Bike Computer Accuracy
Likes For Flip Flop Rider:
Likes For Paul Barnard:
#28
Zip tie Karen
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Fair Oaks Ranch, TX
Posts: 7,004
Bikes: '13 Motobecane Fantom29 HT, '16 Motobecane Turino Pro Disc, '18 Velobuild VB-R-022, '21 Tsunami SNM-100
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1465 Post(s)
Liked 1,542 Times
in
806 Posts
I'm going to agree with the general sentiment expressed here, that the data display from a simple bike computer will have inherent inaccuracies. And this is okay. One can calibrate out errors from the wheel's circumference under load (roll-out 3x and then average isn't a bad method). But what are the other sources? Sampling rate error from the sensor is most likely the next largest. Next will be rounding/truncation errors in the algorithm's math stack. The filtering algorithms will contribute negligible errors. Last will be display resolution. Does any of this matter to the average bicycle rider?
GPS-based systems have their own sources of error. The math's more complicated, too. Does this matter?
It's not the mission to Mars. It's a bike ride.
GPS-based systems have their own sources of error. The math's more complicated, too. Does this matter?
It's not the mission to Mars. It's a bike ride.
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South shore, L.I., NY
Posts: 6,857
Bikes: Flyxii FR322, Cannondale Topstone, Miyata City Liner, Specialized Chisel, Specialized Epic Evo
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3221 Post(s)
Liked 2,048 Times
in
1,170 Posts
I'm going to agree with the general sentiment expressed here, that the data display from a simple bike computer will have inherent inaccuracies. And this is okay. One can calibrate out errors from the wheel's circumference under load (roll-out 3x and then average isn't a bad method). But what are the other sources? Sampling rate error from the sensor is most likely the next largest. Next will be rounding/truncation errors in the algorithm's math stack. The filtering algorithms will contribute negligible errors. Last will be display resolution. Does any of this matter to the average bicycle rider?
GPS-based systems have their own sources of error. The math's more complicated, too. Does this matter?
It's not the mission to Mars. It's a bike ride.
GPS-based systems have their own sources of error. The math's more complicated, too. Does this matter?
It's not the mission to Mars. It's a bike ride.
#30
Senior Member
I've found this varies by the type of ride and conditions of the ride. My Garmin is generally pretty consistent in speed and distance on the road but becomes less accurate with more tree cover and more twisty routes. The Garmin seems particularly inaccurate on singletrack in the woods when compared to dead reckoning based methods like wheel sensors, it can be off by 10%-15% on both distance and average speed (always underestimating both, of course). It also bugs my neuroses and distracts me to see the speed bounce up and down by three MPH when I'm riding steadily. I gave up and installed wireless speed sensors on all of my bikes. They're cheap and they solve the problem. Of course, none of this actually matters...
Likes For Camilo:
#32
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Virginia
Posts: 218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times
in
53 Posts
I’ve concluded my wired computer is accurate and the problem is with the Ride With GPS app.
The apps is great for keeping a log of all rides; I just wish it was more accurate. I may try Map My Ride.
The apps is great for keeping a log of all rides; I just wish it was more accurate. I may try Map My Ride.
Last edited by bikehoco; 01-21-21 at 05:47 PM.
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 2,190
Bikes: Ti, Mn Cr Ni Mo Nb, Al, C
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 942 Post(s)
Liked 526 Times
in
349 Posts
I get what people are saying with regard to the difference being so small it doesn't matter. However, lets say one average says 19.9mph and the other says 20.8mph...although the margin of error is the same...the difference (all things being equal) between averaging 19.9 and 20.8 is pretty significant.
Likes For jadocs:
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: northern Deep South
Posts: 8,895
Bikes: Fuji Touring, Novara Randonee
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2597 Post(s)
Liked 1,924 Times
in
1,208 Posts
Don't hold your breath. There may be a slight change in how the apps process it, but the major inaccuracies are going to be in the GPS hardware and software embedded in your phone (as noted above, multiple times).
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bristol, R. I.
Posts: 4,340
Bikes: Specialized Secteur, old Peugeot
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 663 Post(s)
Liked 496 Times
in
299 Posts
A statute mile is 5280 feet so one percent is a mere 52.8 feet. A two percent error would be 105.6 feet. On a century ride the error would be tiny.
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
The wired bike computer is the more authoritative source for speed and distance. GPS wins for convenience and additional functionality, which is the only good reason to use GPS at all IMO. Keeping a record. Convenient for analysis. Integration with maps.
Likes For wphamilton:
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South shore, L.I., NY
Posts: 6,857
Bikes: Flyxii FR322, Cannondale Topstone, Miyata City Liner, Specialized Chisel, Specialized Epic Evo
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3221 Post(s)
Liked 2,048 Times
in
1,170 Posts
Any inaccuracies are likely from the phone. When I plot out a route on RWGPS online, it's typically within 1/10 a mile in 20 accurate to what I end up riding.
Likes For Steve B.:
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,936
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3942 Post(s)
Liked 7,283 Times
in
2,941 Posts
A GPS computer, when used with a speed sensor, is generally much more accurate than a wired bike computer, for both speed and distance.
Likes For tomato coupe:
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: northern Deep South
Posts: 8,895
Bikes: Fuji Touring, Novara Randonee
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2597 Post(s)
Liked 1,924 Times
in
1,208 Posts
IME that's true for a straight road without any nearby vertical obstacles, like trees, hillsides or cliffs, or buildings. IOW not where I normally ride.
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Posts: 877
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 528 Post(s)
Liked 230 Times
in
161 Posts
If the distance between the two is almost identical but the average speed is not, that must mean they have a difference in time. Have you compared those? Does the app have an auto start stop functionality?
I used to ride with a bike computer with sensor though wireless on the wheel not wired and wahoo on phone. When I didn't stop, both time and distance matched close enough for my liking. When I did the wahoo always read less time given the auto stop is what 3kmh or maybe 5 idk what I set. Instantaneous speed displayed differed too though in most cases was fairly close and the more even i kept going the more aligned they were. Similar to my two HR monitors. My polar band reacts a lot faster than my fitbit watch, so one might be 150 the other still 140, but a few seconds later the fitbit would catch up. Similar going down and overall the average HR was never more than 1, a few times 2 bpm different.
I used to ride with a bike computer with sensor though wireless on the wheel not wired and wahoo on phone. When I didn't stop, both time and distance matched close enough for my liking. When I did the wahoo always read less time given the auto stop is what 3kmh or maybe 5 idk what I set. Instantaneous speed displayed differed too though in most cases was fairly close and the more even i kept going the more aligned they were. Similar to my two HR monitors. My polar band reacts a lot faster than my fitbit watch, so one might be 150 the other still 140, but a few seconds later the fitbit would catch up. Similar going down and overall the average HR was never more than 1, a few times 2 bpm different.
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
The wired bike computer properly calibrated is much more accurate (in the case that the GPS ignores the wheel sensor for distance) because of the numerous sources of error of the GPS. Primarily among them, the transient variance of measured position (5 meter accuracy) by the GPS means that it only approximates the actual path travelled.
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,936
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3942 Post(s)
Liked 7,283 Times
in
2,941 Posts
Not true IMO. The speed sensor is the same hardware as a wired bike computer, and you're probably thinking that it's only used for measuring instantaneous speed and the GPS is used for overall distance.
The wired bike computer properly calibrated is much more accurate (in the case that the GPS ignores the wheel sensor for distance) because of the numerous sources of error of the GPS. Primarily among them, the transient variance of measured position (5 meter accuracy) by the GPS means that it only approximates the actual path travelled.
The wired bike computer properly calibrated is much more accurate (in the case that the GPS ignores the wheel sensor for distance) because of the numerous sources of error of the GPS. Primarily among them, the transient variance of measured position (5 meter accuracy) by the GPS means that it only approximates the actual path travelled.
2) 5m is the typical absolute accuracy of a GPS-based bike computer, but you don't need high absolute accuracy for distance measurement, just high precision. (Accuracy and precision here are used in the strict metrological sense.)
3) Wired computers will measure distance better at short distances than a GPS-based computer, if the GPS computer is not used with a speed sensor. The distance error of a wired computer accumulates (linearly) as the distance increases, however, giving a GPS-based computer the advantage at long distances because GPS positional errors do not accumulate linearly.
4) If a GPS-based computer is used with a speed sensor, there's no reason it couldn't measure distance as well as a wired computer at short distances, but I don't know if they use speed sensor data when they calculate distance.
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South shore, L.I., NY
Posts: 6,857
Bikes: Flyxii FR322, Cannondale Topstone, Miyata City Liner, Specialized Chisel, Specialized Epic Evo
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3221 Post(s)
Liked 2,048 Times
in
1,170 Posts
1) Rollout calibrations for a GPS-based computer can actually be a bit better than a wired computer, because the rollout measurement can be performed automatically at the beginning of every ride over a much longer distance.
2) 5m is the typical absolute accuracy of a GPS-based bike computer, but you don't need high absolute accuracy for distance measurement, just high precision. (Accuracy and precision here are used in the strict metrological sense.)
3) Wired computers will measure distance better at short distances than a GPS-based computer, if the GPS computer is not used with a speed sensor. The distance error of a wired computer accumulates (linearly) as the distance increases, however, giving a GPS-based computer the advantage at long distances because GPS positional errors do not accumulate linearly.
4) If a GPS-based computer is used with a speed sensor, there's no reason it couldn't measure distance as well as a wired computer at short distances, but I don't know if they use speed sensor data when they calculate distance.
2) 5m is the typical absolute accuracy of a GPS-based bike computer, but you don't need high absolute accuracy for distance measurement, just high precision. (Accuracy and precision here are used in the strict metrological sense.)
3) Wired computers will measure distance better at short distances than a GPS-based computer, if the GPS computer is not used with a speed sensor. The distance error of a wired computer accumulates (linearly) as the distance increases, however, giving a GPS-based computer the advantage at long distances because GPS positional errors do not accumulate linearly.
4) If a GPS-based computer is used with a speed sensor, there's no reason it couldn't measure distance as well as a wired computer at short distances, but I don't know if they use speed sensor data when they calculate distance.
I would expect that a standard (non GPS) bike computer that uses a wheel magnet, and when calibrated for tire size, would be more accurate than a GPS without a speed sensor, and as accurate as a GPS using a speed sensor. But without using a surveyors roll out measurement, I've no clue which might be MORE accurate and doubt it matters real world. I mean how accurate does all this need to be ?.
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,258
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4244 Post(s)
Liked 1,346 Times
in
934 Posts
========================
One issue with GPS is loss of signal.
https://support.garmin.com/en-US/?fa...623Z535geTx2e9
The wheel rotation counter is taking measurements 3 times a second. The GPS is typically only taking measurements once every second.
That means the counter has a higher resolution than GPS (which has a straight line between each one second measurement).
The GPS measurement has an error of 10 feet or more. The wheel counter has error on the order of centimeters. This really matters for accurate "instantaneous" speed.
If you have an accurate circumference, the distance based on wheel rotations will be very accurate. There's no reason to expect that GPS (at the low speed of bicycles) would be better.
Last edited by njkayaker; 01-28-21 at 09:59 AM.
#47
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,258
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4244 Post(s)
Liked 1,346 Times
in
934 Posts
I'm going to agree with the general sentiment expressed here, that the data display from a simple bike computer will have inherent inaccuracies. And this is okay. One can calibrate out errors from the wheel's circumference under load (roll-out 3x and then average isn't a bad method). But what are the other sources? Sampling rate error from the sensor is most likely the next largest. Next will be rounding/truncation errors in the algorithm's math stack. The filtering algorithms will contribute negligible errors. Last will be display resolution. Does any of this matter to the average bicycle rider?
GPS-based systems have their own sources of error. The math's more complicated, too. Does this matter?
It's not the mission to Mars. It's a bike ride.
GPS-based systems have their own sources of error. The math's more complicated, too. Does this matter?
It's not the mission to Mars. It's a bike ride.
#48
Stevoo
Yup, agree roll out method is quite accurate IF it is calibrated properly.
They measure and certify running race courses using the roll out method. Look up Jones counter. Accurate to 1 part to 1000.
They measure and certify running race courses using the roll out method. Look up Jones counter. Accurate to 1 part to 1000.
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,936
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3942 Post(s)
Liked 7,283 Times
in
2,941 Posts
... and as accurate as a GPS using a speed sensor.
But without using a surveyors roll out measurement, I've no clue which might be MORE accurate...
... and doubt it matters real world. I mean, how accurate does all this need to be ?.
#50
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Virginia
Posts: 218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times
in
53 Posts
“It’s close enough, don’t obsess”
”It’s not the mission to Mars. It’s a bike ride”
Thanks for your input, I always find it valuable when anonymous people on the internet tell me what I should-shouldn’t care about. /s
”It’s not the mission to Mars. It’s a bike ride”
Thanks for your input, I always find it valuable when anonymous people on the internet tell me what I should-shouldn’t care about. /s