Pros/Cons of Suunto 9 BARO * ONLY * be fair and polite!

[freeheeler]

@surfboomerang
I see that it has improved. The distance is reasonable and differs minor to the distance of A3PS recording.
It was an issue, it has improved. If it is good ebough, I will check in the next month with slow moving activity on skis.
But for me it’s going absolutely in the right direction

[freeheeler]

@pilleus agree, your recording of the alti graph looks a bit worse than mine.

I think we must not forget that also sensors have tolerance.
I’m by far not a top athlete but from my personality quite demanding. For me it’s fine as it was today.

[Shrek3k]

@sartoric I am rather late to join the visibility part of the discussion. For me I more or less solved the issue by simply switching the mode under options to light, also that I have dark numbers on a light background, which improves visibility (for me) vastly, even when the backlight is inactive and the sunlight no longer / still not that bright.

[freeheeler]

… just compared my wifes and sister in laws half marathon track recordings from last week.
one A3R and one A3PS.
Both are a bit offset… and from a distance it roughly looks like same accuracy as S9B…
every device receives satellite data and calculates individually… this makes me think that it is nice to compare A3PS vs S9B directly but we should not judge too critical…

… I mean… please correct me if I’m wrong, but the satellites are located more or less half way to the moon… 1m accuracy is like if you would want to shoot a football from the moon into a goal in whatever stadium, isn’t it?!

[pilleus]

@TELE-HO said in Pros/Cons of Suunto 9 BARO * ONLY * be fair and polite!:

it is nice to compare A3PS vs S9B

Yes, it is. And in all cases the tracks of the Ambit 3 are better. More accurate, more precise.

[freeheeler]

@pilleus
but when I checked A3R vs A3PS they also differ… it’s hard to quantify but it is a measuring system and it has tolerance. That’s my point of view.

here are two tracks of the same skitour, both with A3PS… first how it should be, second when recording is crap… even A3PS hast its weak days

edit: if you follow the second track you’ll fall over a not insignificant cliff…

[freeheeler]

here another comparison of 3 circles in my backyard

https://quantified-self.io/user/jBm0qOhihUMykVYD8HBJMshQrJc2/event/Z3fjts8jvu1Dafbn6g1b

[zhang965]

@TELE-HO your backyard looks like a dildo???

[freeheeler]

@zhang965

yes that’s what’s left after they built some roads and houses

[sartoric]

@TELE-HO said in Pros/Cons of Suunto 9 BARO * ONLY * be fair and polite!:

@zhang965

yes that’s what’s left after they built some roads and houses

Well, I guess it’s not funny to have a dildo in you backyard

[freeheeler]

@sartoric
… and I tell my kids not to draw stupid things with chalk on the streets…

[Fenr1r]

@TELE-HO My theology is a bit rusty but if drawing, carving and/or gardening giant wangs is supposed to appeal to gods of fertility, what does outlining a massive vibrator get you?

[freeheeler]

@Fenr1r
I didn’t do this for myself but for others in need as I am a giving person

[Fenr1r]

@TELE-HO Bravo. And as you give, so should you receive. What goes around, comes around. Etc.

[freeheeler]

@Fenr1r

[freeheeler]

here’s another comparison of S9B vs A3PS with same settings. This time the chest strap was connected to A3PS and OHR was used with S9B to check for differences between the two types of HR measuring.
At home I’ve changed manually by purpose the altitude to the wrong value of around 650m in both watches to check what they do with FusedAlti.
S9B got a start alti of 481m, A3PS has 472m. The total ascent of S9B was 146m and A3PS 159m.
Swiss Topo Map shows at my start point 472m.
The alti profile of both recordings look similar, and the offset from start is constant throughout the activities. I don’t know why S9B shows a more nervous graph but still has less meters total ascent. Does it measure the alti more often?! A3PS looks much “smoother”.
Distance S9B: 7.74km, A3PS: 7.79m.
Between km 3 and 4 I purposely went once around a big tree… S9B did not recognize this circle, A3PS did.

The HR graph in my opinion is differing, too. But for me it’s good enough. In general I will use the strap anyway, because of less battery consumption and better measuring precision. I noticed that S9B was often a bit higher and took longer time to show lower HR values when the trail changed from up to downhill.

It’s interesting to see these differences… BUT I must say that I would believe both.
The start altitude of A3PS nailed it… could be coincidence or pure precision

https://quantified-self.io/user/jBm0qOhihUMykVYD8HBJMshQrJc2/event/A60PtzTC8ofZ20ZyQpqZ

[Fenr1r]

@TELE-HO The tree was a nice touch. Interesting.

[A Former User]

@TELE-HO said in Pros/Cons of Suunto 9 BARO * ONLY * be fair and polite!:

I don’t know why S9B shows a more nervous graph but still has less meters total ascent

Thanks! That is a good comparison!

One reason why S9B may have a more nervous graph is that it logs elevation every 1 second vs 10 seconds for A3P. But that still doesn’t help with more accurate total ascent.

[freeheeler]

@silentvoyager said in Pros/Cons of Suunto 9 BARO * ONLY * be fair and polite!:

very 1 second vs 10 seconds

I suspected this but I’ve had something in memory that it is not adjustable anymore because 10sec would make more sense… but I obviously recall this wrong…

[cosme.costa]

After one week with the S9 baro, and comparing it to the SSU:

Pros:

• Battery life/Battery modes
• OHR (for who uses it)
• Better tracks
• Firstbeat stuff (for who uses it)
• Nicer (personal opinion)
• Buttons (I feel them more robust)

Cons:

• GPS lock is extremely slow comparing to the SSU, even with the AGPS updated. I mean, with the SSU and an updated AGPS the lock is done in less than 10 seconds, with the S9 I have needed 30 seconds, and today more than 5 minutes with the AGPS up to date. All this, checking in the same spot. I need more activities to see if its the normal behavior.