Mine arrived today! Woot for that!
First impression were that the mount is brilliant and small and the unit is small and light (compared to the 60CSX). Also the power adapter didn't have a Kiwi plug with it but thats not a major for me as I plan to charge it from USB anyway.

Mine came with a HR belt and GSC10. And this is where things got a little confusing. I decided to keep using the HR belt of my Forerunner 50 (I'll keep the other one as a spare) and to my surprise when I switched the unit on it found it straight away and was using it (a little surprising as I hadn't paired it) is seems the unit searches for new Ant+ stuff every time it is switched on.

Anyway, I put the mounts on both my bikes and programmed the bikes into the unit. Finally I charged the unit as I was going for a MTB ride shortly.
At the carpark I switched the unit on and went for a ride. Once we got back I compared the data with my riding buddies and my KMs travelled was way out and as a result the average KPH and all distance/speed data was out too. The heart rate data was spot on though.

I have a feeling that the GSC10 didn't learn in properly or the Auto wheel configure thingee didn't get a chance to work things out before I dissapeared into the forest and ended up getting it all wrong. I'll report more when I figure this out.

Here is the track of today. http://connect.garmin.com/activity/25364933

Sat down after writing the previous last night. I was a little worried about the 500 being almost 5K's out on a 17 K mountain bike ride (reading 12.7 instaed of 17.4).
It seems that the GSC10 on my mountain bike definately hasn't paired properly. If I go to Settings/Turner RFX (the bike name)/ANT+ SPD/Cad there is no unit ID. Whereas in Settings/Allez/ANT+ Spd/Cad there definately is.
I also found that in the GPS settings the Grid Co-ords where set to some strange setting which might have affected the readings (or not). I am not even sure if any of this data is used so I might be blowing smoke. Guess I should have done a bit more research before buying it.

I thought that one of the ways the Edge 500 (& 310/705) worked with the speed/cadence sensor was that the Edge only used the wheel speed sensor if it can't get a satellite signal, so the satellite reading should be correct. There has been some discussion on the Garmin Forums about making sure that when you are pairing the Edge to a second bike, it is well outside the range of the sensor on the first bike. This might be problem you're having, if they were together in the garage then it would have still been paired to the Allez. Worth a try anyway.

Spyder wrote:I thought that one of the ways the Edge 500 (& 310/705) worked with the speed/cadence sensor was that the Edge only used the wheel speed sensor if it can't get a satellite signal, so the satellite reading should be correct.

except of course when you're mtbing in bush cover - in which case coverage could be so hit or miss that the accuracy of the fix is low and hence you get the sum of all the errors added to your total!!!

If I turn my dakota20 on and sit in next to the PC (inside) and let it log for 30-60mins I can have a plot that claims I've easily done 5km without moving (due to low quality signal leading to a large cummulative error)

which is why I'd have thought on a bike oriented gps the speed/cadence sensor would be the primary speed/distance input - or maybe garmin just expects only roadies to use it

I've been very pleased with my 705 without a speed sensor. Of course, I have no idea how far I'm actually riding, so have no basis for comparison...

ArjanH wrote:Sat down after writing the previous last night. I was a little worried about the 500 being almost 5K's out on a 17 K mountain bike ride (reading 12.7 instaed of 17.4).

some of it could be the GPS cutting corners with a low sampeling rate but I would not expect it to make that much differance

Spyder wrote:There has been some discussion on the Garmin Forums about making sure that when you are pairing the Edge to a second bike, it is well outside the range of the sensor on the first bike. This might be problem you're having, if they were together in the garage then it would have still been paired to the Allez. Worth a try anyway.

As the weather is Shyte this morning I will be reading up on the 500 a bit more and re-pairing both bikes, although I did seperate the 2 bikes maybe it wasn't the complete 10 meters.

philstar wrote:some of it could be the GPS cutting corners with a low sampeling rate but I would not expect it to make that much differance

The difference is almost a third, I could understand if it was say 1 Km out but almost 5 is a bit much. My 60 Csx was never more than a couple of hundred meters out compared to the cateye even if I set the recording interval to 5 seconds. The 500 doesn't have any options for recording frequency but it seems it averages a recording every 2 to 3 seconds which in theory should be plenty to be 95%+ accurate in the bush (probably more like 99.5% on the road).

sifter wrote:I've been very pleased with my 705 without a speed sensor. Of course, I have no idea how far I'm actually riding, so have no basis for comparison...

I think these are just teething issues on my part. The 705 has been around for some time now and its a brilliant unit. The only complaint about it normally is its weight. For the weight weenies it weighs a tonne.

The GPS log looks fine to me - there are no gaps in terms of either time or distance, as would be expected if the GPS unit had a glitch and stopped recording for 5km. The GPS log also looks to line up with the aerial photos in Google Earth, at least where the tracks are visible in the photo. Therefore, perhaps the problem is elsewhere.

Just a thought: is the GPS somehow interferring with the Cateye? ie. perhaps the Cateye is sometimes picking up the GPS's speed/cadence sensor? Are both units wireless? Or maybe the magnetic sensors are too close?

iodi wrote:The GPS log looks fine to me - there are no gaps in terms of either time or distance, as would be expected if the GPS unit had a glitch and stopped recording for 5km. The GPS log also looks to line up with the aerial photos in Google Earth, at least where the tracks are visible in the photo. Therefore, perhaps the problem is elsewhere.

Just a thought: is the GPS somehow interferring with the Cateye? ie. perhaps the Cateye is sometimes picking up the GPS's speed/cadence sensor? Are both units wireless? Or maybe the magnetic sensors are too close?

Nah the cateye is a wired unit and its on a different bike. I am still thinking it has something to do with the grid reference because as you said the raw data seems to be ok.

ArjanH wrote:I am still thinking it has something to do with the grid reference because as you said the raw data seems to be ok.

The grid reference should be WGS84 (or maybe NZGD2000 if the GPS supports it - though the two references are essentially the same).

iodi wrote:The GPS log looks fine to me - there are no gaps in terms of either time or distance, as would be expected if the GPS unit had a glitch and stopped recording for 5km. The GPS log also looks to line up with the aerial photos in Google Earth, at least where the tracks are visible in the photo. Therefore, perhaps the problem is elsewhere.

could be your mate's computers actually - bad erd calibration combined with the inevitable error from the time the front wheel spends locked up skidding under brakes.

iodi wrote:

ArjanH wrote:I am still thinking it has something to do with the grid reference because as you said the raw data seems to be ok.

The grid reference should be WGS84 (or maybe NZGD2000 if the GPS supports it - though the two references are essentially the same).

Yeah but it was set to hddd mm'ss.s". I am going for a ride soon and might redo the same trail now that I have it set to New Zealand. I'll see if it makes a difference.

It seems data is recorded in WGS84 regardles. I have made some changes and paired the GSC10 properly now. Also I have added an accuracy field to screen 1 so I can keep and eye on that. We'll see what happens. My 60CSX never went much below 7 meters accuracy in the bush. I'll be happy if this remains below 12 (seeing as it is a much smaller unit and has no visible aerial).

Heading out for a ride on the roadie. Probably up Te wearenga and around the Lake.

ArjanH wrote:My 60CSX never went much below 7 meters accuracy in the bush.

8-15 is typical for a handheld so it's actually doing quite well great from a navigation point of view, but in your application the cumulative error can become large. They need to do a differential capable model

The Garmin connect site shows your GPS software is version 2.1.0, it might be worth using the webupdater as there is a version 2.2 available :

http://www8.garmin.com/support/download ... sp?id=4715

Changes made from version 2.10 to 2.20:

* Workouts have been added.
* Improved smart recording algorithms. This will improve track point dropping during turns.
* Added %FTP Power, 30s Average Vertical Speed, and Maximum Speed as new Data Fields.
* Increased detection radius for Elevation Points and added a detection message.
* Improved Course processing and error handling.
* Removed limitations on the displayed Power Calibration Value.
* Added notification messages for Courses, Workouts, and Metabolic Profiles.
* Added the ability to import .NLF New Leaf files.
* Fixed some issues with setting files not being saved properly.
* Improved Vertical Speed values.
* The Bike Profile page should now show an invalid value if the wheel calibration is set to Auto and not yet calibrated.