8,153
edits
Changes
no edit summary
* The red line is from a [[Garmin 225]] that is relying on its internal accelerometer. The Garmin 225 is firmly strapped onto my wrist to ensure its optical heart rate monitor is effective. This is rather tighter than I would like, and mostly it does okay. You can see it's a little delayed in some of its responses, and at the 5:00 and 6:30 minute marks it misses the rise completely. While it's far from perfect, it does a reasonable job.
* The orange line is from an [[Suunto Ambit3]] using its internal accelerometer. The Ambit3 was reasonably firmly strapped to my arm, but nowhere near as tight as the Garmin 225. I suspect it's this looseness that causes the poor data for the Ambit3. You can see that on the fast intervals the Ambit3 loses the plot completely and assumes that my cadence drops to zero.
[[File:Cadence Comparison3.jpg|none|thumb|1000px|A second comparison of cadence monitoring devices during [[High Intensity Interval Training]].]]
The graph above is another test during a [[High Intensity Interval Training]] session, and again, the [[Warmup]] and [[Cooldown]] sections of the run are not included. You can see that under steady state conditions, all the watches do reasonably well, but not during the interval section.
* I wore five watches, only one with a [[Footpod]] and the others with just their internal sensors.
* The orange line is from a [[Garmin 920XT]] with a Garmin Footpod. This is the gold standard for this run and I'm assuming it's accurate based on the tests above.
* The purple line is from the [[Suunto Ambit2]] and matches fairly well with the Footpod.
* The red line is from a [[Garmin Epix]] which does nearly as well as Ambit2, but there are a couple of drop outs where it thinks the cadence has dropped rather than gone up.
* The blue line is from a [[Garmin 225]] and it does quite poorly, not really following the interval session at all.
* The green line is from an [[Suunto Ambit3]] where again you can see it loses touch with reality completely and assumes that my cadence drops to zero.
[[File:Cadence Comparison2.jpg|none|thumb|1000px|A comparison of cadence monitoring devices during a [[Long Run]].]]
The graph above is the comparison of a [[Garmin 920XT]] with a [[Footpod]] (red line) with a [[Garmin 225]] using its internal accelerometer (blue line). You can see the internal sensor is far noisier, but worse, it has an overall bias. The Footpod showed an average cadence of 91.1 while the internal sensor was 89.3. That's not a huge difference, but it's far from ideal.