Suunto 9 baro very low elevation gain vs other brands

Fenr1r

@stromdiddily said in Suunto 9 baro very low elevation gain vs other brands:

That’s how I normally wear it

But you don’t normally get this distorted result in the same conditions?

Unless you’ve changed jacket materials or the rain on that run was unusually chubby, my beautiful theory has probably been slain by ugly fact. I’d like to be at least plausible but some other variable(s) must be at work.

stromdiddily

@Fenr1r new shake dry jacket (is quite nice actually lol)

Honestly it’s a one off, so not too concerned about it. I just thought it was interesting as I expected to see a super human type jump but instead saw fairly reasonable up/downs on the graph.

Fenr1r

@stromdiddily Hmm.

Maybe less chubby rain, more beady jacket. Anyway, you’re right: add it to the PNW’s supply of post-X-Files/Twin Peaks Things Of Interest.

freeheeler

I don’t believe that S9B has very low elevation gain… I went from about 730m to about 1’250m and the total ascent is 721m. Ok there were small dips, very very small dips. But not to a sum of 200m.

fazel

@freeheeler what type of activity was this?

Oktan

@freeheeler not sure its a good example because you went up once and went down once. in hilly routes (many ups & downs like all my routes are) I see the differences. I guess each up I loose some elevation gain.

freeheeler

@Oktan
actually it is a bad example as there’s nothing easier than one consecutive ascent

@fazel
it was ski touring

fazel

@freeheeler thanks. I was wondering if the hand motions were different (I assume they are) and that might have caused some discrepancy? It sounds like the accelerometer data is considered along with the barometer measurements when calculating accent. Others will know more.

freeheeler

@fazel
it could be possible that I’ve had a similar “setup” like @stromdiddily had recently during his run. Lot of wet stuff and the sensor holes just on top of the jackets cuff.
When zooming in the graph I can see tiny spikes… maybe I should entertain myself tonight and count all the irregular deltas
The last couple of ski tours gave a more reasonable result. I’m not sure if it’s this. But what I actually wanted to point out is that I have the impression that S9B is not calculating way to low.

freeheeler

@fazel
this graph is from a hike with poles. Hence similar movement like ski touring. When I zoom in the graph is impressively less noisy. It was a dry and sunny day. I assume that raindrops and hence molten snowflakes in combo with a garment can influence the recording.
I did not check the total ascent as this activity has more ups and downs plus a bike ride at the beginning and the end (and a pause for getting wet shirt changed). But just the fact that the graph has less noise is interesting, at least for me

fazel

@freeheeler yes - your analysis seems good.

isazi

Today I experienced something similar to @freeheeler. I went running outside and it was snowing (first snow in a long while in Amsterdam!), and got 47/49 (ascent/descent) on a route where I usually get ~10 meters. Corrected elevation seems something like 12/13 (I did play a little bit with Runalyze).

The common pattern seems to be rain/snow. First time this happen to me.

Also, when I got home the altitude on the watch kept changing rapidly (-3 when I stopped the exercise, 0 when I arrived home, then -2 a minute later, +2 next time I checked, and so on).

Currently the watch is taking a warm bath to calm down

freeheeler

@isazi said in Suunto 9 baro very low elevation gain vs other brands:

the watch is taking a warm bath

you have to treat nicely what you love

Oktan

Hi again,
Sorry, but I’m still annoyed by this issue.
Both S9B and A3P on handle bar, recorded exactly the same ride: S9B recorded 539m elevation gain and A3P recorded 641m.
How could it be?

@oktan said in Suunto 9 baro very low elevation gain vs other brands:

Hi again,
Sorry, but I’m still annoyed by this issue.
Both S9B and A3P on handle bar, recorded exactly the same ride: S9B recorded 539m elevation gain and A3P recorded 641m.
How could it be?

both calibrated at the begining of the activity?

Oktan

@andré-faria Yes.

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@oktan link. Please so I can compare.

Mff73

@oktan
I would bet on wind effect on S9B and lateral holes.

If confirmed by Dimitrios, try protecting holes with something like this

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@mff73 nah then the s9 would have had more. I suspect the opposite

Mff73

@dimitrios-kanellopoulos
Oh yes, I misread it.