I have used a new ANT+ belt, so don't hope that this is the reason but will try with my Garmin tomorrow.
Not sure why my trainings are uploaded to January 2000/2001
that must be a bug 
Michael
Statistics: Posted by mkronby — Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:24 pm
]]>
a bit of explanation to what you have experienced.
1) long GPS acquisition: this is the bug we are fixing now. your watch got wrong assist data and the GPS got confused. It takes a long time getting a fix and when you get it you have a low number of sat. This is quite bad and a fix will be pushed ASAP.
2)pulse signal unstable: this is a surprise. As far as I recall we had just another case of bad pulse recording, and it turned out it was the belt. Are you sure you are not running low in battery on the chest strap?
3) the unknown training sessions are recorded without a time stamp but they are still uploaded. You can find them all in Endomondo dated 1st of Jan 2001 ( cant recall if it is 2000 or 2001).
thanks
Cris
Statistics: Posted by admin — Tue Nov 05, 2013 7:30 am
]]>
For me a big step backwards. I did not get a GPS fix within the first 5 min. I was running to my Spinning hour without signal. Is now in my whatch as unknown Running. Had my Spinning hour where the puls signal was unstabile. Changed to running, got a GPS quite fast and run home.
When I want to upload to Endomondo, the Watch said 4 uploads and after uploading there were only 1 training in Endomondo.
In my Watch I have 2 unknown trainings and that is my Spinning and my run to training.
That gives me the idea that it will not upload trainings without GPS data??
I need from now on to have 2 watches with me every time. Last week I lost 2 trainings with my Leikr. Not fun
Statistics: Posted by mkronby — Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:35 pm
]]>
Following someone's advice I power-cycled the watch prior to the workout and it got GPS fix in less than 2 minutes - very fast compared to the past experiences.
It got 6 satellites and during the run stayed between 5 and 12. The weather is miserable today with clouds everywhere, so I was really surprised. No wavering, no problems at all. Strange.
I have pre-ordered a Garmin FR620 and once I get it in a month or so will try to compare the two, but all the extra ffeaturees like reocvery time etc. make me think Leikr is not worth the price.
Statistics: Posted by Szadzik — Mon Nov 04, 2013 11:51 am
]]>
That leads to a big variation between good runs and very bad runs, fast GPS acquisition times and very long ones, high number of satellites locked and very low numbers.
We are working to release a bug fix ASAP.
Thank you all for reporting your experience!
Cris
Statistics: Posted by admin — Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:48 am
]]>
Something went wrong on Leikr as I finished the event with 14.44miles on the Leikr compared to 13.38miles for the Garmin 910XT.
Reviewing the route data post-race, I noticed that at mile 3.69, the Leikr goes off track completely and rejoins the course at mile 5.36. The Garmin at the same point is at mile 4.4.
I would be interested in knowing what happened.
Reports below:
Garmin - http://www.endomondo.com/workouts/265333703
Leikr - http://www.endomondo.com/workouts/265323158
Many thanks.
Dr. D
Statistics: Posted by Dr. D — Sun Nov 03, 2013 5:36 pm
]]>
Statistics: Posted by Swanny — Sun Nov 03, 2013 4:33 pm
]]>
Same round, different softwarereleases:
1.7.14:
1.7.15:
1.7.16:
The track with 1.7.14 was the most accurate of them (didn't swim there at all
). I think, you've got a long way to go.Statistics: Posted by Questor — Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:01 am
]]>
Ran on Thursday after having done the software update. Had between 8 & 9 sats locks for the whole run. Leikr recorded 0.13 of a mile further than my Garmin 310 over 7 miles and apart from a couple of wobbles the track looked great. Hooray I thought
Did the same run this afternoon. Despite getting the latest wifi gps fix data the Leikr only locked on to 4 sats this time. (Watch left in exactly the same position and sky clear). Set off and pretty much constantly for the first three or so miles the Leikr vibrated every 10 secs or so as it lost and then regained a lock (incredibly irritating). Track + pace all over the place and this time distance recorded as 8.8 miles. At no point during the whole run did I ever see more than 4 sats locked (I run in the hills with no buildings to block signals).
How could the two runs be so inconsistent especially with regards to the ability to lock satellites?
Very disappointing
Statistics: Posted by jamesg — Sat Nov 02, 2013 4:34 pm
]]>
Time sync from server shown on watch before leaving home to nearby open park and then waiting stationary for 5 minutes before giving up on any GPS lock. Proceeded to run for 110 minutes through mostly light suburbia, open hillside, some river dells and open canalside but still not one single lock in the whole time. My old Nokia N810 does better than this.
Statistics: Posted by Swanny — Fri Nov 01, 2013 5:28 pm
]]>
I strapped on the Leikr and Garmin 910XT and went for a run along leafy and open roads.
As always auto-lap (1mile) was on and auto-pause off.
Both watches were switched off until I got to my starting area (open with clear view of the sky)
GPS acquisition was timely with the Leikr showing a maximum of 9 satellites.
I created my workout on the Leikr website and synchronized it to the watch. The Garmin was also working through the same workout.
This time I observed that the pace zones were not rounded off on the watch - great news.
I checked the pace readings a couple of times especially the map screen and I thought it was way off when compared to the 910XT.
The overall distance were 7.40miles (Leikr) and 7.24miles (Garmin)
Wishes:
1) can the watch alert you (vibrate - maybe twice) when you stray outside your pace zone. I mean to alert you to speed up or slow down.
2) count down (beep - from say 5s) when you are finishing a step and preparing you to start a new step.
3) creating a workout on the website - for repeats, can you please simplify how that is done. Ideally, I should be able to show something like run between 6/7mins/mile for 1min then slow down to 8/9mins/mile for 30s. Repeat for 10 sets.
4) can the street name be displayed when in map view (maybe show it for 10s every 2/3mins).
Workouts:
Garmin - http://www.endomondo.com/workouts/264551242
Leikr - http://www.endomondo.com/workouts/264540773
Many thanks.
Dr. D.
Statistics: Posted by Dr. D — Fri Nov 01, 2013 3:09 pm
]]>
of course many negative reports pile up here, but I would like to also give some positive feedback. I updated yesterday and did a run with both my Leikr and the Forerunner 305 today:
Garmin (13.02km): http://www.endomondo.com/workouts/264330361/12717179
Leikr (13.09km): http://www.endomondo.com/workouts/264330266/12717179
Sky: partially cloudy
Sight at start: a parking lot with a few bushes and low trees, but majority of sky in sight
Overall distances of the 2 devices are very much the same, but it has been like that for me also before except when the Leikr went completely bogus. There was no Wifi-lock on the Leikr (I switched it on only after I arrived at the parking lot with no building in Wifi range), but there was reasonably good sight where I started. GPS-lock on both devices was there at about the same time. The Garmin is typically "usable" a bit early, but then with less precision on the first few meters (although it typically doesn't let you know, it still shows the big progress bar). In my view the Leikr took much longer to boot this time after the upgrade. I didn't measure it exactly, but it felt to be close to 1 minute. After booting there where still just 00 GPS satellites visible, so longer boot time can't be explained by starting GPS tracking now while booting. Is a longer boot time known for this update?
After roughly 2-3 minutes while I dressed up for running, the Garmin had locked 8-10 satellites, while Leikr had 7-9. At the end of the run the Leikr had 11 at the same location, but I forgot to check the Garmin. Overall, the Garmin showed 14 satellites of which the rest did not lock. I think the Leikr performed only slightly worse than my Garmin. If you look at the tracks they also show on average the same "accuracy", at least both are off the track somehow every now and then by almost the same amount and within the GPS accuracy or at the border of it. I can't complain much about this. However, the Leikr is still obviously less smooth. This may has something to do with the fixed 1s GPS sampling rate and if I urge Leikr to experiment with variable output sampling rate like the Garmin. It simply looks smoother and overall feels better.
What I do like with the update is the display of wall clock time and number of locked satellites. That's clearly a win. On this run I didn't check wether it would have searched for registered ANT+ devices upon pressing the Start button alone, but I'll check that on the next run. If that's not implemented yet: FEATURE REQUEST
. That would be a clear win in convenience, no loss in power consumption (otherwise you need to press 2 buttons anyway before your workout).Overall I think that the update shows some good will and progress. However, my single run (actually in good conditionas) is too limited to judge it's quality completely. I'm maintaining an own wish list that I'll add to the forum soon.
Best,
STYLON
Statistics: Posted by stylon — Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:07 pm
]]>
To be clear, we know we have still work to do, I just wanted to share my observations:
Here the two files:
garmin:
http://www.endomondo.com/workouts/264201417/1835155
Leikr:
http://www.endomondo.com/workouts/264135866/1835155
Preparation:
Leikr: I left my Leikr in the charger overninght and this morning I took it off, switched to "active screen" by pressing the power key once, went out the door and got a fix with 8 satellites within a short time (about a minute).
Garmin: turned it on inside the house, went out, got a fix some secs before my Leikr, however pretty much the same time.
Route:
I purposely stayed for the first 4 km in an area of single family houses: here my Leikr and Garmin vibrated approximately at the same time. Same distance, instant pace difference between the watches around +/- 3-4 secs.
Semi urban canyon:
as you can see between km 4.3 adn 5.5 i went into a more dense area with narrow streets, sharp turns and buidings of 4/5 stories on both sides.
What I observed is that both watches got confused about my pace (I was keeping a constant pace around ~4,10min/km): but, while the instant pace of Leikr increased compared to my actual pace (readings jumping down to ~3.30 sec/km), the instant pace of Garmin dropped (redings up to ~5.30 secs/km). In this stretch Leikr suddenly got ahead of Garmin in distance logged of 70 meters.
Rest of the run:
Buidlings just on one side. Garmin and Leikr kept pretty much the same readings.
OBSERVATIONS:
Garmin average pace on km 5: in Endomondo it is reported as 7:43 min/km, that is very far off. In Garmin connect the average pace is a more reasonible 4:15 min/km
Tracing on the map: Garmin tracing is in general less noisy and lines are much streighter (except in the "semi urban canyon" area). We believe that it can be achieved by adding some post filtering before uploading.
thanks
Cris
Statistics: Posted by admin — Thu Oct 31, 2013 1:34 pm
]]>
@mcbadger: please send a mail to leikrteam@acornprojects.dk and we will assist you on waht to do to recover your watch.
thanks
Statistics: Posted by admin — Thu Oct 31, 2013 12:38 pm
]]>
]]>