Unbelievably cool. Is the software compatible with Macs?
Triathlon Forum
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: Garmin 301 used during IMAZ [jnielsen]
[ In reply to ]
Re: Garmin 301 used during IMAZ [Gator1736]
[ In reply to ]
Re: Garmin 301 used during IMAZ [jnielsen]
[ In reply to ]
Very cool... I have the 201 but I think the 301 is in my near future. Have you tried topofusion? It allows you to 3d render your workouts from satellite photos as well as topo maps. If you are in an urban area the resolution is .25 meters!
----
Don't hold back
----
Don't hold back
Re: Garmin 301 used during IMAZ [jnielsen]
[ In reply to ]
That is unbelievably cool... I have the 301 but never thought it could do all that... thank you for showing us what it can do.
Dude, what an awesome post.
Thanks again,
Trev
Trev Williams
http://www.thedoctrine.ca
Dude, what an awesome post.
Thanks again,
Trev
Trev Williams
http://www.thedoctrine.ca
Re: Garmin 301 used during IMAZ [jnielsen]
[ In reply to ]
Someone already asked but I'm gonna bump to ask it again - whats up with the elevation data? 4200' of climbing for IMAZ? I can't see any computer generating that much on that course no matter how high the resolution.
Do 301 owners typically find thier elevation data to be this wacky or exaggerated?
ot
Do 301 owners typically find thier elevation data to be this wacky or exaggerated?
ot
Re: Garmin 301 used during IMAZ [OT in CA]
[ In reply to ]
Re: Garmin 301 used during IMAZ [jnielsen]
[ In reply to ]
I think the forum just ate your response...
ot
ot
Re: Garmin 301 used during IMAZ [jnielsen]
[ In reply to ]
How did you get your data uploaded to MB. I am using a 301 and MB will not synch my data with my watch. It is all there, swim, T1, Bike, T2 and Run. I had no trouble getting it into Training Center. Is there a trick?
Congrats by the way.
Pepper
Congrats by the way.
Pepper
Re: Garmin 301 used during IMAZ [OT in CA]
[ In reply to ]
The elevation issue is my only complaint with the 301. I think it has a hard time with the resolution of the elevation. If you stand in one spot you will notice that the elevation may vary +/-20 feet continuously. This is where you get the wacky numbers for elevation. I did a 10k in downtown Houston in February and the 301 said there was 600 feet of climbing - not a chance / it may have been 5 feet of climbing. I had a friend do a 60 mile ride west of Houston that had almost 3000 foot of climbing. Actual elevation change was 50 feet max. The only climbing in Houston is in the downtown parking garages.
Elevation seems to be the only problem. Distance is not - If I run different sides of the street on a run it will show this linear distance change. Maybe as the software evolves the elevation will get in line.
Elevation seems to be the only problem. Distance is not - If I run different sides of the street on a run it will show this linear distance change. Maybe as the software evolves the elevation will get in line.
Re: Garmin 301 used during IMAZ [cowtippers]
[ In reply to ]
cowtippers,
You are on to part of the problem of measuring altitude with GPS data from consumer GPS devices.
These devices are not all that accurate in measuring altitude variations accurately, especially on rolling terrain.
I have tested software for the 201 and 301. It has been my experience that the variation between the GPS data that these devices record and topographic information for the same route generally varies by 25-35% on the low side for GPS measured elevation changes. The maximum variation that I have observed is 44% lower than the topographic record. The smallest variation I have observed was 4% but this was a glaring isolated instance! The next closest variation was over 20%.
On flat routes, the variation tends to be a positive variation, again in the 25-35% range. The biggest contributor to these variations appears to be the "floating" nature of consumer GPS elevation readings.
This is one of the primary reasons that most consumer GPS units that advertise the measurement of elevation and elevation changes use barometric altimeters to measure elevation and elevation changes.
It has been my experience that the linear distance measurements of the 201 and 301 have been extremely consistent and accurate and the variation in linear distance measurement from topographic data for the same route has been less than 1% and generally in the 0.1-0.5% range.
I hope that help. FWIW.
Ben Cline
Better to aspire to Greatness and fail, than to not challenge one's self at all, and succeed.
You are on to part of the problem of measuring altitude with GPS data from consumer GPS devices.
These devices are not all that accurate in measuring altitude variations accurately, especially on rolling terrain.
I have tested software for the 201 and 301. It has been my experience that the variation between the GPS data that these devices record and topographic information for the same route generally varies by 25-35% on the low side for GPS measured elevation changes. The maximum variation that I have observed is 44% lower than the topographic record. The smallest variation I have observed was 4% but this was a glaring isolated instance! The next closest variation was over 20%.
On flat routes, the variation tends to be a positive variation, again in the 25-35% range. The biggest contributor to these variations appears to be the "floating" nature of consumer GPS elevation readings.
This is one of the primary reasons that most consumer GPS units that advertise the measurement of elevation and elevation changes use barometric altimeters to measure elevation and elevation changes.
It has been my experience that the linear distance measurements of the 201 and 301 have been extremely consistent and accurate and the variation in linear distance measurement from topographic data for the same route has been less than 1% and generally in the 0.1-0.5% range.
I hope that help. FWIW.
Ben Cline
Better to aspire to Greatness and fail, than to not challenge one's self at all, and succeed.
__________________________________________________
What a drag it is getting old. -- Stones