11 thoughts on “Garmin Running Power – Pros & Cons”

1. All jokes aside about Garmin and their Wishy-Washy relationship with good programming, there are a plethora of issues I have with the running power info and how it obtains it. You covered those things already, but instant pace not coming from a footpod, the whole weather reporting and measurement, and frankly the measurement coming from the Strap and not from a pod.

   All these sensors are approximations of course, but that’s a fairly vague/nebulous area to gauge. This could be either +/- a few points of precise or 30-100 points off. Both are approximations, yet i’d rather go with the one closer to approximation. I think most would.

   I personally have little faith that the numbers coming back from Garmin’s measurements are anywhere near the actual. I also think it will never get close to the actual. Like most of the “features” from the company, they come out less as a fully recognized thing and more as a “work-in-progress beta.”

   I’ll stick to my Stryd, it has consistently returned data that is consistent in all the metrics it reports.

   1. there is a calculation from STRYD somewhere demonstrating, i think , %metabolic efficiency which can be a max of 25% for super elite atheltes. that bascially ties back to stryd’s wattages delivering low 20’s %…give or take a bit. so higher number (grrmin) are measuring ‘something else’ other than the metabolic cost. but then again runscirbe is in the same ballpark as garmin.

      ‘covered these things’: not quite 😉 there is weight and height to go yet. former has an obvious effect, latter prob some cda related factor.

2. Good analysis/summary, thanks. Being the owner of a 935, an HRM-Run (red pod) and a (Adidas!) footpod, it was indeed a no brainer to try GRP. I’m even finding the wind adjustment to be pretty effective with notable differences in numbers when running with and against the wind. Since I have both Power and Combo activated I’ll try activating wind for only one of them. The numbers seem rather high though based on the reported wattage of cyclists in the mountains but that doesn’t really matter.

   The last of the 14 points for running with power (know when to increase your pace in a race) has me curious though. How can power be used for that? Does Stryd have a “total power used so far” field that would show you have a lot left in the tank based on past races?

   1. you have target average power (determined by power duration) and you have variability (determined by target NP).
      if your actual is lower you kow what to do.
      at least that’s what i vaguely try to do when cycling (normally it’s slow down a bit though as i ‘forget’ i have to run afterwards 😉 )

      1. Thanks for getting back but I must be a bit slow on the uptake, sorry, NP stands for? On my original question, if you’re below you’re on schedule and your average power is lower than expected you can step on it? Too bad my HRM4 slipped during my 10k on Sunday as I could have used that as a reference!

         On another note does Stryd show more variance than GRP when you step on it? I’m getting 370w a on verage during easy runs at 5:15/km with GRP and when I go full out around 3:15/km it only goes up to 500w…The full out value makes sense using data reported for cyclists on the Tour de France but then easy pace should be more like 250/275 it seems.

      2. NP=no problems…or normalized power 😉 (a weighted average sort of based on the zones you are in) pick which seems the most apporpriate
         if you are below average power, cycling, you can’t really just “step on it” perhaps a better one liner would be ‘push the constant effort level up a little’

         variance to what?
         – running power variance is low: the cp curve is MUCH flatter than a cycling CP curve. hence low variability in that sense (supported body weight)
         – GRP power seems more variable than STRYD power. [[which may or may not be true (TBC)]] but i guess a decent moving average will smooth GRP out, so GRP could still be ‘right’

      3. Thanks, I guess amplitude would have been a better term. More amplitude would maybe help to stay in the target zone. With an easy effort coming in at 370 and all out at 500 there isn’t a lot of room. I’ll try “easier” as well as hills.

         But there is no free wheeling when running so the watts are always going to be there, regardless of the pace.

3. Have you determined what ballpark Average Power and rFTPw by using the 20 Minute STRYD test for different weighted runners over different Average Paces ? I have determined my Average power of 190-210 W and an FTP of 270 W. My original STRYD Chest pod measured an Average Power of around 600 Watts which was impossible for me at 160 pounds ( 73 KG). STRYD sent me a replacement foot Pod unit and my numbers were in the ballpark for a 9:36 Average Pace.
   What I am getting at is how does your PWRavg and rFPTw compare when using Garmin compared to STRYD values. These values would then give runners their ballpark Average Power for different paces.
   After looking at various running articles with Power, I was able to figure out what my ballpark ranges were as compared to 70-75 KG Runners during races. Like I said before, there was no way I could have an rFTPw over 300 unless I became more efficient and faster.
   Peter

   1. my stryd chest strap had similar but higher figures.
      no i haven’t done the stryd tests and probaly won’t do them on garmin RP.

      I MIGHT construct a CP curve with garmin RP. but, for me, that will require carrying 2-3 watches whilst doing near-maximal race effortS – which may well not happen in reality.

      rFTPw>300…yes. i guess you state an unavoidable truth.

      1. You need to get some hi-tek firm to develop a smart ‘heads up’ display unit for serious runners and bikers. It would get too wet for swimmers… Ya, a rFTPw of 300 will never be in my ballpark.
         Peter

      2. they exist . 4iiii do one http://amzn.to/2CNvodx . there are several other companies too. I was supposed to be looking at a swimming one that beamed something into goggles but it never materialised.
         you’ll definatly get a ftp of 300…jsut use the garmin version 😉

Comments are closed.