I’m new to using a smartwatch to track my skiing.
If the GPS in the Forerunner inferior to the Fenix or Epix?
When I look at my tracks it looks like I straight line it down the piste, which I don’t, and my mates Epix tracks show all the turns.
Does the more expensive watch have a better GPS that’s samples more often and as such gets a more accurate/detailed track?
Which version do you have? GPS chipsets are fairly even across the newer watches but if you have a more basic forerunner that can account for part of the difference.
Over the generations chipsets have changed also larger watches have more surface area. I have a 7 pro, epix pro and a forerunner 965. I have one for battery life when I am hiking etc, with solar, lightweight for running and swimming and everyday use an epix pro.
Last edited by shoppy; 18th January 2024 at 19:18.
Mine is a Forerunner 245 so a fairly basic model.
Have you enabled GPS+ GALILEO (European Union satellite system) for better accuracy? Sucks a bit more battery life out of watch but quicker locks and more accuracy. GPS + GLONASS is also better than standard GPS.
Check your setting are the same as your chum’s; then you’ll have your answer….
I’ve changed to the Galileo setting, will see what that does.Originally Posted by shoppy
I see under settings the data recording is set to smart and there is an option for every second, if I select that will my battery get munched?
Last edited by Montello; 18th January 2024 at 19:45.
Short answer your battery will die quicker but I have solar battery pack I use on my coffee breaks.
I’ll try it. I don’t allow coffee breaks whilst skiing :-)
Well those changes made zero difference but I suspect the increase the file size as the upload took longer.
Doesn’t matter but interested in the difference between watches. I suspect the Epix has a superior gps.
I've been using a Coros Apex Pro 2 since Christmas for running and skiing. It's been fantastic. Battery life is excellent - I run with it 3-4 times a week for 4hrs on average, use it all day, multi GPS lock is strong, only need to charge it maybe once every 1.5-2 weeks, and have all functions on. I find the interface to be a lot more user friendly than Garmin, and the analytics through their website is good too. Slightly less data than the Garmin (so I am told), but it has plenty already if you are into sports/analytics. Worth a look imho.
FWIW, I also wear a Whoop and find it is the one I use to gain some valuable insights which is more than any of the sports watches. Mind, Whoop is not a watch.
I've recently bought an Epix and although I can't really offer any advice on the GPS compared to the Fenix (apart from it's tracked every run and walk I've done to perfection). The main draw for me was the screen compared to the fenix, the oled on the epix is fantastic, and it's done everything I need it to (and more, but most of it goes over my head.
Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
Last edited by leo1790; 19th January 2024 at 21:54.
Sorry to hear that and it may just be the age of the chipset in your Garmin watch. On the current Fenix and epix versions both share the same chipset and accuracy is rather superb.
Only paid £100 for mine used. Its perfectly adequate but I’m wondering if I will upgrade. 😬
The Garmin always samples location once a second regardless. Smart recording just drops some of these data points and smooths the plot out to reduce the number of points stored. So yes it will take longer to upload and take more room on the watch.
I only know this as I use an AI service to create custom running plans and it recommends turning off smart record as it also drops samples from heart rate to save space which the service uses as a gauge of how hard (or not) you have been going.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote