In reply to Tony the Blade: Endomondo used to really eat the battery life on my phone. Changed to Sport Tracker that seemed better although perhaps not as pretty as endomondo. Now using Strava - it's quite a different beast because it's deliberately competitive. There are little sections of rides all over the world now and when you ride that section of road it ranks you compared to all the other people who have done it using strava. Of course next time you ride that way you know there is a "segment" coming up and hence you try and go faster than last time up that hill etc.
I've found Strava annoying unstable on my phone though. I have various long rides I've done split into 2 or 3 rides because Strava crashed and I have to restart it so it! Besides that great fun.
> I'm still not sold on Strava though. Most of my friends use Endo and I quite like the fact that we can see each others rides/runs/swims etc.
You can do the same on Strava, plus also see the rides of complete strangers and then develop a completely irrational hatred of them as they managed to go up a hill in 30 seconds less time than it took you. ;)
> (In reply to Tony the Blade)
> You can do the same on Strava, plus also see the rides of complete strangers and then develop a completely irrational hatred of them as they managed to go up a hill in 30 seconds less time than it took you. ;)
In reply to Tony the Blade: I love strava.. but maybe because it seems to have more of a community feel to it. But I already knew many on it.. I also use Garmin connect as we're all on that locally, but prefer Strava.. my ideal job remains a job with Strava...
In reply to aligibb: Are you using a phone? Then yes they are quite inaccurate as they are using GPS triangulation for altitude gain, not very good. Dedicated devices like Garmin sometimes use altimeters and barometric pressure which is much more accurate. The Strava app on phones is inaccurate for quite a few things not just elevation gain. Dedicated devices are much better.
> (In reply to Tony the Blade)
> I've been finding with strava that the altitude gain is sometimes way out, which then makes me think the rest could be out as well. anyone else experience this?
> eg. the last ride I remembered to turn it on it was over 1000m too much on the altitude gain for the day. I wish I had done what it said but no chance!!!
I often ride with a friend and our Garmins (me 200, and him 500) are often way-out of sync, despite the fact we are doing the same ride.
Distance is not normally too bad, but altitude can be a couple of hundred metres out...very strange
I've a Garmin 510 and my wife has the Garmin 800 and we can find up to a 20% difference in altitude gain over a ride. I'm pretty sure it's my 510 as hers matches other units fairly accurately. The "cure" seems to be to switch it on and not move for a few minutes before you start your ride - there must be some form of calibration going on during this time.
Last week five of us with Garmins doing the same route showed a range in height gain from 1019 to 1047 metres, so roughly 3%. There was a 300 metre range in the distances covered as well but that may be due to when each of us started recording the ride (on a sea front so no altitude changes). The following day there was a similar range in recorded altitude but different units showed the min and max values.
Things like tree cover can affect GPS - I was on a long descent and doing a fairly constant speed yet my GPS showed it varying from 20Kph to 60Kph so presumably altitude is going to be similarly skewed.
In reply to Kimono: The 500 and 800 units use barometric pressure but the 200 does not, the latter being less accurate. But none of them are perfect, but the ones that do use barometric pressure seem to be the most accurate. 500's are known to measure a bit under and 800's a bit over. As another poster says switching it on for a while before starting the ride does help. I live at about 100m altitude and I switch mine on it will take 5 minutes or so to move from 0-100 m elevation, so it's definitely doing something until it works out what the actual elevation is. You can program it with a spot height so it'll be right to start with, but it still needs to warm up for best accuracy.
As for phones, quite a few segments that have been set up from a ride that someone did with a phone have completely mad elevation profiles. Cat 3 and 4 ratings for something that is flat or goes downhill, or sudden height losses like you've ridden off a cliff. Although Garmins might get the total elevation a little out across a whole ride they are more consistent and you rarely see some of the major errors over a short period of time like you do with a phone. Although does happen occasionally. Once or twice it's plotted me riding out to sea.
I was using both Endo and Strava at the same time to log mountain runs this summer. In reality there wasn't any huge difference but they clearly don't measure in quite the same way as one would get ahead of the other quite randomly. One clear difference was the route trace afterwards: Strava showed a good accurate line whereas Endo only showed a rough curve which ironed out all of the small switchbacks, which was annoying. I doubt it would make much difference when road biking.
Overall I think I prefer the Strava interface and social aspects as well but there's very little in it really.
In reply to Tony the Blade:
Strrava is the VHS to Endomondo's Phillips 2000/Betamax. it's not necessarily the best quality, but it has got the biggest community and as such is setting the standard. A bit like the UKC logbook, once you start logging your rides with a given system, it's a pain exporting the data and uploading to any alternatives so the more user's invest their time, the les likely they are to leave.
I use to use Stava on my phone, but have since bought a basic Garmin Edge and must say, it works beautifully.