Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Do I want a foot pod?
Quote | Reply
Returning to triathlon after a long hiatus.

When last I did this thing I was a very overweight BOP guy, just happy to beat the cutoff clock in events up to 70.3. Training was just to get used to the distances.

Now: significant weight loss achieved, with more to go, so I am setting up to train "right." Smart trainer with Zwift, good HR monitor with a Fenix5X plus, so data collection will be no problem and I am actually going to use it this time.

Which leads me to this question: do I want a foot pod?

My runs will almost never be on a treadmill, always outside with GPS. Never imagine I will be a podium contender in anything with running, but let's just say that where once a 16 minute mile was my average, I wouldn't mind working to a sub30 5k in a couple years. So while improvement in speed is always relative, I would like to work toward improvement nonetheless. Is the footpod data something I am likely to use to improve my running? Or am I being tempted to add data just to add data?
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [AirWeaver] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I use both footpod and a garmin HRM-run strap. The data on cadence, ground contact time and left/right balance have been really valuable.

And part of that is the stride length data you get from the footpod but not the strap.

In addition, then I found the footpod helped a very specfic issue I was having with the distance /pace on teh FR935 as a result of the route I was using for some runs for a while (a winding boardwalk where GPS straight lining reduced distance/pace by about 20%.
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [AirWeaver] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Your watch may already have cadence, which is given the most attention by far. Whether or not you think "improving" your cadence is a priority is completely up to you.

I know that GPS watches defer to to footpod data for distance when they lose signal (going through a tunnel, or otherwise), but do they use that instead of GPS distance even when they have a good GPS lock? You could always turn off GPS to force it to use footpod but then you wouldn't have the map.

IMO, unless you run indoors, a footpod is unnecessary.
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [AirWeaver] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Congrats on your weight loss!

My dad loves his foot pod specifically for the Chicago marathon, where he feels something about the buildings blah, blah, blah (I stopped listening) messed up his GPS signal. This from a guy who is pissed off by turns b/c they lengthen the overall run.

Now hopefully all devices are better these days but I used to have a Garmin 410 and it had hideous GPS connectivity on this one trail I frequented, that was down in a valley that was pretty wooded. I was pretty angry to several times finish a run w/ no data.

The above also serves as my warning for you - once you begin to care about data it can be really tough to find a middle ground. I still pout that my 735 takes hours sometimes to transfer data to Garmin Connect via my phone, while once upon a time I just ran or rode my bike with a timex and a smile on my face.

To breathe, to feel, to know I'm alive.
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [AirWeaver] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AirWeaver wrote:
.....I wouldn't mind working to a sub30 5k in a couple years. So while improvement in speed is always relative, I would like to work toward improvement nonetheless. Is the footpod data something I am likely to use to improve my running? Or am I being tempted to add data just to add data?
Like others mention above, I find the foot pod to be valuable. For me, the calibrated foot pod is very helpful when running indoors or in environments where GPS data may be corrupted (buildings, trees, fog, tunnels, etc....). In your current situation, however, it probably won't make much difference, especially if you're only running outside.
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [AirWeaver] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I always run with a foot pod. There are situations where the wrist cadence isn't correct and if you want a more accurate pace and stride length (not to mention the run metrics) then use a foot pod. I use the old Garmin foot pod and I really like it. I used to run with the Milestone (now Zwift pod) but I found it to be annoyingly inaccurate with the distance.

"see the world as it is not as you want it to be"
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [AirWeaver] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i have a fenix 5 and the gps is as accurate as any nerf gun from a dollar store. Like I've had the same route show off by a half mile. I bought a foot pod.
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [AirWeaver] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AirWeaver wrote:
Returning to triathlon after a long hiatus.

When last I did this thing I was a very overweight BOP guy, just happy to beat the cutoff clock in events up to 70.3. Training was just to get used to the distances.

Now: significant weight loss achieved, with more to go, so I am setting up to train "right." Smart trainer with Zwift, good HR monitor with a Fenix5X plus, so data collection will be no problem and I am actually going to use it this time.

Which leads me to this question: do I want a foot pod?

My runs will almost never be on a treadmill, always outside with GPS. Never imagine I will be a podium contender in anything with running, but let's just say that where once a 16 minute mile was my average, I wouldn't mind working to a sub30 5k in a couple years. So while improvement in speed is always relative, I would like to work toward improvement nonetheless. Is the footpod data something I am likely to use to improve my running? Or am I being tempted to add data just to add data?

First, I'm assuming you mean a standard ANT+ footpod, not a fancy running power sensor like Stryde.

As triathlon training tools go, footpods are surely one of the least expensive, so one answer is "why not?"

OTOH, what do expect to gain from a footpod? Your watch already has all the data that are available from a footpod (cadence, indoor pace/distance, etc.) Maybe the footpod is more accurate, but so what? Do you care if your cadence is 180 vs 178? And what would you do differently if it was? There's also the hassle factor. Footpods occasionally need new batteries. If you switch running shoes you have to move the footpod and re-calibrate, etc.

In the grand scheme of things, I don't think it's a big deal either way.
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [kblahetka] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
kblahetka wrote:
i have a fenix 5 and the gps is as accurate as any nerf gun from a dollar store. Like I've had the same route show off by a half mile. I bought a foot pod.

For real? Man, I figured if I was buying this fancy expensive watch I could count on a reliable gps signal. 1/2 mile off? How long of a course?
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [sathomasga] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sathomasga wrote:
First, I'm assuming you mean a standard ANT+ footpod, not a fancy running power sensor like Stryde.

As triathlon training tools go, footpods are surely one of the least expensive, so one answer is "why not?"

OTOH, what do expect to gain from a footpod? Your watch already has all the data that are available from a footpod (cadence, indoor pace/distance, etc.) Maybe the footpod is more accurate, but so what? Do you care if your cadence is 180 vs 178? And what would you do differently if it was? There's also the hassle factor. Footpods occasionally need new batteries. If you switch running shoes you have to move the footpod and re-calibrate, etc.

In the grand scheme of things, I don't think it's a big deal either way.

That's my question really, what would I use it to do differently? - Also I just got the watch and I am still setting it up, so I don't even know what I'm looking at yet. I think I need to delve into about 2-3 hours of youtube videos just on this watch
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [kblahetka] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
kblahetka wrote:
i have a fenix 5 and the gps is as accurate as any nerf gun from a dollar store. Like I've had the same route show off by a half mile. I bought a foot pod.

Yeah, I've had the same thing happen w/ my Fenix 5+.
Which sucks, because the 310XT it replaced was actually really, really good in that regard.

I love the form factor of the Fenix, and there are a lot of cool features, etc.
But the GPS accuracy is utter crap at times, and the optical HR is laughably awful while running.

I'm back using my Viiiiva HR strap for any time I want actual HR data, not a random # generator.

What foot pods are best for pairing w/ a Fenix?
Garmin, Stryd, Zwift, other??


float , hammer , and jog

Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [AirWeaver] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AirWeaver wrote:
For real? Man, I figured if I was buying this fancy expensive watch I could count on a reliable gps signal. 1/2 mile off? How long of a course?

GPS accuracy is a real rabbit hole. It depends on so many factors, environmental (tree and cloud cover), personal (how does your arm move during a typical stride), even technical (position of satellites). The accuracy is so unique to specific situations that it's hard to make generalizations; some watches work best for some folks, other watches for others.

FWIW, I've found Garmin to be, by far, the worst for me. But then I gave up on Garmin after the fiasco of the Fenix 5 introduction and presumably they've made improvements since then. I'll never buy another Garmin again to find out, though. Most accurate watch I ever had was a Polar V800, but it finally died after many years of service. Currently the best I've found is Apple Watch Series 4. Some folks might not consider it a "serious" training watch, but it works fine for me.
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [AirWeaver] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I drove across country a couple summers back and listened to all this guy's podcasts. I ended up buying his book and embracing his training philosophy.

In a nutshell, do most of your weekly running with just a watch, do the weekend long run by miles. Intervals by time not distance. Everything is by feel. And a long walk once a week, the day after the long run.

So maybe ditch all the gadgets and just listen to your body.

https://www.amazon.com/...5e778beddd6b0963fbd9
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [Murphy'sLaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Murphy'sLaw wrote:
kblahetka wrote:
i have a fenix 5 and the gps is as accurate as any nerf gun from a dollar store. Like I've had the same route show off by a half mile. I bought a foot pod.


Yeah, I've had the same thing happen w/ my Fenix 5+.
Which sucks, because the 310XT it replaced was actually really, really good in that regard.

I love the form factor of the Fenix, and there are a lot of cool features, etc.
But the GPS accuracy is utter crap at times, and the optical HR is laughably awful while running.

I'm back using my Viiiiva HR strap for any time I want actual HR data, not a random # generator.

What foot pods are best for pairing w/ a Fenix?
Garmin, Stryd, Zwift, other??

Hmm... I'm replacing a 310xt with a cracked screen here.

My impression is that the optical HR is crap on pretty much anything. I have a decent strap with bluetooth and ant+

This is frustrating. $800 watch and now I may be regretting it. Not to start a whole thing, but I didn't see any downside from DCR from this product, so I was pretty confident in this purchase.
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [jroden] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
these are the podcasts i mentioned, episode 22 details the training week if you are curious

https://itunes.apple.com/...-podcast/id969509765
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [jroden] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jroden wrote:
I drove across country a couple summers back and listened to all this guy's podcasts. I ended up buying his book and embracing his training philosophy.

In a nutshell, do most of your weekly running with just a watch, do the weekend long run by miles. Intervals by time not distance. Everything is by feel. And a long walk once a week, the day after the long run.

So maybe ditch all the gadgets and just listen to your body.

https://www.amazon.com/...5e778beddd6b0963fbd9

No doubt, but I think I need a bridge to get there. What I mean is, my body is still changing a lot. (Sounds like I'm in middle school health class, right?) I don't have enough history of training and really, good training, to know what it feels like or should feel like. I did years of long slow distance stuff without regard to HR zone at all. Now I want to do that right.

So, to parallel this, I was a type two diabetic. I reversed this by not eating anything that raises my blood glucose. Simple enough really, no secret. But I still test my BG several times a day. I now can guess what it is before I do the blood draw, with a pretty decent margin of accuracy. But it took a while before I could correlate the feel with the numbers.

Right now, I'm clueless as to what my actual ability to push hard in training feels like. I need the data crunching to show me where I really am, HR zone-wise, so that I can begin to know what the feeling actually is telling me.

Does that make sense? I'm looking forward to the day when I can train by RPE. So far, that has been a miscalculation of my own that kept me from doing much effectively.
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [AirWeaver] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
yes, it makes a lot of sense. I think using a HR monitor is a great idea for you.

So, there is a guy called Maffeltone who wrote about lower HR training. I think some (or much maybe) of his philosophy isn't based on any science, but one thing you might like is setting a ceiling for HR as an alarm on your watch. Pretty low, like 135 or something, then when it beeps start walking until it shuts up. Get out and put some time in on or off road letting your body get used to the stress of exercise.

I would not sweat the pace data at all. Maybe make the goal 30 (or whatever) minutes of actual running with no walking breaks without your HR limit squaking at you. If you want to make walking harder and avoid the beating of running, add some ski poles and hit the trails.

And don't look in the rear view mirror. The road is stretching out ahead of us, out past achievements don't mean much.

Be patient and keep up the good work.
Last edited by: jroden: Mar 31, 19 14:17
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [AirWeaver] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have a 6 mile route that it would be off on literally every time. The tracking on the map would be everything from squiggles to one time a nice straight line through houses. I had a 910 that I donated to a family member starting out and honestly it was was much more reliable.
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [jroden] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jroden wrote:
yes, it makes a lot of sense. I think using a HR monitor is a great idea for you.

So, there is a guy called Maffeltone who wrote about lower HR training. I think some (or much maybe) of his philosophy isn't based on any science, but one thing you might like is setting a ceiling for HR as an alarm on your watch. Pretty low, like 135 or something, then when it beeps start walking until it shuts up. Get out and put some time in on or off road letting your body get used to the stress of exercise.

I would not sweat the pace data at all. Maybe make the goal 30 (or whatever) minutes of actual running with no walking breaks without your HR limit squaking at you. If you want to make walking harder and avoid the beating of running, add some ski poles and hit the trails.

And don't look in the rear view mirror. The road is stretching out ahead of us, out past achievements don't mean much.

Be patient and keep up the good work.

First, thank you for all of the above!

I'm mostly familiar with the Maffetone Zone 2 method. I know that a lot of runners struggle to slow down to do it. I feel like I have the opposite problem. I never pushed hard to then have to pull back. I have been doing a series of stair climbing events this spring. That is a sure fire way to jack the heart rate up into zone 4. And I love it. It's brief, but it is a new kind of challenge for me. I am hoping to find a mix of training styles in this next stage of endurance sports training so that I can benefit from the high HR intensity, as well as the Zone 2 Maff volume for endurance. At least that's how I understand the point of Maff.
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [AirWeaver] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I really like using a footpod. First, as others have said, it really helps with pacing accuracy around buildings and trees. Second, and more important for me, is that Garmin using GPS will take 15-20 seconds to register a change in speed, but with a footpod it's maybe 2-3 seconds. Instant pace data is useful at the start of a race, when I tend to go out too hard. It's also helpful when you find yourself above or below pace and want to get back on pace quickly -- trained RPE ideally gets you this, but is less reliable in a hot/cold/long race.

Trouble is, a basic footpod can be hard to find these days -- too many fancy and pricey ones with metrics other than speed/cadence.


<The Dew Abides>
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [dewman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dewman wrote:
I really like using a footpod. First, as others have said, it really helps with pacing accuracy around buildings and trees. Second, and more important for me, is that Garmin using GPS will take 15-20 seconds to register a change in speed, but with a footpod it's maybe 2-3 seconds....

Interesting. I have a Garmin footpod but I only use it on the treadmill. I'm going to try it on my next outdoor run, especially if it's an interval run where I'm changing paces often.

I have a Garmin 935 watch. I'm assuming the watch will rely on the footpod for cadence rather than the watch, if anyone knows?
Quote Reply
Re: Do I want a foot pod? [dktxracer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dktxracer wrote:
I have a Garmin 935 watch. I'm assuming the watch will rely on the footpod for cadence rather than the watch, if anyone knows?

I have a 920xt, and I had to go to the "Sensors and Accessories" submenu to change the "Use footpod for speed" setting from the default (when GPS is off) to "Always." It's very nice on intervals, where you might not get a good pace reading for the first 200m.


<The Dew Abides>
Quote Reply