Surge - inaccurate GPS tracking

[almarshall]

I've been finding recently that my Surge seems to quite inaccurate when tracking my runs with GPS. Last night it tracked me running through buildings, in nearby streets etc. When I do runs with other people (with other trackers including Garmin's) and sync with Strava, it's quite apparent that my Surge is no where near as accurate as other brands. Is there anything I can try to make the Surge more accurate? I've tried re-starting it a couple of times and also I've been waiting for around 1 minute after it's found the satellite at the start of my runs. It's dissapointing as the GPS tracking feature was what made choose the Surge and stick with Fitbit when I was moving on from my Charge HR.

[AngelaMa]

Hello @almarshall welcome to the Fitbit Community! At least two dozen GPS satellites are constantly in orbit around the Earth and broadcasting data. All GPS devices, whether your phone or a Fitbit Surge, require a direct path to these satellites in order to receive their radio transmissions. If the signal is being blocked—either because you're underground, near many tall buildings, or as a result of atmospheric effects—GPS will not work. Thus, whereas GPS gives you a more accurate measure of distance than step counting alone, the actual accuracy depends on both your environment and the weather.

Hope this helps! 🙂 

[bfill1985]

@AngelaMa to be honest I don't think that your response is valid. @almarshall was saying he was running the same route as others, who had different running trackers, and his Fitbit showed differing distances to his friends. I assume all the devices are accessing the same satellites, but for some reason the Fitbit Surge often underplays the distance travelled on runs. I have the same problem. I use my Fitbit and my phone with Strava open to track a run, and 90% of the time my Fitbit shows shorter distance run than Strava app.

When I have run 10k or half marathon races (i.e. officially measured distances), Fitbit has not yet tracked me as having run full 10k (usually around 9.8km) or half (last one tracked as 20.9km instead of 21.1).

The question is why does the Surge consistently show shorter distances that other apps and watches running the exact same route

If this was remedied it would make a big difference in terms of me considering purchasing a Fitbit when I decide to get a new tracker/running watch.

[shipo]

@bfill1985, keep in mind, the Surge relies exclusively on GPS signals which can, and often are, obstructed by buildings, trees and other foliage, and even heavy cloud cover.  Other trackers, especially those which tether to smart phones, have the advantage of at least two layers of location redundancy in that smart phones can determine location based upon GPS, mobile phone tower triangulation, and (per some usually reliable sources) local Wi-Fi signals.

Long story short:

• Advantage to the Smart Phone in urban environments or areas with lots of tree cover
• Advantage to the Surge when in rural locations with no mobile phone coverage

The above said, I run with a number of folks who have trackers which tether to their phones, and as a general rule, my Surge is usually dead on accurate.

[AngelaMa]

Hello @bfill1985 as @shipo mentioned, Surge's GPS signal can be obstructed by building trees and other foliage. Phone's GPS doesn't work the same and this can cause the discrepancy.  Also please notice that the activity recorded by your Surge's GPS will not match a predetermined distance since you could do the same route but you can deviate and the distance will be different. 

Hope this helps! 

[Radders]

Im a new user of a Fitbit Surge and appear to be having the same problem. This morning I ran Parkrun with my running partner who also has a Fitbit surge. We both finished together with me being 1 second behind. When we have uploaded our results my distance shows 2.94 miles and his shows 3 miles. My time shows 22.16 and his 22.15 but when it's uploaded to starva my time is shown as 22.10.
Now I have the results from Parkrun the result shows my run to have taken 22.17.
This is not unusual as when we train in the week we will have the same running time but different distances and pace times.
This isn't just a glitch and not sure if I have made the correct purchase

[shipo]

@Radders, in the grand scheme of things, six-one-hundredths of a mile over three miles is well within the margin of error for GPS.  On my typical 10.1 mile run I usually see right bang on 10.1, however, I've seen as short as 9.85 and as long as 10.3; usually when I see reporting errors it is during the summer months as I typically run on either trails or rural roads with lots of tree cover.

The flip side is when I run in wide open spaces, a (very hot and sunny) race last fall on an old abandoned WWII runway, not a tree to be seen for hundreds of yards on either side of the race route, my Surge measured the 5K run at 3.09 miles, close enough for me.  🙂