Originally Posted by DiabloScott

Good point, makes Garmin less unattractive.




1. A lot of talk with no experimental data.
2. Written from perspective of cars, not bikes.
3. Discusses tracking only (my phone usually can tell which side of the street I'm on - can't imagine needing more accuracy than that); doesn't discuss elevation data at all, which was my point of contention concerning relative accuracy. The issue is whether altimeters are better than whatever the phone uses in Strava... I presume some kind of data table for coordinates.

Got anything else?