Real world data

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@wotus are you using HR ?

wotus

@dimitrios-kanellopoulos To have a direct comparison, I did not use HR in endurance mode on the first ride, but in the following ones, because without HR my energy consumption is usually counted with zero calories. Regardless of this, the track quality remains equally inaccurate.

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@wotus I am asking because without HR the s9P should get you more than 30h in best.

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@wotus is the plan to use the watch as a bike computer or as an accessory ?

wotus

@dimitrios-kanellopoulos Without HR it shows me 1h more duration, this is not significant for me, but I wanted to try it out.

wotus

@dimitrios-kanellopoulos For both, I usually use an additional simple bike computer. But the plan for S9p is especially for daily recording of training data in all activities for the next 5200 units, as the old A3p has served me well since 2014. In this regard, the power saving modes sound very promising for me to try them out.

Brad_Olwin

@wotus For biking, the S9P should go 30+ Hours on Performance mode. However, you could go on Performance mode until you get a battery warning and then simply switch on the fly to Endurance mode. That way most or all of your bike would be on Performance mode.

Mff73

Other real world data about OHR.
My wife ran with S9P a couple of times, and it takes about 10 min to have a reliable value .

She has low HR at start (60) (S9P measure it while not recording) and she started the run, with warm up smoothly and in gentle downhill, so HR 150 for ten first minutes are not good (and by far).
And then, it becomes “normal”.

chrisc92

@mff73 I had the same problem and after tightening the wristband (thanks to dimitrios) the peak disapeared. But anyway for some days I keep my belt to compare and make sure that there is no “HR starting peak”, for the two first minutes I can have 10 to 20 more BPM.

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

I am also having bad spo2 values but also from my oxymeter ( medical). But not when I am inside with the airco, and not at 40c. Just an observation. I don’t know if spo2 can relate to heat. I read and searched a bit and heat it is said to significantly impact the spo2. If I am correct. Not trying to justify something and I am putting some feedback to suunto

ChrisA

The S9P alltitude accuracy seems really great! Calibrated it once about a week ago and did a small trip to the local grocery store today. When passing an old railway station I took a picture of a sign on they Wall, which tells the altitude of the station. It was the same as measured by the S9P!

For those interested 185km ride with:
Suunto S9P
https://www.suunto.com/move/andrfaria640/60d7729dc2a2ac4a04baf5ec?imageId=60d77d4fc2a2ac4a04bb32fd

Garmin edge 530 fw8.10 with decathlon hr strap
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/7025695294

Interesting the different altitude values and that s9p ended up with 61% battery !

chrisc92

@andré-faria whow very good trip
61 % is perfectly in line with 25 h autonomy prediction (4%/hour)
For elevation, you can upload the two activities gpx files to quantified-self.io if you want to see the elevation graph merged

chrisc92

@andré-faria
related to your S9 elevation concern, i did a smaller ride today, but I also noticed a difference between Suunto (509m in SA) and Garmin (573m in GarminConnect)

Here is the route I followed

is shown 540m elev in SA, but 490 in QS )

I merged the route, Garmin Edge and S9P activities route vs S9P vs Edge to see each activity towards the route’s elevation :
S9P Vs Garmin elevation:

S9P vs Route

Garmin Edge vs route

Interesting thing is that in the first part S9P was lower and in the second part higher, when it started to rain, with a small depression
(photo taken at 3 pm, ride at 10 pm)
So regarding the change in weather conditions, Garmin tends to deviate a little more from standard GPS elevation, as S9P remains always close. But surprisingly the total ascend of Garmin is closer to total route ascend than S9P total ascend.

(if you send your gpx, maybe someone could help with the brilliant QS tool )

@chrisc92 said in Real world data:

@andré-faria
related to your S9 elevation concern, i did a smaller ride today, but I also noticed a difference between Suunto (509m in SA) and Garmin (573m in GarminConnect)

Here is the route I followed

is shown 540m elev in SA, but 490 in QS )

I merged the route, Garmin Edge and S9P activities route vs S9P vs Edge to see each activity towards the route’s elevation :
S9P Vs Garmin elevation:

S9P vs Route

Garmin Edge vs route

Interesting thing is that in the first part S9P was lower and in the second part higher, when it started to rain, with a small depression
(photo taken at 3 pm, ride at 10 pm)
So regarding the change in weather conditions, Garmin tends to deviate a little more from standard GPS elevation, as S9P remains always close. But surprisingly the total ascend of Garmin is closer to total route ascend than S9P total ascend.

(if you send your gpx, maybe someone could help with the brilliant QS tool )

Thanks for this awesome comparison.
I don’t care too much about elevation differences. Sometime ago I followed the imense discutions about how each brand/site does…in the end what I got, is that there is no “right”.
On strava, the two guys that rode with me (one with Xiaomi phone) and other with hammerhead karoo 2 got for ascent 829m and 1044m respectively (against 977 from edge 530 and 660 from S9P)
But if anyone wants I can provide gpx, no problem. I posted this data, more to help the developments or people that need comparison of these devices.
What I posted before was a gravel ride, with some parts in “forest”.
Today I did another 165km with both devices but on open road:

Garmin 530 https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/7030987942 (458m ascent)
Suunto S9P https://www.suunto.com/en-be/move/andrfaria640/60d8a12f1c6b0f5222d3db2a (316m ascent)

My collegues got 354m (xiaomi phone) and 452 (hammerhead karoo).
Based on what we climbed, I would say the suunto is right
Again, if someone needs/wants to compare, go ahead, I just cycled for Rapha Ambitious 220, to help creating awareness/funding for autism and for pleasure.

chrisc92

@andré-faria Kudos for your ride and thank you for new data, I know that elevation is a neverending discussion subject, on measure and map processing concerns. Even a basic route gpx file can have different total ascent in SA, GCConnect and Strava route

Here is the merge of your two files (the X-offset is due to an offset of the starting point in QS)

S9P 316m ascent seems to be consistent for your loop.

Considering the terrain where you performed your ride today, it is obvious that Garmin’s elevation is overrated towards the end, because yout took the same road for your first and last 7 kilometers !

the elevation pattern of Suunto is very consistent between the start and the end (although I should have reversed the curves)

whereas the Garmin pattern for the start/end path is really out of scope !

There is no need to discuss about that, the altitude should be the same for the first and the last kilometers, and Suunto shows a perfect consitency for that. Garmin overrated the elevation by almost 50% (confirmed by the route of your ride in Garmin Connect which was estimated to 335m elevation)

P.S.1 in QS @Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos I have a question in the import of Gpx files produced by GarminConnect : the starting point in QS is not the same as in the Garmin activity
, as if the first points were not imported (for the SA activity merged at the right it is ok :

P.S.2 : another recent proof of Suunto barometer reliability :
Maybe did you hear about on the 24h elevation record attempt in June 5th by French athlete Matthis Granet ? 16632 m in 24h (mesured by a surveyor)
Suunto was 15677m, so 5-6% less

@chrisc92 said in Real world data:

@andré-faria Kudos for your ride and thank you for new data, I know that elevation is a neverending discussion subject, on measure and map processing concerns. Even a basic route gpx file can have different total ascent in SA, GCConnect and Strava route

Here is the merge of your two files (the X-offset is due to an offset of the starting point in QS)

S9P 316m ascent seems to be consistent for your loop.

Considering the terrain where you performed your ride today, it is obvious that Garmin’s elevation is overrated towards the end, because yout took the same road for your first and last 7 kilometers !

the elevation pattern of Suunto is very consistent between the start and the end (although I should have reversed the curves)

whereas the Garmin pattern for the start/end path is really out of scope !

There is no need to discuss about that, the altitude should be the same for the first and the last kilometers, and Suunto shows a perfect consitency for that. Garmin overrated the elevation by almost 50% (confirmed by the route of your ride in Garmin Connect which was estimated to 335m elevation)

P.S.1 in QS @Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos I have a question in the import of Gpx files produced by GarminConnect : the starting point in QS is not the same as in the Garmin activity
, as if the first points were not imported (for the SA activity merged at the right it is ok :

P.S.2 : another recent proof of Suunto barometer reliability :
Maybe did you hear about on the 24h elevation record attempt in June 5th by French athlete Matthis Granet ? 16632 m in 24h (mesured by a surveyor)
Suunto was 15677m, so 5-6% less

Thanks a lot for doing this comparison.
Regarding initial point on Garmin, almost every device from Garmin I had (fenix 6s sapphire, fr245) had that issue. Only fr45 was more or less ok. I think it is very difficult to catch gps due to the buildings. But the edge said “gps ok” ahah

wotus

O-See Open Water Race 5600m XTERRA, 8x700m, GPS+QZSS, the deviation of about 5% is ok, because I did not swim very straight.

chrisc92

@andré-faria said in Real world data:

Thanks a lot for doing this comparison.
Regarding initial point on Garmin, almost every device from Garmin I had (fenix 6s sapphire, fr245) had that issue. Only fr45 was more or less ok. I think it is very difficult to catch gps due to the buildings. But the edge said “gps ok” ahah

No it was not a garmin issue since the Garmin Connect is Ok just a small glitch in the comparison tool QS

GPS trace S9P and Garmin are very clode juste elevation is bad for garmin.

chrisc92

second week S9P optical HR comparison

very good results today, the OHR is very reactive in pace change.Good positioning on the wrist, medium tightening, everything compared very well with belt strap despite sweat.
To avoid the “starting peak” I noticed on my previous test, as my run starts with an hill this can be misinterpreted by the firmware, I selected my activity 2 min before running (this is also good for GPS fixing)

Only 2 small +10 peaks (1min), maybe I pushed the center button to heavily to navigate between displays
This curve is very promising and i think I will entirely rely onthe OHR in a few weeks