Suunto 9 with the recent GPS firmware was among least accurate GPS watches in today's 25K trail race

[Dimitrios Kanellopoulos]

@nseslija well I said something wrong.

For cycling/running no diff.

For open water only yes there is a special mode.

[nseslija]

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos ok, tnx

[zvonejan]

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos said in Suunto 9 with the recent GPS firmware was among least accurate GPS watches in today's 25K trail race:

@surfboomerang I have not tested high speeds. Only up to 22km/h that is the fastest j can run.

Can you share this FW? I take all responsibility myself if anything goes wrong.

[Dimitrios Kanellopoulos]

@zvonejan if it was with only the GPS FW updated yes.

Unfortunately it’s debug build and I can’t. Let aside that they check FW versions vs SN

[Łukasz Szmigiel]

What can I say - if conditions are right, Suunto 5 is spot on. Apparently two layers of longsleeve covering the watch don’t do much if GNSS signal is strong.

But - according to Trimble GNSS Planning there were between 8 and 9 GPS satellites visible and between 6 and 7 Galileo satellites and DOP was very low.

Today’s run with GPS + Galileo:

Open area:
Notice top right path being off - I actually run off the embankment and the track is very accurate and consistent.

Mixed park / open / low buildings:

An old park with plenty of tall trees:

[Mff73]

@Łukasz-Szmigiel
S5 BARO should be a killer.

[stromdiddily]

@Mff73 was hoping that would be the s7. I think a Baro version would kill S9 imo

[nseslija]

@stromdiddily S9B with external antenna… my dream watch…

[Łukasz Szmigiel]

I did some scouting on Beidou availability and it’s pretty impressive - while there are around 5 - 9 GPS, Galileo and GLONASS satellites above Wrocław at any given time, there are between 10 and 14 Beidou sats at the same moment.

I believe that Beidou support might solve some GNSS problems for people doing workouts in the mountains or dense urban areas.

[Dimitrios Kanellopoulos]

@Łukasz-Szmigiel I think I agree.

I have been testing now 2 weeks the new FW , I managed to get bad offsets etc from all systems used except GPS-BEIDOU.

[zvonejan]

Honestly, i’m quite pleased with the accuracy lately. These are the last 4 training sessions in the forest and the maximum deviations between tracsk is 15 meters. I use a combination of Gps Galileo,. Only gps give worse results. Gps + Glonas results are really bad - unacceptable to me

[zvonejan]

And last 3 street runs, clear sky. Almost no deviations. I hope, that stays in new FW

[Dimitrios Kanellopoulos]

@zvonejan I like it that you look at the scale.

I have seen people posting:

• What a great track -> Line is super thick (polar/Strava) and scale is like 1KM
• What a bad traack -> Line is super thin (ok) and scale is like 2m

[zvonejan]

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos

Correct , when i compare tracks, I always zoom to detail and than look at the scale in corner. These are short daily runs during week, perfect for accuracy comparision.

[Shrek3k]

Just my 2cents with three tracks (short loop, city of Berlin; GPS+Galileo (everything else is worse))

not good, just the usual standard

not that bad

rather good one

Newest official GPS software; ‘soaking’ - after reception has been confirmed - for a few minutes each time before starting

The loop is approx 2,7 km, and I am always moving along the street / on the sidewalk.

Additionally a longer one (22 km, city of Berlin). All in all ok, see the excerpt from the route showing the ‘usual’ short-run-area … not that nice, especially as it decreases at the end of a longer run. Of course: rather challenging area.

[Dimitrios Kanellopoulos]

To mention about Gallileo and my experience.

The earlier or around noon Galileo at my area has given the best tracks ever:

Examples

https://photos.app.goo.gl/BVSy8pkRZraKAyah8

It includes also todays offset

[isazi]

@Łukasz-Szmigiel beidou has 47 satellites in orbit, if I’m not wrong, many more than the other constellations.

[cosme.costa]

@Shrek3k Well, I do not consider these tracks bad at all, in my opinion are quite good. Maybe my demands on accuracy are low . I need to raise the bar here

I am pleased with the level of accuracy of the S9B, it still needs improvement but I am happy that Suunto is working on it and it and it seems that we will get a really good level.

[Łukasz Szmigiel]

@isazi yeah I wasn’t aware of that, it’s pretty impressive. I wonder what will yield better accuracy in practice - 5 Galileo sats or 10 Beidou sats.

[ollemelin]

As an GIS-engineer and survey-educated I understand why bad reading accurs. Running around with a reciever on the arm in different positions, and with trees is not ideal for good GNSS-readings.

Iv’e been using suunto watches for years and they Always recorded a bit on the short side compared to Garmin.

Lately iv’e been running with my wife on the same road out and back. She is using garmin 735xt and me S9B (GPS+glonass on both). We measured the distance with high accuracy. Every run with no exeption my Suunto records too short distance.

When I analyze the Pace-data it’s clear that the Garmin get better readings. My suunto shows spikes the whole route. I can also see during the run that the SB9 cannot show correct pace due to bad readings. It the tries to compensate…but my km-splits are then not correct.

I would expect this in the woods here in Sweden but not on roads with clear views.

For me, it doesn really matter in the end, but my opinion is that there is some kind of hard-to-fix-problem with SB9 and GNSS readings.