.
Count one foot strike for 30 seconds any time you are running. Its not hard to do. You want the number to be 45. Adjust as needed if it is not. You don't need a footpod to simply count.
Yeah, like you really need the $400 610.
The 610 looks cool. I've always though the footpod looks dorky. Not as bad as a fuel belt or a camelback but like those it is another accessory I won't wear despite the fact that something like those things would help me carry fluids.
Chris M- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 1061
Points : 6032
Join date : 2011-06-14
Age : 55
Location : Washington, DC
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Chris M wrote:Jerry wrote:Chris M wrote:Jerry wrote:Jim Lentz wrote:Yes, the cadence is always accurate.
Cool. I may buy one later. Just curious about my cadence.
Count one foot strike for 30 seconds any time you are running. Its not hard to do. You want the number to be 45. Adjust as needed if it is not. You don't need a footpod to simply count.
Yeah, like you really need the $400 610.
The 610 looks cool. I've always though the footpod looks dorky. Not as bad as a fuel belt or a camelback but like those it is another accessory I won't wear despite the fact that something like those things would help me carry fluids.
The newer foot pod is not too bad. Smaller than the older models. I keep meaning to lose mine so I can buy a new small one.
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Tim M wrote:Chris M wrote:Jerry wrote:Chris M wrote:Jerry wrote:Jim Lentz wrote:Yes, the cadence is always accurate.
Cool. I may buy one later. Just curious about my cadence.
Count one foot strike for 30 seconds any time you are running. Its not hard to do. You want the number to be 45. Adjust as needed if it is not. You don't need a footpod to simply count.
Yeah, like you really need the $400 610.
The 610 looks cool. I've always though the footpod looks dorky. Not as bad as a fuel belt or a camelback but like those it is another accessory I won't wear despite the fact that something like those things would help me carry fluids.
The newer foot pod is not too bad. Smaller than the older models. I keep meaning to lose mine so I can buy a new small one.
I should do the same. I do a lot of treadmill running so it wouldn't be bad to have one I wore once in awhile. We should have a whole thread on what people think looks cool vs. not cool in running. Certainly there are those who think vibram toe shoes and those compression socks that come up to your knees are wicked awesome looking (maybe even together).
Chris M- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 1061
Points : 6032
Join date : 2011-06-14
Age : 55
Location : Washington, DC
Re: How Garmin Footpod works?
Chris M wrote:Tim M wrote:Chris M wrote:Jerry wrote:Chris M wrote:Jerry wrote:Jim Lentz wrote:Yes, the cadence is always accurate.
Cool. I may buy one later. Just curious about my cadence.
Count one foot strike for 30 seconds any time you are running. Its not hard to do. You want the number to be 45. Adjust as needed if it is not. You don't need a footpod to simply count.
Yeah, like you really need the $400 610.
The 610 looks cool. I've always though the footpod looks dorky. Not as bad as a fuel belt or a camelback but like those it is another accessory I won't wear despite the fact that something like those things would help me carry fluids.
The newer foot pod is not too bad. Smaller than the older models. I keep meaning to lose mine so I can buy a new small one.
I should do the same. I do a lot of treadmill running so it wouldn't be bad to have one I wore once in awhile. We should have a whole thread on what people think looks cool vs. not cool in running. Certainly there are those who think vibram toe shoes and those compression socks that come up to your knees are wicked awesome looking (maybe even together).
Look, if the discussion is just about looking cool, Jerry is out. Jerry is all about serious training.
Jerry- Explaining To Spouse
- Posts : 2712
Points : 1006505
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Where I'm Loved
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|