Garmin - Questions They Can't Answer

DizArch wrote:

Maybe somebody who has had a better experience of Garmin can help, because they have no inclination to do so.

Why does Garmin tell me I've climbed over 5000ft and then reduce it to 3000 when I upload the ride?

Why does Garmin tell me I have burned 4800 calories and then reduce it to 2500 when I upload the ride

Because altitude calculated from GPS is notoriously innaccurate - in fact it's o bad one wonders why they bother to include it. I live in london adn it commonly tells me I'm riding several metres below sea level

When you upload the route, Garmin (or Strava, or similar) recalculates the altitude by looking at the actual height of each position point. This is actually far more accurate

Why does the display on my Garmin Edge 800 change after a stop eg) Time Elapsed becomes something about fat burned?

No idea - this does nt happen on mine. Are you sure you re looking at the same page or maybe your "final results" page is different to the in use page

Why does my Garmin give a total ascent of 3500ft when the guy I am riding with gets 2500ft?

As above...

Why does my computer only recognise the Garmin Edge 800 sporadically?

When the computer does recognise the Garmin Edge 800 why can't I upload routes?

Would suggest that's something wrong with the computer - have you tried redownloading the new stuff they have for the new Garmin Connect or tried it on Strava..?

After a stop, why do my Garmin mileage alerts change to something ridiculous like every 0.34 of a mile when they are set to 5 miles?

Dunno sorry, not used this

Lastly (for now), why are Garmin's products, manuals and what they laughingly call "customer service" so awful?

Dunno either - but I would suggest that cyclists make up such an insignificant amount of their customer base that it's not worth their bother. Plus to be honest they have no serious competition...

I'm a bit off Garmin right now,

Strith wrote:

In other news I've been trying the new connect interface and its much improved, anyone else give it a go?

You are kiddin, right? Its worse than the new Bikeradar homepage... Doesnt show half the stuff I used to get on my dashboard and doesnt use the whole screen properly. Lots of stuff just doesnt work and the bits that do are those which look like the old website but they dont work quite as well as they used to... The new dashboard looks more modern at first glance, but just isnt usable in any way...

Strith wrote:

Nope I'm serious, much much better than before. Everything seems to work perfectly for me. Which bits look like the old website?

Activities, courses, goals, calendar - just the few that come to mind - all the same as they were before, some with slightly different sylised buttons but the same despite that, many looking a bit out of place inside the new frame wrapper with the menus. There are some new features, which dont seem to work very slickly or well but main ly it is just the menu wrapper and the dahboard that has changed - many of the widgets on the dashboard dont show any data because they havent been implemented yet, many of the others dont work as well as they used to. The new widget for Personal Records is blank for example - just shows nothing. The new dashboard widget for goals shows you what % you have completed but not the line to show where you should be to be on target. The old dashboard used to list the last 4/5 activities and you could flick through a quick preview of them on the dashboard without moving to another page or having to go forwards and back - because the recent activity list and most recent activity are two separate parts, if you want to flick through the last few you have to select one, this navigates your whole window to see that activity in detail, then you have to go back and reload the whole dashboard and drill into another. On 1024 x 768 it doesnt quite show 3 widgets wide - probably only by a few pixels, so wastes alot of space not showing anything. On my 3 screens at different resolutions, it shuffles the parts around to different positions on the screen for me - so that I cant set it up and have the same display whichever device I am on.

Strith wrote:

Sounds like you're just used to the old interface, which indecently I found awful to use.
You can set the dashboard to list your last 10 activities, or click through them one at a time using the arrows at the bottom, I don't understand why you would want more, and you don't need to go to any other pages, you can view it all in the dashboard.
I only use GC on my 13in laptop, and don't have any issues with screen size or resolution.

I don't care much for the segments, but once that's up and running I think strava will have some tough competition provided Garmin continue to develop the platform. I'm happy this is now sufficiently good that I'll stop using strava to record my rides.

Ah - actually, that helps a little - I didnt notice that when showing the latest activity you could scroll back or forward. Still not as useful as seing a short list and being able to select one and go straight to it, but a little better than I thought.

I have been trying to like Strava and found that REALLY confusing to find my way around though...

You do need to go to other pages to plan courses, view an activity in detail, set goals etc. I think I just do more with it that some and look a little deeper, only to find the new interface doesnt stand up to the scrutiny.

Altitude doesn't work on moving GPS units. The way your position is calculated, it makes the assumption that the Earth is a smooth surfaced sphere, with no contours. Mathematically, this makes things much simpler.

Your altitude is calculated by using the GPS unit's 3D position when you first turn it on and then using barometric pressure to calculate how far up or down you go. This method is quite accurate and is the same method used by the altimeter in aircraft. In an aircraft, you know what height you are at when parked on your airfield, so you re-set your altimeter every time before flying. The GPS sort of does the same thing by trying to triangulate from satellites. This is very complex and very prone to small amounts of error (you are reading time stamps to 8 decimal places and working out how far they have come from if they were travelling at the speed of light) due to gravity and the position of the satellite in the sky.

On longer rides, the accuracy of barometric pressure readings suffers as the atmospheric pressure will change during the day and can be higher or lower away from your starting point, if you ride towards the centre of a low pressure system, for example. Pilots radio up for the pressure at ground where they are going to, we can't do that.

The system is flawed but it's probably good enough for our needs.

Your unit sounds like it might be on the fritz to be honest...try doing a factory reset or something

This needs to be sorted out and is unacceptable...my elevation was off with the garmin and I crashed into a mountain.

Bar Shaker wrote:

Altitude doesn't work on moving GPS units. The way your position is calculated, it makes the assumption that the Earth is a smooth surfaced sphere, with no contours. Mathematically, this makes things much simpler.

Really? I have always got altitude information on my GPS devices when they are moving as long as you can see enough satellites.

wongataa wrote:

Bar Shaker wrote:

Altitude doesn't work on moving GPS units. The way your position is calculated, it makes the assumption that the Earth is a smooth surfaced sphere, with no contours. Mathematically, this makes things much simpler.

Really? I have always got altitude information on my GPS devices when they are moving as long as you can see enough satellites.

Once the GPS has used all overhead satellites to establish an altitude in the initial boot up, your height is then adjusted using air pressure... As I explained. Your quote selectively omitted that part of my post.

The unit gets a much more accurate position fix from satellites that are low on the horizon but these are poor at giving altitude. Satellites that are overhead are poor at helping give an accurate position so are ignored when you are moving.

Bar Shaker wrote:

wongataa wrote:

Bar Shaker wrote:

Altitude doesn't work on moving GPS units. The way your position is calculated, it makes the assumption that the Earth is a smooth surfaced sphere, with no contours. Mathematically, this makes things much simpler.

Really? I have always got altitude information on my GPS devices when they are moving as long as you can see enough satellites.

Once the GPS has used all overhead satellites to establish an altitude in the initial boot up, your height is then adjusted using air pressure... As I explained. Your quote selectively omitted that part of my post.

The unit gets a much more accurate position fix from satellites that are low on the horizon but these are poor at giving altitude. Satellites that are overhead are poor at helping give an accurate position so are ignored when you are moving.

But my GPS units without barometers always display altitude when moving, and it varies as expected. The GPS system is perfectly capable of calculating altitude when moving so your claim that GPS altitude doesn't work when moving is wrong. The smooth sphere you mention is the geoid for the map datum the GPS system uses - WGS84. The GPS altitude is the calculated altitude variation form that geoid.

Edge units with barometers do ignore the GPS altitude data after initial lock if the barometric altitude function is used. You should have started without the blanket statement.

wongataa wrote:

Bar Shaker wrote:

wongataa wrote:

Bar Shaker wrote:

Altitude doesn't work on moving GPS units. The way your position is calculated, it makes the assumption that the Earth is a smooth surfaced sphere, with no contours. Mathematically, this makes things much simpler.

Really? I have always got altitude information on my GPS devices when they are moving as long as you can see enough satellites.

Once the GPS has used all overhead satellites to establish an altitude in the initial boot up, your height is then adjusted using air pressure... As I explained. Your quote selectively omitted that part of my post.

The unit gets a much more accurate position fix from satellites that are low on the horizon but these are poor at giving altitude. Satellites that are overhead are poor at helping give an accurate position so are ignored when you are moving.

But my GPS units without barometers always display altitude when moving, and it varies as expected. The GPS system is perfectly capable of calculating altitude when moving so your claim that GPS altitude doesn't work when moving is wrong. The smooth sphere you mention is the geoid for the map datum the GPS system uses - WGS84. The GPS altitude is the calculated altitude variation form that geoid.

Edge units with barometers do ignore the GPS altitude data after initial lock if the barometric altitude function is used. You should have started without the blanket statement.

It's perfectly capable of calculating it with really poor accuracy.

Oh, I see you now agree and just wanted an argument based on pedantry. You should have said