I want to believe they can fix their GPS issues with software updates. I really do and am trying to wait as long as I can.
But I just looked at a run I did today. I marked in yellow where I actually ran.
This is not a bad area for GPS.
Compare this to a run I did with Garmin a couple of years ago (Not the same route but you can see it's very, close).
If you switch to Satellite you can see it even did incredibly well on off-road paths where I was under trees on both sides
More Like This
Retrieving data ...
Jan 11, 2014 9:30 PM (in response to srandom)
We'll definitely keep on improving the GPS function via the next SMART RUN's firmware releases.
But in the meantime, to get this issue solved, let me suggest you to send an email to our Support: please send them the screenshot you attached here, let them know which firmware version you have at the moment, what workout modus you use and how you wear the watch.
Please also write SCM - srandom - SD as object of the email.
Thank you very much!
Your miCoach TeamAnswered by miCoach
Jan 11, 2014 10:31 PM (in response to srandom)
I'm going to tread into slightly controversial waters here, given all the feedback about GPS, but I don't see the Smart Run GPS as being that poor (even from the picture you and others have posted). (1) I think when you look at (nearly?) any GPS mapped to this level of magnification it will look a bit off the actual path. (2) It seems on par with most consumer-grade products (and the performance of my iPhone and car-based trackers) (3) It is on a device that can be worn on a wristwatch. The comparative Garmin pic is zoomed out more, so it looks more precise, but the Garmin devices I've tested don't seem much better.
In my mind, the point of the GPS is to capture your route (and accurately track your distance…if that's not happening, that a bigger deal), and not to tell you which side of the street you've run on. Maybe others have higher standards?
I'm by no means dismissing your feedback. There's a lot of room for improvement that keeps me from buying at this time. I think we'd all like to see longer batter life (please please please!), better bluetooth performance (please please please!), distance-based training options, data import/export, and better wet weather responsiveness (a natural problem of touch screens?). Improved GPS accuracy is desired, but not a deal-maker/breaker.Answered by ambassador
Jan 11, 2014 10:51 PM (in response to SHotime)
I'm afraid I have to disagree. If you look at the Garmin link I posted, it's not a screenshot. You can zoom right in as close as the image I've posted and see how remarkably accurate that product was. It doesn't get the route right all the time, sometimes it's off by a bit, but if I had to give them a rating, I'd be given that 3/4 year old Garmin a score of probably 7 out of 10 and I'd give the Smart Run probably a 4 out of 10.
When I first saw how all over the place the Smart Run was, I tried to give them the benefit of the doubt in that I'm sure Garmin does a lot of 'cheating' by smoothing out the line, averaging, and discarding points that don't make sense, but that image above just looks all over the place and I wonder if it is a software-correction thing, how long it will take to fix given that Garmin has had years head-start to figure out the maths to correct for GPS's little quirks.
I think I would be confident in the Garmin to have a very close approximation of my distance. Given that image above, how can I have any confidence in the Smart Run to be even close?
Jan 12, 2014 4:34 AM (in response to srandom)
I see your point and share your curiosity about the various GPS systems used by these devices. I also wonder, like you, as to whether it has something to do with the GPS module used or the software.
I am also wondering how accurate the distance measurement is, which is probably more important. Though I've never taken scientific approach to it, I've had good success with the miCoach app running on three generations of iPhones--at least it's close enough for my needs as a long distance runner. As long as Smart Run was in the ballpark distance-wise, I'd be fine with it, but concede that it's down to personal preference and if GPS is the most important thing, you've convinced me that the Garmin unit is working better at the moment.
What I find most frustrating is that Smart Run seems to be so close to the perfect device--optical HRM, bluetooth audio, the miCoach training design--yet not close enough for me to make the switch.Answered by ambassador
Jan 13, 2014 2:53 PM (in response to srandom)
What I've experienced is that the accuracy of GPS seems to depend on the speed of the runner.
While I have a pace of 5:00 to 5:30 minutes/kilometer in hilly, wooded area and the GPS overall accuracy is moderate, my wife is slower than me (pace of 7 to 8 minutes for a kilometer), the GPS accuracy is perfect when she's wearing my Smart Run. Even when the watch is covered with clothes.
Jan 14, 2014 1:21 PM (in response to jottlieb)
My main issues I have is not what it draws on a map, pretty much do not care much about it.
I expect the GPS to work consistent that it finds the satellites quick: Mine always takes around 2- 3 minutes average
While running I expect it to be consisted and not start all of sudden telling me I ran the last km in 2.5 minutes
I expect that the line on a map are more or less to what I ran and not go from straight to zig zag
And most important, to be accurate when I compare it to 5 other devices! which I have and be on a 21km run off by 1km!
Depending on if I run uphill, slower or faster, the distance keeps changing. The Smart Run GPS is always to fast!
==> I want to be consistent!
One could say it is consistent for me, consistent bad. I even tested it on a official measured running race where the "blue" line is the real measured line.
The GPS seems to have to many issue when something might be blocking the view or even by just a bit.
- Like 2
Jan 15, 2014 10:41 AM (in response to tinyhunter)
I agree with srandom and tinyhunter. I've posted pictures on other threads where I've used the SmartRun alongside my phone (running MiCoach) to compare. The phone (even in aeroplane mode to exclude external cell triangulation or any other assistance) tracks nearly perfectly to what I've run. The SmartRun will be 10%+ higher in distance (and thus also causing errors in pace) - this coming from the SmartRun thinking I've zig-zagged through people's houses, rivers and everything else on my route!
There has to be something fundamentally wrong with the GPS implementation on the SmartRun. I don't know if it is the aerial, GPS chip or just the software running it. However, if my phone can see and receive fixing data from 15+ satellites in my house, plotting my position to within 2 or 3 meters accuracy, why can't SmartRun see those same satellites? The SmartRun is using exactly the same frequencies as my phone and should be receiving the same radio waves from the same satellites. The signals are there and at the right strength - the phone proves that. If it isn't seeing them, then it has a serious problem.
Jan 17, 2014 5:21 AM (in response to srandom)
Yeah, I'm wondering if there is something fundamentally wrong with the GPS on the Smart Run also. I could not even get GPS to work in my neighborhood. In contrast, I never have problems with GPS on my Garmin watch or iPhone. I fully charged the battery, updated to the latest firmware, sync'd the watch, tried various locations to get the Smart Run GPS to lock on, reset the GPS to factory settings, held the watch up towards the sky for a clear line of sight, did not activate the music player, stood on my head (not really), but never could get it to work at all. It's really sad too as I had such high hopes for this watch. I was looking forward to the coaching feature via Bluetooth to help me stay on pace during interval training. I was looking forward to utilizing the coaching plans to help me improve my times this year, but alas, I gave up and sent the watch back. Perhaps when Adidas gets the GPS fixed, the battery improved, more water resistant and better touch screen response in wet weather, then I'll reconsider.
Jan 17, 2014 6:31 AM (in response to runnerboy07)
I still doubt it is the hardware (although I am sure that some random units will suffer hardware failures). Mine acquires satellites quickly (nearly as fast as my Tomtom Runner and faster than my old Motoactv) and works better than these units in dense forest coverage. I may be proven to be incorrect, but I hope not.
Jan 17, 2014 9:29 AM (in response to Roastontoast)
I believe it is more software. Unfortunately what ever I do, GPS still takes 2-4 minutes to pick up signals before I can start running. My FR620 takes about 10-15 seconds when I am outside. Though I do have to say, once or twice in the last 12 weeks I got a quick signal in 30 seconds. The moment I have some blockage, it tends to miss behave.. not always, but far to often.
Jan 17, 2014 10:28 AM (in response to runnerboy07)
It's a shame this hasn't worked out for you @runnerboy07. One would hope Adidas would take these issues very seriously. In the meantime, you could always try MiCoach on your iPhone. All you'd need is a compatible chest strap for the heart-rate and you could get all the coaching you would have done from the Smart Run, then maybe move back in the future once it gets properly fixed.
Jan 21, 2014 1:46 PM (in response to srandom)
Oh dear Smart Run
Was wondering why I had been awarded a Fastest KM award on a blue-run day (Don't suppose there's any way to delete that). Pretty obvious when you look at the GPS:
Yellow is where I ran. The bit highlighted in pink is the bit Smart Run decided to make up. This is on a hill where there's absolutely no obstruction. Garmin on this route in 2012:
Jan 21, 2014 2:54 PM (in response to srandom)
I did 2 runs last night catching up a missed programme run from the weekend. I did 2 laps of exactly the same route - 30 mins run. For the 1st lap it took a good 2 minutes to lock on to the satellites. I measured 2.82 miles and the route is quite poor, generally running off my actual track and with a few zig-zags thrown in. Even the start point was 20 or 30 meters down the road. At the end of the first lap I ended the exercise and saved the data as normal. I then selected the next run and set up as normal - satellite lock only took maybe 30 secs and the route is actually very good. There is the odd tiny wobble but you can see exactly where I ran even down to when I crossed roads and which side of the road I ran along. The overall route was 2.72 miles.
This gives a 3.5% error for the first lap in just 30 minutes of running. At that rate, by the end of a marathon, I could have an error in the order of a mile or more. How, though, in exactly the same environment, can the watch perform badly then well? This hopefully points to software processing rather than hardware, but it would be nice to know that Adidas are still working on this. Other than a brief mention in the last update that GPS wasn't included, there has been little information. As GPS now seems to be the major issue for most people, I would hope it has the highest priority for a fix.
Jan 30, 2014 11:36 AM (in response to srandom)
Sorry for the delayed response and thanks for sharing your feedback.
Those of you who are experiencing GPS issue with the SMART RUN, please check our Support Blog post HERE.
Thanks in advance for your cooperation!
Your miCoach TeamAnswered by miCoach