Suunto 9 baro - GPS track not accurate

florin2528

I had a run on that Sunday and the track was looking pretty bad:

During the update I was in another country with poor internet so I didn’t do the update but the runs were looking ok(not as bad as home, was at the sea side):

Turned back home, made the update and I started with a run, but the GPS signal was low, mobile phone did complain about it(some clouds on the sky). Even that the s9 had a better signal than the phone which was not registering GPS at all, only time for more than 1 km.

the track was ok in general.

then I did some biking and the track was looking pretty good:

I traveled to Innsbruck and did some hiking and running.
Hiking was bad:

running was good as can be:

Now i’m back home and I will continue with another reply.

florin2528

@florin2528 said in Suunto 9 baro - GPS track not accurate:

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos

Now i got back home and did biking:
the track was looking more better than when running:

but running was ok, but not so accurate, i’m happy with it:

In general i think that from GPS point of view it’s fine.

florin2528

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos

But i noticed some issues with barometer sensor.
I did some diving, maximum one meter deep and the baro indicator was showing me -75, -50.
I don’t have the log from that. I was just viewing on the watch with no activity recorded.
Being in the see, in the water was still showing me like 12 meters above sea level with GPS active.

another issue I notice it\s with WHR, sometimes it starts really slow, and sometimes drops with no reason:

altitude in orange, HR in white.

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@florin2528 it won’t work with water.

florin2528

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos
good to know.
but being at the sea level it was still showing 12m above?

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@florin2528 hmmm. That depends. Sea level is very hard to match from GPS altitude calibration. Its too many multipath errors (Google this term).

In general 12m above sea (1m in reality) might sound much for an error but its not absolute (you see the relative error).

For example if you were at some peak of 1700m and you had 1712 it looks less of an error right? Well its really the same.

To me the device looks good.

What I wonder is how it will perform if you use Galileo.

florin2528

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos

changed the setting, i will let you know on my next run.

can i ask other questions/issues related to watch app? if not please ignore

do I have the possibility to see the smart sensor battery status on the watch(S9)? can i get notifications when battery is getting low?

any updates regarding a shortcut for connectivity on/off?

florin2528

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos
What I wonder is how it will perform if you use Galileo.

I tried a run with galileo enabled and the track was not great, GPS signal was green but i was running with a big hill on side.

this was exactly the same path on a track(1 m wide).

Here on the end of track was really open, and I was always doing a round at the end of track on each sides.

Not good at all but i didn’t start my phone to register in the same time to compare.

I had enough with this. I didn’t returned, so i will have to stick with what i get from this S9.

johann.fuehrer

Galileo GPS Service is down since 12.7. On ALL satellites, maybe this is the reason…

https://www.gsc-europa.eu/system-status/Constellation-Information

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

yeah the timing was not ok

florin2528

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos

To be honest i made a mistake by keeping this watch.
a run on a sunny day:

If you don’t fix your issues people will move to garmin.

The heart rate avg is shown 116 on image but on the running details is shown 161.

this is not professional, looks like a startup app.

very disappointed…
Florin

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@florin2528 Hi florin I am sad for this and I am not sure what to say, as that is not my experience. I can help with a refund perhaps so in this case PM me.

The HR btw its not the AVG its the one at the start you can move the finger on the chart and its changes to the one on the map etc.

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@florin2528 Also Galileo Satellites are down at. Just saying

florin2528

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos The HR btw its not the AVG its the one at the start you can move the finger on the chart and its changes to the one on the map etc.

My bad.

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@florin2528 no worries

florin2528

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos said in Suunto 9 baro - GPS track not accurate:

I can help with a refund perhaps so in this case PM me.

I would prefer that Suunto to solve this issues and i see here a product management issue.

Suunto implemented performance mode, but all corners are cut. what is the customer winning?
this? I was doing a nice turning with a round at the end.

I had in 2004(and still working) a Forerunner 101, and I used for paragliding, and doing thermals i was doing circles with a diameter of 20-30 m and was visible on the track afterwards, Landing and take off was very accurate. It was seeing maximum 12 satellites and showing the level of signal for each of it. GPS accuracy <15 meters.

Now if i’m doing a round with S9 it’s not visible at all with 1s performance.
And yes, i was expecting a better performance than 15 years ago.

you have to rethink the product.

Kind Regards,
Florin

P.S.

snapshot of a track friend with Ambit2:

florin2528

@florin2528 said in Suunto 9 baro - GPS track not accurate:

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos
I was using the watch in all my runs or rides and I didn’t found any other deviation, the GPS was accurate.
It seems that in conditions with low signal or in the city S9 ‘might’ get more interferences than other watches.

this topic can be closed.
Thanks for all support,
Florin

florin2528

@silentvoyager
the distance was always higher than what I got from phone with runtastic.
but when running with friends having ambit2 or garmin fenix5 I noticed that on distances there were not high differences, but on altitude yes.
I was setting S9 to get altitude from barometer and they were taking the altitude from GPS.
I had 50-60m differences on 800m total altitude gain.

I don’t know which one is more accurate or if it’s good or bad.

cheers,
Florin