I went from the Fenix 6 to the Apple Watch 7 for cycling. As far as I can see ismoothrun is the only app for the AW witch can connect to my cycling powermeter (which is from Garmin). The hart rate sensor on the AW is better.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
From Garmin to Apple: is there an alternative to the Garmin coach that works on the watch?
- Thread starter grmlin
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
For what it’s worth, I’ll also add that I find the forerunners to be more accurate with GPS than the fenix range.
Have owned fenix 3, 5 and 6s… and always found my FR925, 935 and 745 over the years to be more accurate.n Could just be me, but have heard the remix range suffers from accuracy issues more than others.
Have owned fenix 3, 5 and 6s… and always found my FR925, 935 and 745 over the years to be more accurate.n Could just be me, but have heard the remix range suffers from accuracy issues more than others.
This is true and also my experience (Fenix 3). Seems to be an issue with the positioning of the GPS antenna in the housing and/or the material of the case.
Also found that the GPS quality in my Forerunners got worse from generation to generation. My 945 had really lousy GPS tracks. Was maybe a result of the new Sony chipset and lack of experience on the developers side, but heard that they still have a broad range of issues with it. But it was never a big problem for me, with a almost perfect accurate Stryd I do not care too much if my recorded track is exactly spot on. Just want to know where I was running, not which street side.
I always believe that the longer the course, the more difficult it is to gauge how much one has actually run. Running a 10k, HM or marathon, my watch will always be out from what the course length is. GPS will never be 100% accurate, and we’ll of course never run in a perfect line around a course, and what we actually run will differ from the race distance.
Personally I think I wind myself up far too much sometimes about tech being perfect’/accurate, but really should convince myself that the device really just is a training tool! Haha
For trainings, I see no big issue. Not even concerning instant pace during workouts or such. This contradicts my previous post, I know. What I mean: training effect will be more or less the same, no matter how accurate (as long as it is in a normal range of say +/- 2%) the watch is.
But: in a race, I want to have very accurate numbers. Remember well a 10k where I was running solely with GPS and I was on course for a new PR. Well, the course was about 300m longer than my watch thought, missed PR by some seconds.
With Stryd (should get money from them ;-)), I did not have these issues anymore. If you calibrate the Stryd to your shoes you use on the race, distance will be almost spot on.
For instance: if I do trainings on the same course with the same shoes, I get results like 11.61km and 11.59km on two different runs. This is almost perfection.
That's fundamentally a GPS vs footpod matter though. Footpods - when calibrated - can be very accurate. They're also superior to GPS in giving your "instant pace" since GPS pace is averaged and thus lags.
I think Garmin still sells footpods, though any ANT+ model ought to work with a Garmin watch.
Whether the watch software will prioritize the footpod data over GPS data is another matter, that was a frustration with at least one model I had in the past.
Not sure, if Garmin still sells their SDM-4. Was not very good compared to a Stryd concerning accuracy.
And you are right, Garmin had several issues, especially during workouts, to select the correct data source (GPS or footpod). Very disturbing.
With the release of Fenix 3 they threw out footpod support and only through massive complaints and a petition they brought that support back.
Footpods can indeed be more accurate. Essentially it's a three-axis accelerometer attached to your shoe.
You calibrate it against either a known distance or against GPS. So long as your stride remains largely the same the calibration remains good. Not affected by tall buildings or going through a tunnel.
Downside is it's something attached to your shoe - which can be a pain if you alternate running shoes.
Remember though that running courses are seldom the exact distance listed - and in a race you're unlikely to even run the shortest course distance due to others in your way.
For more info check out DC Rainmaker's review of the most recent Garmin footpod.
Garmin’s Running Dynamics Pod (RD Pod): Everything you ever wanted to know
Today Garmin announced a new accessory alongside the Forerunner 935, the Running Dynamics Pod. This tiny pod, about the size of a piece of small candy, essentially provides the existing Running Dynamics data (i.e. Vertical Oscillation/Ground Contact Time) that normally
www.dcrainmaker.com
Stryd is very accurate, even out of the box without calibration. But best is to calibrate with the shoes you are running.
Interestingly accuracy is consistent even among different paces.
They have a 3D gyroscope inside. No idea how that works, no expert on this.
For more info check out DC Rainmaker's review of the most recent Garmin footpod.
Garmin’s Running Dynamics Pod (RD Pod): Everything you ever wanted to know
Today Garmin announced a new accessory alongside the Forerunner 935, the Running Dynamics Pod. This tiny pod, about the size of a piece of small candy, essentially provides the existing Running Dynamics data (i.e. Vertical Oscillation/Ground Contact Time) that normally
To be precise: the running dynamics pod is NO footpod. It can measure running dynamics like ground contact times, etc. but not distance and hence not pace.
Oh, my mistake. DCR's article on the garmin footpod I used to use mentioned the release of the new Run Dynamics Footpod. Kinda thought it would be a footpod since it was named such?
Garmin ANT+ Foot Pods: Everything you ever wanted to know
Heads up: This is an old version, Garmin has since released the Run Dynamics Footpod. Check out that link for the full review! Thanks Tis the season when the weather goes from bad…to ugly, and as such – many folks
www.dcrainmaker.com
Oh, my mistake. DCR's article on the garmin footpod I used to use mentioned the release of the new Run Dynamics Footpod. Kinda thought it would be a footpod since it was named such?
Garmin ANT+ Foot Pods: Everything you ever wanted to know
Heads up: This is an old version, Garmin has since released the Run Dynamics Footpod. Check out that link for the full review! Thanks Tis the season when the weather goes from bad…to ugly, and as such – many folks
Yes, lots of confusion around this. That's why I clarified it. Even DCR wrongly states this "Garmin has since released the Run Dynamics Footpod.". And it is not a footpod. Quite some folks were disappointed after buying.
It is. Good chance to get one is either now (they had a pre-BF offering) or a used one. There are several on the market. That is how I got mine.
But as stated: if accuracy is not really important, you do not need one. Other aspect: running with power as a metric, but that is an entirely new topic I do not want to add in here...
Yeah, I don't think I need one of these. Seeing my heart rate and pace is more than enough right now. Don't forget that I'm an "old" man who just started running with a goal. I'm running for some years now, but that was more the 5km type of runs. I would have never thought that I'd manage to run 10km, or almost 20 like recently.
I really enjoy fitness+, it's a quality service made for people like me. Fun workouts and unrivaled pricing. I think I'll bite at some point, maybe I can convince my wife to get me an AW7 for Christmas
Last edited:
This has been my experience as well.
I’ve had a Fenix 6 since right after launch and the only reason I’ve kept it is because I’ve had QC issues with the plastic Garmins (generally, soft buttons or buttons that stop working over time). The Fenix GPS is wonky, but the build quality has been great. But whenever I do speed workouts or race with it I need to use a Stryd if I want accurate splits. Both the AW 6 and 7 have been more accurate for me than the Fenix even on a good day.
That’s the best setup in my eyes. I run with Stryd and the the AW. Perfect combo and stats for me.
Coming back to Garmin Coach, I see the following alternatives?
<minor rant>
I have to admit I find this sort of irritating. Coaches should be paid, and need a way to be paid, but $29.99 for a plan that is often little more than nothing, and took next to no effort for the coach to create, isn't very inspiring. At least with Garmin they created videos and a data structure to go with the plan, even if it's not the greatest thing ever.
Maybe write a book and include your secret running program with some content at least.
This has gone on for years in weightlifting, with articles about how to build big arms, and the answer really is lift weights and buy steroids, because that's how they are doing it. Minor changes in reps / sets / weight isn't what's doing it and for 98% of us won't make a bit of difference. But, the magazines, gotta fill them with content.
</minor rant>
- Stryd - Subscription plan
- RunKeeper - Subscribe to get plans
- Training Peaks - Purchase plans. The one I purchased, with the interface, was very not fun to use.
- A couple of other places to purchase plans.
<minor rant>
I have to admit I find this sort of irritating. Coaches should be paid, and need a way to be paid, but $29.99 for a plan that is often little more than nothing, and took next to no effort for the coach to create, isn't very inspiring. At least with Garmin they created videos and a data structure to go with the plan, even if it's not the greatest thing ever.
Maybe write a book and include your secret running program with some content at least.
This has gone on for years in weightlifting, with articles about how to build big arms, and the answer really is lift weights and buy steroids, because that's how they are doing it. Minor changes in reps / sets / weight isn't what's doing it and for 98% of us won't make a bit of difference. But, the magazines, gotta fill them with content.
</minor rant>
There are so many good books out there (eg Pfitzinger, Daniels, …) or even free plans on the web. And then program the quality workouts. I do it that way. Not comfortable but ok.
+ Hal Higdon - lots of good material freely available. See https://www.halhigdon.com/training/
Back when I was actively training for goals vs just running casually I leveraging the Higdon materials and adjusted based on timeframe and intent. Then just put the workouts on my calendar. Allowed the freedom to shift things around a little bit with no stress when weather or work or family obligations necessitating changing things up a little.
I just was surprised that with all that computational power on a wrist with an Apple Watch, there aren’t that many options. And it’s also surprising that it’s not part of Apples Fitness+ service.
The Garmin Coach isn’t perfect, it annoys me a lot that I can’t edit single days and my only option is to skip it. But it’s very unlikely that I’ll pay another 10€ or something a month to get these guided runs on my watch.
[couple edits]
fellow fence sitter here> Apple user since 2007, Garmin user since 2018. Now going back and forth between by AW6 and 945.
I really dislike the square look of the AW and low battery life but am always sucked into the simplicity and cohesiveness of the ecosystem. Fitness+ trial was great, good price, but I find it annoying it only works with AW.
Still, here I sit switching watches every couple days trying to decide which gets wrist time.
Garmin Connect is great, lots of stats, features and programs they provide for free - all under one roof. On the Apple side I've duplicated Garmin's functionality with the native workout app, Workoutdoors and RunGap to export stuff (like back to GC). Healthfit and Athlytic are other useful apps. NRC and NTC were cool before they stopped updating them and supporting AW better.
I also have a Wahoo unit to complete the Garmin exit and it's been nice managing everything from the phone. Strava routes go to Wahoo, Wahoo stats to Apple Health > it works fine. Wahoo SYSTM, TrainingPeaks, etc - all decent alternatives. Also found a good HR broadcasting unit with NPE's bluetooth bridge from AW to Wahoo. Many good strength apps to use w/AW.
I would argue you can possibly piece together a fuller system using the AW and apps but now, you're going from one app on your phone (Garmin Connect) to ~4-6 and it gets a little crazy managing all these vs one interface via GC. [I don't intend to keep all this, it was just experimenting].
The one thing I'd say about sending it all to Apple Health is I do like their more comprehensive "full health" info [esp. when combined with diet apps and the comparison to all users vs just Garmin athletes and my fitness/training status].
fellow fence sitter here> Apple user since 2007, Garmin user since 2018. Now going back and forth between by AW6 and 945.
I really dislike the square look of the AW and low battery life but am always sucked into the simplicity and cohesiveness of the ecosystem. Fitness+ trial was great, good price, but I find it annoying it only works with AW.
Still, here I sit switching watches every couple days trying to decide which gets wrist time.
Garmin Connect is great, lots of stats, features and programs they provide for free - all under one roof. On the Apple side I've duplicated Garmin's functionality with the native workout app, Workoutdoors and RunGap to export stuff (like back to GC). Healthfit and Athlytic are other useful apps. NRC and NTC were cool before they stopped updating them and supporting AW better.
I also have a Wahoo unit to complete the Garmin exit and it's been nice managing everything from the phone. Strava routes go to Wahoo, Wahoo stats to Apple Health > it works fine. Wahoo SYSTM, TrainingPeaks, etc - all decent alternatives. Also found a good HR broadcasting unit with NPE's bluetooth bridge from AW to Wahoo. Many good strength apps to use w/AW.
I would argue you can possibly piece together a fuller system using the AW and apps but now, you're going from one app on your phone (Garmin Connect) to ~4-6 and it gets a little crazy managing all these vs one interface via GC. [I don't intend to keep all this, it was just experimenting].
The one thing I'd say about sending it all to Apple Health is I do like their more comprehensive "full health" info [esp. when combined with diet apps and the comparison to all users vs just Garmin athletes and my fitness/training status].
Last edited:
Good synopsis. I like a one stop shop of Garmin Connect. I like the fitness analysis that Garmin gives you. I just wish I could send quick replies to texts on Garmin with my iPhone. I also only want to charge a watch once a week or every day. I always hated the unpredictability of watches that need charging multiple times a week. You never know when it’s going to need it and can’t get in a rhythm.
I’m realizing though from using certain training apps with my Apple Watch that I’m nowhere near serious enough or training hard enough to need the training features of Garmin.