![]() ![]() Want a good read? Try FreeBSD Mastery: Jails (IT Mastery Book 15)įreshPorts needs to find a new hosting provide willing to take a 2U chassis and host it free of charge. I think that Coros will sort out the smoothing VERY quickly and, in hindsight, I guess it’s not so surprising that the power figures from Coros broadly trend with those from STRYD as I would imagine that they specifically modelled their stats to align with the market-leader (STRYD).FreshPorts - graphics/gpxsee: GPS log file viewer and analyzerĪs an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. The power on the steady-state run from the Coros is clearly ‘wrong’ from a data smoothing point of view but on the second chart of 2×15 minutes then who is to say which is right, Coros or STRYD? Here is a fairly long steady-state run where I’m comparing the RUNNING POWER metric of STRYD (on the Garmin) to that from the Coros Pod. Surprisingly they generally tallied quite nicely on paper too, although each device handled walking differently as you can see between 18 and 20 minutes on this chart for the Ground Contact Time (ms) – ignore the fact that it says power…it’s GCT. But I did perform a quick comparison of the Coros POD’s data to those produced by Garmin’s HRM-TRI on the Fenix 6. So that later revelation somewhat dampened my moment of self-congratulation!Īfter the runs, I only spent a small amount of time looking at the data as this is a minor running accessory. The ‘running efficiency’ seemed to be good enough and generally up towards 100%, so I was happy with that – except later I read that it can go higher than 100%. I embarked on my first run with quite a bit of scepticism about how accurate the data would be.Īs I ran I casually looked at some of the gait metrics and they seemed ‘about right’. Or you could just increase your running cadence a bit, that should work for most people. “Running Efficiency” sounds easy-to-consume but, like many other running dynamics metrics, you still have to know what to do to change your gait and you have to have the perseverance to keep looking at those stats to see the effect, if any, of your newfound focus on running drills. I suppose that many casual runners simply won’t understand what VO or GCT are, nor what to do with them. Having said that, the ‘Running Efficiency’ metric isconceptually interesting and understandable. Garmin is toying with concepts and ideas around Grade Adjusted Pace with their new PacePro…perhaps adding that as a new Coros metric would have been an alternative thing for Coros to deliver on the watch and more suited to take-up by a wider audience? Although if the price is pitched LOW…say $30 then maybe some Coros owners will be tempted to give this a go for running power? It’s too niche for a new market entrant and doesn’t properly jump on the running with power bandwagon in any case. Maybe the Asian market is big for them (I have no idea) but I’m pretty sure that they won’t sell many in the Western markets. For a company the size of Garmin, I can see the point in producing a product to do that but I just don’t know why Coros have done this. I guess it might make sense to have an add-on that can deliver some form of running dynamics. Maybe I’m wrong and Coros will later share some validation studies. Thus the Coros Performance Pod is like Garmin’s RD-POD and Garmin’s Running With Power calculation (via a CIQ app), except the Coros offering is not as comprehensive as Garmin’s and almost certainly not as accurate as STRYD’s implementation when looking at the true metabolic cost of running. Garmin RD-POD and Garmin Running With Power CIQ App The accuracy of the Running Power number will be heavily dependent on the watch GPS and altitude (grade). Effectively it just adds running dynamics to the Vertix and makes no attempt to improve the stability or accuracy of running pace. There is no configuration or calibration at all and, a word of warning, it MUST be the right way up. So the POD is just a plug-and-go type of sensor. Indeed it relies on the watch for the concept of distance, ie distance comes from the GPS on the watch NOT from any configurable parameter on the POD. OK, it’s got an onboard accelerometer but there is neither an onboard GPS chip nor barometric altimeter, the pod relies on the watch for those for the power and efficiency calculations & stats. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |