- This topic has 24 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 7 months ago by
Paul J.
-
CreatorTopic
-
March 13, 2012 at 11:48 am #15329
MCLK
I tend to spend quite a lot of time using sites like Bikely and MapMyRide to plan out longer century rides and then often compare them to the results on my Garmin afterwards. I’ve noticed that the Elevation figures seem to vary quite drastically from site to site, to the point where I don’t know which one to trust – Anybody else had similar problems?
-
CreatorTopic
-
AuthorReplies
-
VeloPeo: No, you can’t expect
VeloPeo: No, you can’t expect that different measurements will be within 5% of each other.What you *can* expect is that there is a minimum elevation gain – the difference in elevation between start and end by the system that produces the lowest figure. After that, figures will increase and increase as you measure ever more granularly.
That’s ignoring the issue of error in GPS, and whether GPS elevation error has any bias (I think GPS lat/long error is relatively unbiased, so over time the errors can be made to cancel out – maybe elevation is the same, but I don’t know) . 😉
Bob's Bikes
Quite a few years back I
Quite a few years back I worked for an american company making military radios these all singing all dancing devices had gps fitted, and they had to be tested before being shipped.It’s amazing how we managed to stay on our feet whilst working in a building that rose and fell by over 60 meters every single test :))
Eg3ftp1
I believe Strava now has the
I believe Strava now has the best, most accurate and comprehensive elevation data on the internet, as they have been effectively crowdsourcing the data from everyone with a barometric garmin who logs their rides with them. This means they end up with a very good average from all the people who ride the roads in different days/pressures etc.
Sensible
I used my new Garmin Touring
I used my new Garmin Touring for a ride the other day and it showed 1082 m elevation. When I loaded it onto Garmin Connect it changed to 819 m. I then noticed that there waa a switch at the bottom of the page with ‘elevation enabled’. When I disabled this it went back to 1082. There is an explanation near the button that explains that the Touring that doesnt have an altimeter takes elevation from GPS, but Garmin Connect will compare the map with actual surveyed heights and correct the elevation aa this is supposed to be more accurate.Stratman
Like many of the above, I’ve
Like many of the above, I’ve compared readings. If you look at the raw reading from a GPS device as a plot it usually looks jagged – like the kayak example above I’ve used a forerunner on a flat run which shows lots of ups and downs. When I used sporttracks to record the data, I used an elevation correction function in the software, which smooths the data, giving a much lower number. The websites apply a similar function to the recorded data. When I’ve run the comparisons, I’ve found the order to be:
Raw
Garmin with barometric
Ride with gps
Sporttracks smoothed
Bikeroutetoaster (sadly defunct)
Map my run/rideWith the sort of variance described above, mapmyrun being consistently 20-30% lower than bikeroutetoaster. I’ve never used strava, so I don’t know where it sits. I guess that this means that mapmyrun has the most aggressive smoothing algorithm.
So for comparing routes, just use the same one, for demonstrating awesomeness use one of the top ones!
VeloPeo
Heh heh – quite agree
Heh heh – quite agree ScottChegg.Got no problems with whatever climbing it turns out to be (the whole route I’m looking at doing according to Strava is 198 miles 13,500ft) – just really surprised that two different sets of mapping data can produce such a wide variance of elevation over the same route, they’re not even close.
ScottChegg
This is my take on elevation
This is my take on elevation data:Plan a route on said route planner
Take the route planners elevation date as a guide
get out on bike and enjoy ride
if there is more climbing than expected suck it in and MTFU!!cqexbesd
IIRC, and I may well not,
IIRC, and I may well not, most mapping sites use the free elevation data produced by NASA. The data they release for free for the “rest of the world” has a measurement interval of just under 100m (its a round number of arc seconds or some such unit which comes out about 100m on the earth’s surface). This interval will filter out many undulations that you will have to go over and so make routes look smoother. In the US they release much higher precision data I believe.Having had a quick google I think this is the stuff: SRTM on Wikipedia
Please note I may have just imagined all that.
RedfishUK
I have Google Tracks on an
I have Google Tracks on an Android Smartphone, which uses GPS and the elevation for the same ride can vary day by day..I assume MapMyRide uses the same systemI got a bottom of the range Garmin as a Xmas pressie and have noticed the elevation figures on the maps you create in Garmin Direct are more consistent ie they all give the same height for points on my ride. But the calculated figures for total Ascent / Descent vary each day
joemmo
the map data is likely to be
the map data is likely to be the most accurate overall. I don’t think the accuracy of consumer GPS units is such that the elevation can be trusted, they are mainly aimed at pinpointing your position on a 2d map. I once took my garmin out kayaking and over a 3 hour session it mapped my elevation at +-60m above / below sea level which was not entirely accurate, which while some of the time was spent submerged, it wasn’t that deep.Oops, I probably mean
Oops, I probably mean measurement interval, not sampling interval.Paul J wrote:Note that there
Paul J wrote:Note that there is no correct elevation gain number. It will depend inherently on the sampling interval, and you can make those ridiculously large, as well as ridiculously small.It’s a bit like the “How long is the coastline of Britain” question…
I realise that – I only commented as the Strava elevation figure is massively different to MMR. I’m not expecting them to match exactly but I’d expect a tolerance of +/- 5% not 65%!
Note that there is no correct
Note that there is no correct elevation gain number. It will depend inherently on the sampling interval, and you can make those ridiculously large, as well as ridiculously small.It’s a bit like the “How long is the coastline of Britain” question…
Been playing around with the
Been playing around with the Strava Route planner and comparing it to MapMyRide tonight for a ride I’m planning next yearOne section of it (Pontypridd to Llandovery – 50 miles) came out as 4200ft on Strava and 2550ft on MMR. Identical routes.
How can they be this far apart? Not like the route is over roads that are hardly used either
Simon_MacMichael
As an experiment, I’ve just
As an experiment, I’ve just looked at a ride of 1km from my house on Map My Rides – it gives the final 200m or so as 3 per cent gradient, which is way out – I have no idea how much it actually is, but if it hit over 20 per cent I wouldn’t be surprised.[Edit: Checked on OS map – it’s between 14 and 20 per cent. Contours vs distance suggests closer to 20]
Thing is, it’s preceded by a shorter but equally sharp downhill section. So as first poster above said, there’s clearly some sort of error there – in this case I reckon it probably takes somewhere around the start of that dip and the top of the climb and misses out the whole bit in between.
Over a long ride, things like that are going to seriously add up.
ps I don’t ride that road often 👿
pps My rides are always more than 1km – just thought I’d use that distance on a road I know well to see how MMR compares with the actual terrain 😉
-
AuthorReplies
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.