Does the barometer option (to measure altitude) influence the resulting distance?
-
I have a question. In my last two official Trail Running races I have noticed that the distance measured by my S9PP is noticeably higher than that most of the other participants and also the official tracks. Approximately 1 km more in 21 km races.
And the thing is that I don’t notice any strange behavior of the GPS, nor strange things in the resulting track.
In fact, on occasions, while mountain biking, I have been able to verify that the Garmin 820 that I use on my bicycle and the Suunto practically equal the results. From what I understand it is not a problem with the watch.
In both I use the barometer to measure the altitude. While friends with whom I have run these races (whose distances are similar to each other and agree with the official tracks) have told me that they do not use the barometer.
So I wonder. Does the fact that I’m using the barometer option to measure altitude (rather than the GPS altitude option) influence the resulting distance?
-
@enriqueescoms If I’m not mistaken Suunto counts 3D distance, so it takes into account the % of the slopes but I do not know if it is enough to add up 1 km. Is the altitude correct? Does it match the organization? You also know that trail running distances are a bit “flexible”, I mean you download the official track from Wikilock and load it in SA and distance and altitude are different.
I can tell you, from my own experience, that I had and S9B and my runner partner a S9BTi. In many of ours trail runs (10 km and +320 m) his distance is 200/300 m longer than mine, ascent the same, one of the main differences is that he wears the watch in the right arm and I wear it in the left. He usually get a better track too.
On the other hand, if the run is flattish, not noticeable ascent, the distances are the same. -
@cosme-costa said in Does the barometer option (to measure altitude) influence the resulting distance?:
@enriqueescoms If I’m not mistaken Suunto counts 3D distance, so it takes into account the % of the slopes but I do not know if it is enough to add up 1 km. Is the altitude correct? Does it match the organization?
Yes, that was the other thing I had thought about, that the distance be measured in 3D. In fact, estimating an average slope of 5% (up and down slopes) the numbers add up.
Because yes, the altitude is correct and coincides with the organization.
-
@enriqueescoms
as @cosme-costa wrote, 3D distance may be quite different to “flat” one, in case of significant slopes/gradient.It is not a barometer thing, it is the way total distance are calculated : using or not the altitude changes (altitude measured from barometer or GPS data, whatever. Only the precision of the result will change).
if one device/organization is only measuring total distance with summing only d values, then it will be different from summing l values
-
@Mff73 Thanks!
Of course, I understand the concept perfectly. It is evident that 3D distance >2D distance.
I’ve seen that the old Ambit3 Peak had the option of a 2D or 3D measuring feature, but I haven’t seen anything about the new models.
Do I understand then that, by default, our new Suunto now always measure in 3D?
For my part, good, great, for the record. I have no problem with it. It’s just knowing how things work.
Suunto 9 Peak Pro (all black version)
-
@enriqueescoms If I recall well, since Spartans it is that way, 3D distance.
-
@cosme-costa said in Does the barometer option (to measure altitude) influence the resulting distance?:
@enriqueescoms If I recall well, since Spartans it is that way, 3D distance.
Great, thanks for the info
-
@enriqueescoms The 3D distance I believe is measured for Trail Running but not Running. I can try to check on this.
Vector/T6c/Ambit 3 Peak/S5 Copper/S3/S7 Ti/S9 baro Ti/S9P Ti/S9PP Ti/Vertical Ti/Race Ti/RaceS/Ocean/Wing
-
@Brad_Olwin said in Does the barometer option (to measure altitude) influence the resulting distance?:
@enriqueescoms The 3D distance I believe is measured for Trail Running but not Running. I can try to check on this.
which, according to me, would be a none-sense : why runners would not need to see their runnning measured taking into account 3D portion ? Even if the difference is small, it is more reflecting the real distance than any 2D measure. Nowadays, devices may be able to compute 3D easily.
Except if it is any normative decision, it sounds quite strange to let this difference still existing 2D/3D
-
@Brad_Olwin I agree with @Mff73 here.
I use, as sport mode, trail running when I go to the trails, flat or steep and I use running when I run in concrete, asphalt or an even surface, but it can have as ascent as any trail run. Usually this differentiation correlates with the types of shoes that I wear.
I mean, I can run, using running sports mode, in the steep streets of San Francisco and 3D distance should be considered.
