Garmin 520 - better satellite tracking?

dabber

I've had a Garmin 500 for a couple of years now and been pretty happy with it. However, I now seem to be having more and more problems with satellite drift,
This results in more and more Strava segments getting left off my rides because the track hasn't matched. This isn't such a big deal most of the time but when I've had a bit of a dig at improving my PBs it really pisses me off to find the segment is missing. The SNAP tool helped a bit in the past but that doesn't seem to work very well now.

So, to my question....
If I get a Garmin 520 can I expect a lot more reliable GPS tracking than I currently experience with the 500? I know the 520 has GLOSNASS and I'm presuming (hoping) this will make a difference.

I should add that a lot of features I don't really need. I just want a decent display, ANT+ connectivity to speed/cadence and HRM.

bendertherobot

I've had one for two weeks. Seems rocks solid on matching my very old (2012 ish) segments. I didn't really have any great issues with my 510 before it mind. I'm pretty impressed by it overall. Good screen, excellent display. Not fancy just gets on with things.

dabber

Thanks... sounds more promising.

jgsi

I've had the 520 since last year. Even with the dreaded Garmin firmware updates it continues to function and can be relied upon. Best buy for a long time. I dont even enable Glonass on it as it synchs to GPS within seconds outside.

mechanism

My Edge 500 would often completely lose gps connection when out riding and is inaccurate in built-up areas. I got the Edge 1000 which is much better - it finds satellites quickly even indoors and is accurate in town. Whether that's due to the glonass ability or just newer gps electronics I don't know but the same might apply to the 520.

dabber

With the glosnass function, do you have to decide on either gps or glosnass... or can enable both gps and glosnass running in parallel for the best possible tracking?

bendertherobot

Dabber wrote:

With the glosnass function, do you have to decide on either gps or glosnass... or can enable both gps and glosnass running in parallel for the best possible tracking?

Both are enabled by default.

dabber

That makes sense.... thanks.

Baron Ban Ana

Dabber wrote:

I've had a Garmin 500 for a couple of years now and been pretty happy with it. However, I now seem to be having more and more problems with satellite drift,
This results in more and more Strava segments getting left off my rides because the track hasn't matched. This isn't such a big deal most of the time but when I've had a bit of a dig at improving my PBs it really pisses me off to find the segment is missing. The SNAP tool helped a bit in the past but that doesn't seem to work very well now.

So, to my question....
If I get a Garmin 520 can I expect a lot more reliable GPS tracking than I currently experience with the 500? I know the 520 has GLOSNASS and I'm presuming (hoping) this will make a difference.

I should add that a lot of features I don't really need. I just want a decent display, ANT+ connectivity to speed/cadence and HRM.

I'm in the exact same boat as you. I've had a 500 for 2 years and recently it has been very poor with GPS tracking. Sometimes not picking up a good hour of riding according to Strava. I too considered the 520 but am kind of still hoping my 500 will just start becoming more reliable again. I'm not really sure why it has suddenly become so poor. I master reset it and reset the GPS data which seems to have helped but its still not as good as it was!

Please let me know how you get on!

getnoticed

I've had no issues with my 520 - all rides tracked as expected and satellites locked on even in forest rides.

dabber

Baron Ban Ana wrote:

I'm in the exact same boat as you. I've had a 500 for 2 years and recently it has been very poor with GPS tracking. Sometimes not picking up a good hour of riding according to Strava. I too considered the 520 but am kind of still hoping my 500 will just start becoming more reliable again. I'm not really sure why it has suddenly become so poor. I master reset it and reset the GPS data which seems to have helped but its still not as good as it was!

Please let me know how you get on!

I just have to decide whether I'm frustrated enough by it to shell out the best part of £200 on a 520.

It's so inconsistent. I rode through a Strava rated Cat 4 climb (in France) yesterday and all was recorded fine. It was towards the end of my ride and I was taking it fairly easy.
The day before that I rode it with quite a lot of effort (for me) and it failed to record it due to satellite drift.

bernithebiker

I've gone 500, 510, 520. Each has been a big improvement.

I really like the 520. Compact, multi function, clear, accurate GPS, long battery.

Tracking is very precise and accurate.

dabber

Thanks Bernie. I'm think I'm convinced (and SWMBO has agreed :shock: ).

bernithebiker

Dabber wrote:

Thanks Bernie. I'm think I'm convinced (and SWMBO has agreed :shock: ).

Good move!

Get the kit and sell off all the bits - works out cheaper than the unit alone.