Best way to find elevation profile?
10-04-10, 12:51 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 634
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Best way to find elevation profile?
I just completed my last century of the season, and I want to determine the total elevation gain and loss. The route is on mampmyride.com, but the elevation seems wrong. I exported the route to a GPX file, then added elevation data using gpsvisualizer.com. The numbers come out way different.
Here is what I get for total ascent:
mampmyride.com: 3583 ft
bikeroutetoaster.com (using GPX file with NED elevation data): 4218 ft
bikeroutetoaster.com (using GPX file with SRTM1 elevation data): 4675 ft
bikeroutetoaster.com (using GPX file with SRTM3 elevation data): 4641 ft
utrack.crempa.net (using GPX file with NED elevation data): 6969 ft
utrack.crempa.net (using GPX file with SRTM1 elevation data): 9200 ft
utrack.crempa.net (using GPX file with SRTM1 elevation data): 8011 ft
As you can see, the numbers are all over the place. My legs felt like 9200 ft was the correct one, but I'm wondering what is the most accurate way to get the true elevation gain/loss for a route?
Here is what I get for total ascent:
mampmyride.com: 3583 ft
bikeroutetoaster.com (using GPX file with NED elevation data): 4218 ft
bikeroutetoaster.com (using GPX file with SRTM1 elevation data): 4675 ft
bikeroutetoaster.com (using GPX file with SRTM3 elevation data): 4641 ft
utrack.crempa.net (using GPX file with NED elevation data): 6969 ft
utrack.crempa.net (using GPX file with SRTM1 elevation data): 9200 ft
utrack.crempa.net (using GPX file with SRTM1 elevation data): 8011 ft
As you can see, the numbers are all over the place. My legs felt like 9200 ft was the correct one, but I'm wondering what is the most accurate way to get the true elevation gain/loss for a route?
10-04-10, 01:55 PM
#2
Professional Fuss-Budget
AFAIK there is no one accurate method. Different services / software use different methods to calculate elevation.
The best thing you can do is select one method and stick with it for as long as possible.
The best thing you can do is select one method and stick with it for as long as possible.
10-04-10, 03:04 PM
#3
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 634
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
OK, I guess the method I'm sticking with is ridewithgps.com
I uploaded my GPX file and ridewithgps.com has a feature to correct the elevation gain using their data. The ridewithgps.com site corrected my elevation gain to 6503 ft. Their value is intermediate between the others, so 6503 ft is my story and I'm sticking to it.
I uploaded my GPX file and ridewithgps.com has a feature to correct the elevation gain using their data. The ridewithgps.com site corrected my elevation gain to 6503 ft. Their value is intermediate between the others, so 6503 ft is my story and I'm sticking to it.
10-05-10, 08:28 PM
#4
Erect member since 1953
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Antioch, CA (SF Bay Area)
Posts: 7,000
Bikes: Trek 520 Grando, Roubaix Expert, Motobecane Ti Century Elite turned commuter, Some old French thing gone fixie
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 121 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 38 Times
in
21 Posts
This is easy! Whatever the highest number is clearly the correct number.
When my group does doubles, whoever gets the highest on their GPS is the "official" entry.
When my group does doubles, whoever gets the highest on their GPS is the "official" entry.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
AngryScientist
Road Cycling
7
07-14-10 07:00 AM
