Timex Ironman Run Trainer GPS Review; Patagonia 50% Off Sale; VIVOBAREFOOT 20% Off Fall Sale

A few unrelated odds and ends before today’s product review …

*

This month VIVOBAREFOOT is launching its Fall 2012 line with a 2-week promotional offer for me and for you.  I get a new pair of shoes to review, which will be posted next week.  You get 20% off of any item in their catalog – even the super-lightweight Ultra water/running shoe and the popular Ra dress shoe – when you use coupon code RUNNINGANDRAMBLING20.  The sale ends on November 1, so get moving.

*
The response to my CLIF Bar Meet the Moment giveaway contest has been somewhat lukewarm so far – meaning that your odds of winning are pretty good if you take the few minutes to enter.  The contest runs through October 31, so head back to this post for full details.

*

A couple of weeks ago I introduced Massey's Outfitters as a new affiliate sponsor, and mentioned that they carry the entire line of current Patagonia apparel.  And now for a limited time, they’re offering a significant portion of that catalog at up to 50% off; click the banner below to go shopping.

*

Back in June my friend Mike and I wrote a Monterey Herald article about how a past winner of the Big Sur Half Marathon later tested positive for performance enhancing drugs, and how the race took extraordinary measures to award the proper prize money to other top-5 finishers whose awards were impacted.  Well, guess what?  It turns out that the 5^th place runner in that same race was also using drugs at the time, as this week’s New York Times article describes.

What stands out most about this article are two points:  1) the runner in question has one of the most matter-of-fact “Yup, I did it, I got busted, life goes on” mentalities that I’ve seen from a drug cheat thus far – which in itself may indicate the extent of the problem in amateur racing.  Also, 2) the drug enforcement business, as well as any efforts by race organizations to do the right thing, is getting trickier and more complicated every day.  

That's all for now.  On with the review!

**
GPS reviews are few and far between around here, primarily because I have the same minimalist philosophy about gadgets that I have about shoes: the simpler, the better. 

I don’t place much stock in the number of bells and whistles, or even in the computer interface for uploading workouts (which I almost never do).  Rather, I want something that’s comfortable, easy to use, and accurate.  Like I said: simple.

You may recall my favorable review of the Soleus GPS 1.0, a small and simple device that gives basic time and distance, and comes at a very affordable price point of under $100.  By comparison, today’s product offers a significantly expanded range of features for a price point that is marginally higher - $225 retail, but currently discounted to $190 at Amazon.com, where I've periodically seen it priced even lower - and is an extreme value for what you get.  It also comes from one of the biggest players in the endurance sports industry.

Timex Run Trainer GPS; photo from Timex website

I started testing the Timex Ironman Run Trainer GPS in early summer, and it immediately became my preferred GPS for long training runs and family hikes.  It’s easy to operate, and for my preferred use includes one key feature that my Soleus device doesn’t: an altitude setting that tells you your current elevation as well as how much vertical climbing you’ve done.  For obvious reasons, those are nice stats for an ultrarunner to have while training for Leadville.

Truthfully, the Run Trainer is also chock full of options that I don’t use – and as I typically do when reviewing a GPS device, I’ll refer you to DC Rainmaker’s detailed breakdown of the Run Trainer if you want in-depth information for everything this watch can do.  Trust me, you’ll be impressed.  I’ve also included a how-to video from Timex at the end of this post for further information.

L to R: Timex wristwatch, Soleus GPS (with dead battery), Timex Run Trainer 

I’ve only experienced two downsides of the Run Trainer in my testing.  The first is that it’s substantially larger than my regular Timex watch, and noticeably larger than the Soleus GPS that I first tested last winter.  However, it doesn’t feel cumbersome while running, and I’ve worn it for multiple high-mileage outings without any discomfort from the size.  

Side view, top to bottom: Timex Run Trainer GPS, Soleus GPS, Timex wristwatch

The other (and most frustrating) problem that I had in testing was that I had all kinds of trouble making the device compatible with Windows 7.  I followed all of the instructions for downloading the Training Peaks program and transferring data from my watch to the computer, but kept bumping into the following error message:

"TP Device Agent has stopped working"

I asked my Timex rep about the problem, and was told to try the “uninstall and reinstall” strategy.  When that didn’t work after a few tries, I was referred to Timex tech support, who referred me to Training Peaks tech support, who referred me back to Timex … basically, nobody wanted to own the issue, other than to tell me it was a known problem for Windows 7 users.  I never did get the device to work on my home laptop or desktop, and finally used the oldest computer in our house which runs Windows Vista, which is where I eventually got the program to work.

If you’re inclined to do so, you can download workouts to your computer and dissect them pretty much any way you’d like to.  And if you’re one who uses Training Peaks for your daily workout log, the Run Trainer will integrate seamlessly with that program.

However, since I don’t download workouts, I’m mainly focused on how the Run Trainer works as a daily use GPS, and on that basis I’ve been very happy with it.  I love how the numbers are large and easy to read, even with four lines of data.  I like the option of customizing different display screens that can be scrolled during your run.  And with an 8-hour GPS battery life and water resistance to 50m, the Run Trainer functions equally well through a 30-mile training run or a driving rainstorm.

Large, easy-to-read numbers at mile 25.  In a related story, I used to be in pretty decent shape.

Most importantly, the GPS and altitude measurements are super accurate.  The Run Trainer uses SiRFstar IV GPS technology, which is reportedly among the fastest and most reliable signals (note: I have no idea if this is true; that’s just what the ad copy says).  It maintains its signal in canyons and under tree cover, and the altitude readings are usually within a few feet of marked elevations on almost every landmark I’ve encountered.

At the top of Clouds Rest in Yosemite, which my map says is 9930'.  Pretty darn accurate!

Until recently, if you wanted a GPS with the number of features that the Timex Run Trainer has, you’d have to shell out 400 bucks and wear a device the size of a deck of cards on your wrist.  It’s great to see both the price point and physical size of these devices decrease as technology has improved, and the Run Trainer is a very attractive choice for an affordable feature-dense GPS for high-demand everyday use.

The Timex Run Trainer GPS retails for $190 from Amazon.com.

“Timex Ironman Run Trainer GPS: Getting Started” by Timex USA (click to play):

*Product provided by Timex USA.  Affiliate sales support Running and Rambling.

**If you have a product you’d like reviewed, contact me at info@runningandrambling.com.

Get updates as soon as they're posted! Click here to subscribe to Running and Rambling. 
Check out the Running Life book for a collection of our most popular columns.

Read more...

Soleus GPS 1.0 Review

I typically shy away from GPS reviews, partially because the whole prospect seems entirely overwhelming, but also because I have very simple tastes.

The only piece of information I really care about getting from a GPS device is “How far have I run today?” I don’t care about vertical gain or compass direction or barometric conditions. I don’t care about my heart rate zones or calories burned. I don’t care to upload, map, or otherwise analyze any data after the run. I don’t care to maintain a digital training log or join yet another online community. Just tell me how far I’ve run.

Although it’s a simple premise, it’s also an important one, for reasons that might have more to do with my own neuroses than any physiological rationale. When I’ve got an ultra in my sights, 30 miles is kind of my standard benchmark when it comes to completing a good long training run. 30.5 miles is a legitimate long run, but 29.8 is woefully inadequate. (OK, yes … it’s not the physiology; the problem is me.) Therefore, it’s also crucial for the device to be accurate, so I’m not always wondering if the distance it says I ran was the distance I really ran. Honestly, I can drive myself crazy with this stuff.

Finally, from a practical standpoint, I’m absolutely terrified of taking on in-depth GPS reviews. There are too many technological considerations than I can legitimately understand, and too many features and components that I don’t adequately utilize; consequently, it’s hard for me to deliver an authoritative opinion on whether a device is worth the (normally very hefty) cost. Especially when my friend DC Rainmaker has become such a guru on GPS devices, there’s no way I can pretend to match that kind of expertise.

So why am I reviewing a GPS watch today? Because the product in question is almost revolutionary, in all the ways that are most important to me. It’s basic. It’s affordable. It’s eco-friendly and low-profile. Best of all, it’s highly accurate, and tells me exactly how far I’ve run.

Soleus GPS 1.0; photo from Soleus website

The Soleus GPS 1.0 has the potential to be a game changer. It retails for $99 (actually, even less than that – see the end of this post), a price point that is less than half of the lowest-cost wrist-mounted GPS from Garmin. It offers the basic features you need – plus a few others – without needing a software program or tech support to figure out how to use the darn thing. For technophobic runners who appreciate simplicity, accuracy, and affordability, the Soleus GPS gives you exactly what you’re looking for.

Continuing the theme of simplicity, my review is going to be somewhat stripped down as well, for reasons I explained earlier. However, I’d be negligent to not refer you to DC Rainmaker’s full in-depth review of this same device, which he breaks down in his typical “all the information you ever wanted plus a lot of information you didn’t realize you needed” fashion.

Timex sleek Ironman on L, SOleus GPS on R

Here’s what you get with the Soleus GPS 1.0: a GPS watch that is roughly the size of the Garmin 401 and Garmin FR610. It’s marginally bigger than my customary Timex Sleek Ironman watch, but with a weight of only 2.0 oz, it’s not much of an extra burden on my long runs. It has an alarm, chronograph, lap/split tracking, 100-lap memory, 12-second backlight, and a USB rechargeable lithium-ion battery. The casing is water resistant to 30 meters so it’s fine to wear in the rain.

Additional features that are nice (but which I don’t really utilize) are calories burned – calculated by an algorithm using body weight and distance run – and your current pace or speed in metric or English notation. Like I said, I’m not so much into those things; I mainly want to know how it works in measuring distance.

First and most importantly, the Soleus GPS is super accurate. I did my first test runs at the track, where the readings were spot-on. While running with training partners, I did comparisons to their various Garmin units, and distance measurements were usually within a few hundredths of a mile for runs in the 10- to 12-mile range. On trail runs, it appears to hold its satellite signal quite well in canyons and under tree cover. The signal also holds steady when the device is underneath a jacket sleeve, which is pretty much every day at this time of year.

Top to bottom: chrono, distance, time of day

While running, you can choose from a few different displays; the one I use most frequently is stopwatch / distance / time of day, which are the only three things I’m concerned about when I’m on a long training day. You can take split times or create lap markers at regular intervals, but I don’t even do either of those things. Like I said, I’m basic.

There are a few minor drawbacks that I’ve encountered in daily use, the first of which is a slow satellite acquisition time. It often takes up to a couple of minutes to lock into a signal, which is significantly slower than my friends pick up signals with their Garmins. I’ve also had some difficulty with the size of the “stop/save” button, in that it’s small in relation to the others, and it’s sometimes difficult to keep pressed down for long enough to save your data. When I’m wearing gloves – which again, is almost every day this time of year – the button is even trickier to push firmly.

Finally, the size of the display numbers is fairly small in comparison to most other watches or GPS devices I’m familiar with. If you have difficulty with small readouts, this might be problematic, but luckily for me it’s just a minor inconvenience.

Aside from those issues, the Soleus 1.0 is everything I want in a GPS – and more importantly, it doesn’t bother with the things I don’t want. I suspect that I’m not the only one who appreciates a simple, straightforward GPS, and there could potentially be a big market for something like this - a highly accurate device that tells you how far and fast you’re running, for a price that won’t set you too far back.

The Soleus GPS 1.0 normally retails for $99, but you can currently find them on sale for $87 from Amazon.com.

*Product provided by Soleus
**See other product reviews on sidebar at right. If you have a product you’d like reviewed, contact me at info@runningandrambling.com.



Get updates as soon as they're posted! Click here to subscribe to Running and Rambling.

Check out the Running Life book for a collection of our most popular columns.

Read more...

Elevation Confusion

A few years ago my friend Mike and I wrote a facetious Monterey Herald article that was a somewhat fictionalized account of our frustrations with using GPS devices in everyday training. Last month, we had occasion to write more seriously on the topic, but the outcome was no less frustrating than the first time around - in fact, it was probably worse.

What started as a simple inquiry about the modified Big Sur Marathon course turned into a trip down the analytical rabbit hole, where we saw and learned more information than we possibly imagined – not to mention about 100 times more than we wanted. Fortunately we had a pretty reliable tour guide to help us make partial sense of this strange new world, but despite his best efforts, the whole process was something that Mike and I couldn’t escape quickly enough.

We stuck around long enough to make an article out of it, though, which follows below. One more note about this post which has nothing to do with the topic at hand: Mike wrote the first draft of this one, and took a page from my playbook by opening with a song quote. I don’t know if he purposely picked a tune that accompanies one of my favorite music videos of all time, but that’s the way it turned out. The video is after the post.

**
Running Life 5/5/11        “Elevation Confusion”

“You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.”
- Bob Dylan, “Subterranean Homesick Blues” (video after post)

Any runner will tell you that it’s easy to figure out when you are running into a headwind, or to determine whether you are headed uphill or downhill. You can also be relatively certain about the distance you’ve traveled, especially if there are mile markers on the road or if you’re wearing a GPS device.

But how high are those hills you climbed? And how much climbing have you done over all the miles you’ve measured? Answering those questions sometimes requires an advanced degree – and even then, you’re probably not certain of your accuracy.

Case in point: prior to our Big Sur Marathon preview article, we attempted to quantify the differences in climbing between the traditional course that features Hurricane Point and the out-and-back course that includes the rolling hills of Carmel Highlands twice. Researching the subject was one of the most mind-boggling ordeals we’ve experienced lately.

We started with the elevation profile on the race website (admin note: this page has now been taken down), which indicated that the total climbing over the new course was 2400 feet. The data came from a Naval Postgraduate School scientist who used a USA Track and Field website mapping tool. He explained to us that the elevation information is stored in US Geological Survey NED database tables, and then extrapolated over a known distance (in this case, 26.2 miles). He also said that this could differ from GPS measurements, as hand-held GPS units update position and elevation on a scheduled interval which might impact the fidelity of the data (seriously – those are his words).

Another tech-savvy (our polite way of saying geeky) friend of ours used his Garmin GPS watch for two previous Big Sur Marathons as well as this year’s modified course, and shared with us his GPX files, which plot latitude and longitude points alongside data from the USGS database. His readings showed approximately 1750’ of climbing for the standard course, and 1630’ on the new course. He disputed the idea of inaccuracy due to delayed reporting, and noted that his dataset contained 3425 points in it – approximately one measurement every three seconds, or every 40 feet of road.

3425 data points plotted over a 30m NED dataset ... or something like that

Then he shifted into high gear, and explained that position readings typically aren’t updated on regular intervals, but are dependent on the rate of change. In other words, the faster your position or elevation is changing, the shorter the recording interval becomes in order to enhance accuracy.  He also advised us that handheld devices rely on triangulation of satellites in the “GPS constellation” for accurate position reporting, as well as the visibility of a 4th satellite to add the elevation component. Finally, the fact that the dataset was taken on the side of a cliff (the race course on coastal Highway 1) might be problematic, since positions just a few meters away on either side of the road could have statistically significant differences in elevation.

It was right around here that our heads started to spin.

The discussion wasn't finished, however … because our friend’s data from his two Big Sur Marathons on the standard route also deviated by about 100’ from each other. When we asked him to account for this, we inadvertently opened the floodgates to a whole world of fractals, interpolations, calibrated barometric variables and fluctuating weather permutations, smoothing algorithms, and numerous other scientific conditions that we couldn’t begin to comprehend. Suffice it to say that any elevation data you see in course profiles is going to have a degree of uncertainty – in some cases, quite a significant amount.

Fortunately, none of this distracted from the task at hand on race day for our tech-savvy friend, who ran 2:53:05 for 15th place overall at this year’s Big Sur Marathon, using his Garmin GPS watch as usual. It’s worth noting that his time this year was virtually identical to his personal record from the standard course, even though there was (according to his watch) slightly less climbing this year. External conditions such as wind and air temperature might have made an impact as well, but honestly, who the heck really knows?

All that the two of us learned for sure in this process is that we prefer to stick to simple considerations like knowing which way the wind is blowing. From now on we’ll just refer to our local marathon as a hilly, challenging course, and leave the elevation claims for the scientists to figure out.

**
As for the video: this one is often imitated, but never duplicated. I’ve always considered both the song and video clip to be two of the best snapshots of Bob Dylan’s overwhelming hipster genius in the prime of his career.

Bob Dylan, "Subterranean Homesick Blues" (click to play):





Get updates as soon as they're posted! Click here to subscribe to Running and Rambling.
Check out the Running Life book for a collection of our most popular columns.

Read more...

MyTach GPS Sports Watch Review

At first glance, it may seem disingenuous of me to promote a new GPS device on the market – after all, I’m on record as feeling generally ambivalent about the necessity of GPS gadgetry for distance runners.

However, when I was contacted by a company called AIM to test their MyTach GPS Sports Training Watch, I jumped at the opportunity for a couple of reasons:

1) They’re an Italian company, which makes them paisan to me. And I was taught to never deny a request from the motherland – it’s right up there with “never take sides against the family” in the Italian rulebook.

2) I’ve always been curious as to whether my running would be impacted by using a GPS – and this was a great opportunity to try it.

Oh, one more thing …

3) I love doing product reviews. I’ve mentioned that before, haven’t I?

I received the gadget in the mail just before Christmas, so I’ve had plenty of opportunities to use it. For this review, I also enlisted the help of some partners, as I’ll explain shortly.

AIM is headquartered in Milan, Italy – and based on a review of their website, they are primarily known for motorsport (dragsters, motorbikes, Formula 1, etc) applications instead of endurance sports. In fact, some of the data measurements seem more applicable to engine performance than ultrarunning – but that could just be a case of me wanting to keep things simple.

When the MyTach package arrived, my goal was to see if I could charge it up and figure out how to use it without wading through a complicated manual – that’s my little test of any gadget’s user-friendliness. I’d say I figured out about 80% of it on my own – which is a good thing, as the user’s manual (both paper and online) has several strange phrases that obviously lost some clarity when they were spit out of the Italian-to-English Google translator.

Fortunately, it didn’t take me long to customize the screens I wanted and head out the door for some running – and that’s when I solicited my training partners’ input as well.

Obviously, when talking about running GPS devices, the first name on everyone’s mind is Garmin. A few of my friends use the Forerunner 305 and 405 models, and one of my main goals for this review was to see how the MyTach compared – both in form and function – to the more prevalent Garmins.

So basically, I started bugging the crap out of them. Before we’d start a run, I’d ask, “Do you have your satellites yet?” and “What’s your altitude right here?” When we broke into a jog, I’d say “What’s your pace right now?” Every quarter-mile or so, I’d ask “What distance do you have?”, and when we were under tree cover, I’d say “Are you still picking up your signal?” I became quite skilled at turning a 6-mile trail run into a 1-hour quiz show. Finally, after each run, we’d compare all of the cumulative data as well.

Having said that, let’s do some comparisons:

1) Form:

Here’s a picture of the MyTach next to the Forerunner 305 from the top …

(Note that my GPS - on left - reads 0.2 miles longer than the Garmin. More on that to come.)

And one from the side:

(MyTach on left, Forerunner on right)

Size-wise, it’s not dramatically different. However, the MyTach isn’t contoured like the Forerunner, which may be a factor for some people. I’ve worn the MyTach for runs of over three hours, and comfort wasn’t really an issue for me. From website information on both brands, the MyTach is listed as slightly lighter than the 305, but since I don’t own a postage scale, I can’t independently confirm this claim.

2) Function

This part was interesting to me: almost across the board, the MyTach picked up signals quicker than the Forerunner (typically within 5-10 seconds), and kept the signal locked in even under heavy tree cover. On its website, MyTach advertises something called FCHS (Fast Connection High Sensitivity) technology; honestly, I don’t know enough about how satellite science works – does the MyTach use different satellites? Does it have a superior internal antenna or tracking device? – to explain the improvement, but I can tell you that it’s noticeable.

However, it’s not just gathering the signals that’s important – it’s what the device does with them. Which leads us to …

3) Accuracy

If signal tracking was the best surprise from the MyTach, accuracy was the most bothersome. Basically, I don’t know whether the numbers are right.

Distance-wise, in comparison with the Forerunner, my distance readings were generally about 0.1 mile off per every 3 or 4 miles of running. Remember the mileage discrepancy in the previous picture? My friend and I did the exact same route that day; my watch read 6.2 miles, and his read 6.0. Two-tenths per 6 miles isn't huge - but if you’re doing a 3-hour run, it can lead to a large degree of error. Interestingly, the MyTach mileage was always higher – so I chose to believe those numbers instead of the stingy Garmin readings. Call me opportunistic.

The altitude readings between the devices showed a similar discrepancy – in most cases, the MyTach readings were lower than the Forerunner, sometimes by more than 100 feet. One day, I ran to the top of a hill with a signpost marking 1800’ above sea level, and my GPS said 1680’. Again, there might be some scientific explanation for this, and the MyTach readings might actually be the accurate ones – but I don’t know enough about the technology to speculate on this.

I found myself lamenting that the MyTach accuracy might be questionable, because the sheer volume of data it collects is quite impressive. Some of this information is stuff that I either couldn’t decipher (for example, the unit for time stoppage is written as cm – is this a European measure I’m not aware of?) or didn’t understand (what exactly is a variometer, anyway?), but a lot of it seems like it would be extremely cool for data geeks out there. If you select the cycling mode, you also get information about current slope and total height differential – a nice feature for people who like to track cumulative elevation change on a run.

4) Extras

The accessories for the MyTach are very similar to other GPS devices on the market. It comes with a combination USB port/wall-charging dock, and fully charges in about an hour. Battery life with the GPS operating is listed at 9 hours. There is a downloadable software program on the MyTach website that interfaces with Google Earth for mapping your route after a run. The memory storage is “rolling”, meaning it replaces the oldest stuff with new data as it gets full. Its capacity in this regard seems pretty good – I currently have about 10 different runs stored on mine, and none of them have been reset yet. The unit also comes with a handlebar mounting system for bikes, so it would be ideal for a bike/run workout similar to some of the high-end Polar GPS devices.

5) Price

From what I can tell, MyTach is only available for purchase through the company website, where it retails for 195 Euros (currently 253 US dollars) – and this might be its biggest obstacle to breaking into the North American market. That price puts it almost $100 higher than the Garmin Forerunner 305, and nearly as expensive as the Forerunner 405, which has staked its claim as the ultimate next-generation wrist-mounted GPS device.


Overall, the MyTach is different than the Garmins – in some ways better, in other ways worse - but it doesn’t blow them out of the water. I imagine that a significantly lower price point is probably necessary for it to steal some attention and market share away from the industry standard.


See previous product reviews on sidebar at right. If you have a product you’d like reviewed, contact me at info@runningandrambling.com.

Read more...