Author Topic: Data comparison etrex vs phone, two websites...  (Read 1490 times)

Data comparison etrex vs phone, two websites...
« on: 05 May, 2014, 10:27:53 pm »
From short ride today; nothing too exciting.  Two tables = same data arrayed differently.

Interesting to see how the elevation is so different between sites...  Corrected = 'replace elevation data' & reload (ridewithgps).





edit.
Cycle and recycle.   SS Wilson

fuaran

  • rothair gasta
Re: Data comparison etrex vs phone, two websites...
« Reply #1 on: 06 May, 2014, 01:30:42 am »
How many trackpoints for each? That can make a difference for distance and elevation change.

Re: Data comparison etrex vs phone, two websites...
« Reply #2 on: 06 May, 2014, 08:59:59 am »
Also Android/ride with gps average speed seems to differ from distance/time, or is this a transcription error?
Quote from: tiermat
that's not science, it's semantics.

Re: Data comparison etrex vs phone, two websites...
« Reply #3 on: 06 May, 2014, 11:09:09 am »
Also Android/ride with gps average speed seems to differ from distance/time, or is this a transcription error?
Well spotted.  Ridewgps-android av/s should be 25.7km/h

Sorry fuaran - no idea about the track points.
Cycle and recycle.   SS Wilson

frankly frankie

  • I kid you not
    • Fuchsiaphile
Re: Data comparison etrex vs phone, two websites...
« Reply #4 on: 06 May, 2014, 11:49:45 am »
Does 'elevation' mean the same thing, on the 2 sites?  After all, 190 is a plausible spot height (which is what 'elevation' implies to me), while 339/230 would be a total climb.
when you're dead you're done, so let the good times roll

Re: Data comparison etrex vs phone, two websites...
« Reply #5 on: 06 May, 2014, 12:46:35 pm »
Highest point is ~160m, so I think elevation = 'ascent'.  My suspicion* is that Strava underestimates, and that ridewithgps/etrex combo is nearer actual elevation. 

*based on KVR in March.
Cycle and recycle.   SS Wilson

Re: Data comparison etrex vs phone, two websites...
« Reply #6 on: 06 May, 2014, 01:40:41 pm »
Which is correct??  :demon:

The spread of distance values is 0.95%, which is good enough for me. I would have recorded "21 km" in my diary. AAMOF, it would have been recorded as 13 miles.

PS. What does BikeHike say for the route?

Re: Data comparison etrex vs phone, two websites...
« Reply #7 on: 06 May, 2014, 07:34:52 pm »
..... and does it matter?

Re: Data comparison etrex vs phone, two websites...
« Reply #8 on: 08 May, 2014, 09:08:12 am »
You think you’ve got problems.

I have a mechanical auto-wind wristwatch made in Switzerland. It has a nominal daily rate of 1 to 1.5 seconds advance when I’m at home or at work.
When I stay at my riverside caravan, it’s daily rate mysteriously changes to 1.5 to 2.0 retard.

When I’m riding round, I haven’t a clue whether it’s advancing or retarding, so I’m really not sure what time I start or finish an Audax.

Riding a 300, my time for the event might be anything between -2 and +2 seconds wrong.

Trull

  • The settee will kill you
    • Aberdeen Astronomical Society
Re: Data comparison etrex vs phone, two websites...
« Reply #9 on: 11 August, 2014, 12:25:45 pm »
I've found RidewithGPS to be really bad at just recording points, and despite paying them, no support so far.

Full moan at: https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=84019.0

Gist is that the app skips points at random intervals - for large chunks of your ride - which is highly annoying, and considering I use it to allow my loved ones to track where I am a real pest.