From a consumer’s perspective, it’s tough to know precisely how correct your wearable is. For instance, if you happen to’re in the marketplace for the greatest operating watch, what are the probabilities that you just’ll have the alternative to strap on two totally different fashions directly and run the similar route to check that information? And even if you happen to do handle to seek out a manner to take action, how do you establish which of the two is extra correct?
These are the questions that preserve me up at evening. As TechRadar’s Fitness and Wearables Editor, it’s my job to determine the best way to reliably check wearables so as to decide how correct they are. My two gold requirements are the Garmin Epix Pro (one in every of the greatest Garmin watches) and the Apple Watch Ultra 2 (which we’ve ranked the greatest smartwatch, interval); however I’ve by no means earlier than pitted them in opposition to one another, nor have I had a extra dependable third get together to check them in opposition to. So, I determined to do exactly that – operating the TCS London Marathon.
Every London Marathon runner is given a bib that comes with a built-in GPS chip, which provides every runner an official time. Thereafter, that point is taken into account as a qualifying time for different races, reminiscent of the unique Boston Marathon, or in some circumstances, even world information.
As such, that GPS chip needs to be correct, verifiably so, so as to guarantee runners have an correct measurement of their race time. And in order that GPS chip is the excellent dependable metric in opposition to which to measure two of the greatest smartwatches cash should buy, whereas additionally evaluating how the widespread run-tracking app Strava treats the data from my Garmin watch.
Of course, at the time I signed up I’d completely disregarded the 16 grueling weeks – effectively, 13 really, with one week sick, and a additional two considerably extra chilled-out restoration and tapering weeks – of coaching that may be required to get me in form. However, operating the race was a singular expertise; there’s nothing fairly like the wall of noise from the crowd that buffets you as you run over the iconic Tower Bridge. It made all the ache worthwhile. I completed the race with a chip time of 4:00:54 – respectable, however barely shy of my sub-four-hour aim.
So, what do Garmin, Strava and Apple must say about one in every of the most well-known foot races of all time? I’ve taken a have a look at the GPS information and data offered by all three providers, so as to present you the distinction between them. I tried to finish the exercise on each wearables at the level I crossed the end line, and efficiently did so, so there ought to solely be a few seconds’ distinction from a time perspective.
Garmin Epix Pro: statistics
- Recording time: 4:01:04
- Distance: 42.81km
- Average tempo: 5:38/km
- Average coronary heart charge: 166 BPM
- Total energy burned: 3,005.
The Garmin Epix Pro is my on a regular basis operating watch of selection. I welcome Garmin’s advanced interface, in-depth operating statistics, multitude of graphs plus restoration metrics, reminiscent of its Training Readiness Score. Its super-long battery life not solely allows the assortment of a respectable quantity of sleep and restoration information, nevertheless it additionally permits me to go on a number of lengthy runs with the battery-sucking GPS mode lively, with out having to fret continuous about having to recharge the watch.
My Garmin recorded my whole distance as 42.81km. Although the race course was simply over 42.2km (or 26.2 miles) in size, Garmin reveals the distance I really travelled, together with weaving in and out of different runners and taking extensive corners. While this may not sound like it could make up a lot additional distance, it provides up over 4 hours.
The Epix Pro recorded my common tempo at 5 minutes, 38 seconds per kilometer, or 5:38/km. As effectively as all the different stats recorded, my common coronary heart charge was 166 BPM throughout the race, measured from my left wrist, and whole energy burned was 3,005 – the equal to round two massive Domino’s authentic cheese & tomato pizzas, give or take a slice.
Apple Watch Ultra 2: statistics
- Recording time: 4:01:07
- Distance: 42.38km
- Average tempo: 5:41/km
- Average coronary heart charge: 168 BPM
- Total energy burned: 2,888
This is the place issues get fascinating. Garmin and Apple use totally different GPS information, totally different coronary heart charge sensors and totally different algorithms to course of data, and as such additionally find yourself with barely totally different outcomes over the similar race. The Apple Watch Ultra 2 makes use of what Apple calls a precision dual-frequency GPS system, combining L1 and L5 satellite tv for pc bands to extra precisely decide your place whenever you run by way of tall buildings – London’s extra densely packed areas, for instance.
Garmin additionally makes use of a multiband GPS expertise it calls SatIQ – Satellite Intelligence – that determines the optimum GPS mode primarily based in your surroundings. If you’re near tall buildings or in a dense forest, for instance, it’ll use multiband GPS. However, when a low-power GPS mode can obtain the similar accuracy – in additional open areas, for instance, it’ll auto-switch to single band.
The finish result’s a distinction of round 400 meters, or 0.4km – which doesn’t look like a lot on the face of it, however for elite athletes it may very well be the distinction between operating a marathon and disqualification.
One factor I observed is that regardless that the Apple Watch Ultra is ready to see the place I am with pinpoint accuracy, when I dive into my splits (the time I spent over every kilometer of the race), Garmin provides me the numbers right down to the nearest 10 milliseconds. Apple, in its customer-friendly strategy, supplies the information solely to the second. Maybe that is the place my additional 0.4km was registered. The Apple Watch additionally underestimated my coronary heart charge by 117 energy (lower than half a slice of pizza) in comparison with the Garmin watch.
Honestly, the distinction is minor, particularly over 4 hours of effort. Discovering which of the two is extra correct is tough; however for the common particular person operating 10km on a Saturday, the variances between the two watches are sufficiently small to chalk them as much as algorithmic differences.
Strava: statistics
- Recording time: 4:01:04
- Distance: 42.80km
- Average tempo: 5:36/km
- Heart charge: 166 BPM
- Total energy burned: 3,005
Strava makes use of the data from the Garmin Epix Pro – together with my Garmin’s uncooked GPS data – to reach at its measurements, which is the motive the well being stats reminiscent of coronary heart charge and energy are so related. However, Strava processes GPS information with its personal algorithm, so there are slight differences.
Strava tends to barely underestimate Garmin’s information: in a group publish, it’s stated the motive this occurs is that Garmin (each the gadget and Garmin Connect) rounds up distances, whereas Strava rounds down. It’s solely 0.01km slower, however contemplating each use the similar GPS file, you may even see differences in your gadget and on Strava when recorded exercises.
There are a few different adjustments: distances are all the time saved in meters on gadgets and then proven on Strava in the athlete’s most popular items. The first quantity Strava provides you on its abstract is Moving Time, not whole time, so it reductions any fast stops.
My Moving Time was really just below 4 hours; to find the full time, I needed to dive into the statistics below the “Analysis” part. Garmin, as a critical software for critical individuals, doesn’t trouble with defending my fragile ego with a sooner time, and merely supplies the whole time recorded on the watch.
Conclusion: Are the differences vital sufficient to matter?
Both these watches are geared up to deal with critical races and distances, representing the cream of Garmin and Apple’s respective crops. They have lengthy battery lives, robust casings, top-of-the-range sensor arrays and GPS choices, and are available in at related premium worth factors. Since I’m not an elite runner, an annual marathon is the solely manner I can check each the watches limits – and my very own.
For operating, I don’t consider the differences between the two fashions will show statistically vital for anybody aside from elite runners. Regular novice runners, even these operating marathons or ultra-marathons, use watches to supply correct places and good data for coaching – and on this regard, each the Apple and Garmin watches are greater than correct sufficient to supply the data such runners will want.
And Strava? Well, if you happen to’ve ever puzzled why there are differences between your watch’s measurements and the data in your Strava account, now you understand.