Today running power meter company Stryd announced their next generation running power meter unit, changing up the form factor and increasing the data metrics gathered. This new model is now a small footpod that you attach to your running shoe. This differs from the first production generation, which was built into a heart rate strap.
I got the chance to take the unit out for a spin last week, and then analyze the data afterwards with the Stryd folks. Here’s a look at how it all works, and some of my initial thoughts.
The New Hardware:
The new Stryd pod has actually gone back to its roots a bit. If you turn on the way back machine, the initial prototype Stryd units were actually pods, albeit pods clipped to the back of your running shorts. That particular design was super-appealing to many who didn’t want to wear a chest strap. However, by time shipping came on their Kickstarter campaign, the pod had morphed into a chest strap and there was no longer a pod-like option available.
This new version takes that earlier pod idea and improves upon it by placing it on the shoe. That minimizes the (previously highly likely) chance you’d forget about it and let it go through the washing machine still attached to your running shorts.
With this new pod design comes new metrics, and those new metrics take a crapload more processing power than the Gen1 strap units. As such, they’ve had to move away from a coin cell battery, which they would have burned through in just a few hours. Instead, the unit is now rechargeable. The battery should last a month, and as you can see – there’s no charging port. That’s because the thing is using wireless charging instead. Pretty cool, ehh?
You’ll just toss it on it’s little wireless charging pad, and it’ll be good to go. It unclips from your shoe using a standard running footpod clip. Note that this is a pre-prod version, and the final version will look a tiny bit different in terms of styling. My understanding is that it’ll be offered in leopard print or Pokémon patterns only.
Like before, the new pod will transmit running power concurrently on both ANT+ & Bluetooth Smart. And it’ll also store data. This means that it’s compatible with Garmin devices using Connect IQ (or some workarounds for those pre-Connect IQ units). And with recent Suunto devices natively. The Suunto with Stryd experience is definitely still cleaner today than the Garmin experience.
Oh, and lastly – it weighs 7g and is waterproof to 1-meter for 30 minutes (IPX7 essentially).
More Advanced Metrics:
With the new pod and its positioning, comes the ability to measure more than just total power; it now comes with the ability to measure additional metrics: Running Efficiency and Leg Spring Stiffness. Plus they already record Ground Contact Time (GCT) and Vertical Oscillation (VO) on their chest strap, though VO isn’t offered on the footpod. This starts to wade into the same areas of data collection that RunScribe is doing, as well of course Garmin and their HRM-RUN/HRM-TRI straps with similar Running Dynamics metrics.
In addition, they’re also capturing higher quality running speed data using just their internal sensors, like footpods usually do. However unlike a traditional footpod there’s no calibration required, which is in large part due to increased sensors they’ve placed in the pod that measure more data streams that previous footpod devices (largely made by Dynastream). As a result, they believe they’ve made the “most accurate footpod on earth”, and looking at the data from my run, it seems reasonably impressive (more on that down below).
Meanwhile, the new Leg Spring Stiffness & Efficiency metrics (as well as GCT/VO) are only available via the mobile phone and desktop apps after the fact, as Garmin’s implementation of Running Dynamics isn’t open to 3rd parties (pretty much the singular reason why RunScribe ultimately went Bluetooth Smart instead of ANT+). That said, with Connect IQ it would be possible for Stryd to transmit that data over private channels to their own apps for Garmin users. On Suunto devices, Suunto doesn’t currently support secondary non-standard data channels.
The consumer version of the mobile app wasn’t quite ready to show this data yet, though. So instead they demo’d me some charts (below) of how they are thinking of displaying the data, both with my data and other sponsored athletes data. One of the challenges that all of these companies though is how to take rather complex data points and make them meaningful for both training and racing. Said differently: How do you actually get faster from using this data?
They showed some examples of data that demonstrates the differences in leg spring stiffness on both a pro and age grouper athlete from Kona. What’s interesting here is actually more of the fade of the age grouper compared to the pro. Of course, the real catch here is creating guidance that improves these metrics (and ideally finish times for races) for training.
Now folks with knowledge of cycling power meters are probably thinking: Did Stryd just create the first ‘left-only’ running power meter? And the answer to that is basically…yulp.
Because of the fact that Stryd is operating on a single foot, it’s technically only capturing/analyzing the power as extracted from that half of the body. Versus before on the chest it had a more holistic view of power output. This is somewhat the whole Stages/etc left-only power meter debate, but now in running. Stryd says they are definitely looking at being able to have users utilize two Stryd units to start to analyze left/right power differences, but out of the gate the platform is focused on single-leg usage.
They’ve also said they aren’t seeing much differences between single-leg and other placement, but, that’s kinda what left-only power meter companies say too (until they want to sell you dual-leg systems of course – in which case it ‘increases accuracy’).
Still, from a daily logistics standpoint – I much prefer the footpod design to that of a chest strap. So for now I’m willing to consider taking that potential hit in single-leg accuracy versus having to wear a chest strap.
As a side note, they did have a handful of athletes wearing them at the Rio Olympics over the past few weeks. They’re working to get all the approvals in place to publish that data – so that’s something that I suspect could be pretty interesting to see.
An Initial Run:
Last week one of the Stryd engineers was in Paris, so we took the unit out for a bit of a short spin around town. The goal being primarily to capture some data with me running. Given I’m running with just a footpod and watch, there isn’t really a whole lot of photography that you can do there. I had it paired to both the Suunto Spartan Ultra, as well as a Garmin FR735XT. Still, here’s some data using the cycling mode (vs the Stryd App), and showing my power.
Now in my case, the run was a bit of a slower run for my normal paces, as such some of my efficiency is lost at these paces, which is something we later see in the data.
After we downloaded my run using Bluetooth Smart to my existing app, they went ahead and provided a bunch of data charts offline (a few days later). The first shows a breakdown for my power, which is split-up based on changes to my run form versus that of pace or terrain (it doesn’t yet account for wind unfortunately). In such a short 5K run, you wouldn’t see an impact to my running form, as validated below. Whereas if I did a 20-mile run, you’d likely start to see an impact to running form.
The same goes for efficiency, in such a short run – we don’t see much shift. However, the below is interesting as they’ve overlaid one of their folks, Angus, on the graph to the right which shows different efficiency levels for different run paces. This would be something more clearly demonstrated in an interval or varied interval paced workout, where you could start to see patterns and break-points in running efficiency.
Next, when we look at my running stiffness, you’ll see on this run I slotted between the pro athlete and the age grouper. However, it’s probably not a true comparison, given that I only ran 5K at about 30-40% slower than race pace for me. Also, they had just swam 2.4 miles and biked 112 miles. Oh, and they were running in a lava field, and I was running around the Louvre. Same-same, but different. Still, you get the point.
Next are two graphs that demonstrate the updated speed readings from the footpod using their more advanced sensors. This is overlaid against the Garmin speed. The Suunto Spartan speed readings upon export are kinda weird, so, we left those off the chart. However, the plot below includes distance on the Stryd that wasn’t recorded on the GPS (since I had stopped the unit already).
Instead, here’s the three metrics once time-aligned to run start/stop length (1,806 seconds):
Stryd: 5448 m
Garmin 735XT: 5441 m
Suunto Spartan Ultra: 5438 m
So basically, the footpod is within 7-10-meters (with no calibration). That’s incredibly impressive. What’s also impressive is that these two GPS watches were within 3 meters of total distance. I’m reasonably certain I’ve never had that happen. On the flip-side, their tracks differed a bit.
And finally, here’s a chart overlaying Stryd speed accuracy compared to GPS.
But of course the real question is what about power accuracy? Well, that’s a bit trickier. Obviously, I have no secondary reference to go on. But I do have existing Stryd data that I’ve collected over the past year. And for such a perfectly flat course as ours, as well as on a windless day – I can at least get into the right ballpark.
Here’s what that looks like when loaded up into my account on the Stryd Power Center (their website):
What I see here is that the power shows a fair bit higher than I’ve historically seen with the chest strap. Like, a lot higher. Typically speaking my running power and cycling power have been rather closely aligned. Meaning that my Z2 and perceived effort in cycling power (225-250w) is about the same in running. And my FTP power (about 310-315w) is about the same in running. I’d do harder intervals for shorter timeframes above those levels (320-380w). Again, roughly.
Whereas what we see above you see me floating in the 250-300w range, despite running at a much slower pace than normal. Here’s a random zoomed in section for more detail:
In talking with Stryd, they’re still digging into the algorithms a bit and working to get them to match as closely as possible. They noted that typically they see very good correlation between the two units, so I’m a bit of an outlier (the story of my life apparently).
(Administrative note: The graphs in this section with white backgrounds are ones they’ve created manually, they are still deciding how to display this data, so the final data pieces you see will probably be different. The black background graphs are from the standard app today.)
Pricing & Availability:
And now for the super-quick section. The retail price will be $199USD, however, they’re also offering a discount to their original Kickstarter backers (the ones to bought the first version). My understanding is that those folks will receive an e-mail shortly with details on how to redeem at the magical price (I don’t have the final lower price yet, but will update this once it shows).
The unit will start shipping in the 2nd or 3rd week of September, which is less than a month from now.
Regular DCR readers will remember that I had tried out their first iteration of the device very early on in their startup life, and even received and have used the final heart rate strap variant countless times since then. But I never quite got around to writing a review. Why?
Well, I found the whole data processing piece just too cumbersome to deal with in that era, especially if your running watch was a Garmin. For those on Suunto, it was relatively easy. But on the Garmin front, it was a mess (at best). Things have gotten significantly better on the Garmin front, especially in the last 30-45 days with apps being able to record data to .FIT files in a running-like mode. But I still get a lingering feeling that the two companies need to do a better job (with about 75% of the fault lying with Garmin). I just want to be able to use the normal running mode and collect power meter data and show it in Garmin Connect. That’s all. Oh, and then I want apps like Training Peaks and Strava to display that data. No acrobatics required. I just want it to work.
Stryd could bridge much of that gap today by using a Connect IQ data field to record the data (in much the exact same way that Moxy is doing so as of last week). This is different than their dedicated Stryd app, because it allows me to use all the gloriousness that is the regular running mode, versus the more restrictive app modes. Hopefully they’ll consider doing so – as that’d be pretty darn straight forward. Alternatively, Garmin could just do what Suunto has done for about a year now, which is just enable recording of power data in running mode. It’s really rather simple.
In any case, the second issue with my lack of desire to use earlier versions of the product was the heart rate chest strap. However, by moving away from the heart rate strap to the footpod I’m a million times more likely to use it (and thus write a review on it). I’d just leave it on my shoe and remember to charge it once a month. That’s simple, and brilliant. In this era where runners are more and more moving to optical HR sensors, being reliant on a chest strap wasn’t ideal.
With all that said, I’m looking forward to the units starting to ship, as I’m pretty darn likely to actually use it day in and day out, versus just on random occasions. Of course…that still requires it be accurate. And that’s what the in-depth review is for. Dueling chest strap and footpod power meters. Hopefully they match!
Thanks for reading!
This, RunScribe, Garmin’s Running Dynamics?
Can we look forward to a comparison of the available choices?
You mention runscribe above, and you talking about the new runscribe hardware coming soon on the facebook live video. Any sign of that landing yet ?
Shipping is free to the UK in case anyone is wondering and doesn’t want to make up crap to fill in their form to find out. Not that I find it offensive to be required to fill in personal information before knowing the real cost you understand… 🙂
Sorry Stryd, but ghjlkhjkl isn’t actually going to be completing that order so don’t bother emailing email@example.com :op
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
That was actually an error we fixed quite rapidly. Of course, we will honor it for any orders placed from the UK when it said that on the website so Dr. Ghjlikhjkl will receive free shipping.
It’s good to know Jake Gyllenhaal backs kickstarter products and is a runner… And who knew he was a doctor?!
I seriously can’t wait untill all the niggling data problems get sorted out. Consider me first in line. The only reason I could think that Garmin is dragging their feet on enabling power in running mode is that they are readying some sort of running power meter of their own and don’t want to give the competition a leg up.
So… which Pokemon would you put on your running shoes? I would pick Weezing.
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
Sorry to say that won’t be available in the near future. Of course we’ll be starting with pink leopard print.
looks great- I do wonder how accurate the powermeter will be (with your deviation from earlier experience in mind), especially since they virtually have no competition (yet)- and then again, I do wonder how long it will take it until the big guys catch up with running powermeters, which I’d love to have (same as having a cycling powermeter for 100 bucks – maybe someday). I do hope they deliver the pod in pokemon-style- I gotta be chinpokomon-master and defeat the ancient evil!
Maybe I’m missing something but I’m really not understanding how these devices calculate power!
How do they take into account things like surface, wind, gradient any weight carried (rucksack), etc, etc.
Power would obviously be a lot higher for the same pace running into the wind, up a muddy field compared to a running round a track on a calm day.
It likely attempts to account for surface by changes in ground contact time (longer in softer surfaces). It can’t account for wind, and it will only account for gear you are carrying if you change the weight setting on the unit. The call it a power meter, but it’s really an ideal and normalized condition power estimator.
…. And thats why I’d say it’s pretty pointless unless you run in the same conditions all the time (which is likely very rare).
I see it as a fun concept, but nothing more, and certainly not a useful training aid.
That is the point of a power meter. Look at a cycling power meter, as you go up a hill, your speed decreases if power remains constant. This is what a running power meter also does. If you go up or down a hill, pace will change but power should stay constant. This allows you to maintain a constant effort (power) across a course or workout. It is similar to HR but less susceptible to daily variables like illness or hydration.
I’d argue exactly the opposite. A running power meter is potentially useful because it allows you to train effectively, and target a specific effort level, *without* needing to run in the same conditions all of the time. It’s actually training by pace that would require you to run under the same conditions.
Think about it. As an example, let’s say you want to do a threshold workout and you’ve established that your functional threshold pace is 6:20/mile. To do your threshold workout, you’d need to run under the same conditions under which you originally established functional threshold. If you were to hit a hill and tried to keep going at your threshold pace of 6:20 per mile, you’d be expending way more effort and it’d no longer be a threshold workout!
With a power meter, you can established your functional threshold power. Then to do a threshold workout, you maintain that power regardless of pace. Meaning that when you hit a hill, you’d maintain the same power level, which would require you to reduce your pace. Then you can keep yourself from going above threshold, and keep the workout as a threshold workout, as intended.
It’s very much the same principle as training by HR, except without the delayed response you get with HR, and without things like temperature, stress, amount of sleep, etc. muddying the waters, like you get with HR.
If power is a proxy for Caloric consumption, a significantly reduced power (or heart rate or grade adjusted pace) on a downhill does not take into considering neuromuscular contributions to Caloric expenditure while running downhill. The leg sprint stiffness data may work great to allow Stryd’s Watt to equal a Kcal expended….
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
Surface: We can account for changes to form resulting from changes in ground surface condition. From the foot, we also have the ability to measure leg spring stiffness, which is a rather useful window into the implications of form.
Wind: The Stryd and Stryd Pioneer do not account for wind. We have developed a technology that accurately accounts for the effect of wind on running power. We prototyped it. We tested it. Here’s the problem. Wind has a small effect on training intensity most of the time in most places. If you run in heavy wind a lot, you need this. Other runners probably don’t care much. Also, the technology required to handle wind accurately makes the system more cumbersome and expensive. So for the new product, we decided to start with something easier to use and less expensive that will work well for most runners (but annoy runners who run in heavy wind a lot). We may take a product for windy environments to market in the future, though.
Gradient: Both Stryd products to a very solid job accounting for gradient. Quite confident you’ll be happy with this.
Weight: We start with power in watts per unit mass. You enter your mass via a smartphone when you get the device and update it when there is a big change in weight. The device remembers your weight. We multiply the power in watts per unit mass by your mass to get watts. So if you put a heavy sack on your back, Stryd will see what it does to your form and if you update your weight, it will account for the impact of moving that weight from stride to stride on power. But don’t ask me what happens if you wear one lead shoe.
Summary: We capture most of the significant effects most runners will commonly encounter, and we’re chipping away at the others.
Do you see much variation on some of the metrics (stiffness/efficiency) depending on a runner’s height? I’m 6’6″ and I really like evaluating various metrics in relation to my running. Like Ray stated, it’s how I can take that and improve on it is that big question. When using a product like the Wahoo Tickr X, I have a very difficult time getting my “smoothness” and vert. osc. to improve. I am not so foolish to think that my form is perfect, but I wonder if my height doesn’t play a role. I see where you commented about weight, but does your company’s product would take a runner’s height into account, or does that seem to influence the numbers much? Thanks
First – Robert, thanks very much for jumping in on the dialogue and for your informative responses. I’m looking forward to learning more.
Second – I do trail ultras on steep, hilly wooded courses, but I live and train in North Dakota and wind is routinely a very noticeable factor. I even note in my log book when wind is clearly affecting pace and effort (I record wind direction and speed and can see the affect on my GPS track). I am a data geek and would love to actually quantify effect on form and power, if it was possible and fit my budget, anyway. I’ll probably (finally) pick up one of your new units but will be looking forward to seeing what you can do to incorporate wind 🙂
hmmm. not sure I believe this @robertDick about wind. I suspect it’s hard to measure on a heart rate strap!
eg If you look at the Cardif 2016 HM with pro athletes eg Farah. this was a windy race. Wind affected the splits. that’s some further evidential data for you to seek out and browse through.
anecdotally, a more moderate wind can easily make me 10-15 secs/km slower.
I said we had developed, prototyped, and tested a technology that can accurately determine the impact of wind on running power.
I didn’t say it was a conventional heart rate strap.
Stansmonster you state, “…changes in ground contact time…” That’s the thing though, a foot pod on the top of your shoe isn’t in contact with any ground surface…
Doesn’t much matter where you measure it. GCT is pretty well understood – and lots of companies have been measuring it. Garmin within their HR straps, Wahoo (offhand) I think as well in their TICKR-R HR straps. RunScribe, and countless other running metric companies (startups) are doing the same thing.
There are certainly aspects one can debate about Stryd metrics, but I probably wouldn’t spend time focusing on GCT .
Even a slight following or headwind affects my pace a lot. It doesn’t have to be a strong wind, so I think this data would be useful for all runners.
If I’m running at 7mph and there is a 7mph wind following directly behind me, I will not actually be aware of any wind at all..but it means there is no air resistance, because the surrounding air is moving with me. So it feels much easier to run and to run faster. If there were no wind blowing at all, I would feel 7mph air resistance when running along at that speed…just like standing still and facing a 7mph wind. Then, running into a 7mph wind at 7mph would be doubly slowing. It would feel like a 14mph wind coming at me. So even with a fairly weak wind of 7mph, running with it or against it would be a perceived difference of 14mph air resistance. In a 20mph wind it would be a 40mph difference…practically blow me over!
Sorry…running into a 20mph wind at 7mphwould be perceived as 27mph…not 40mph. My error.
I think it’s more beneficial to tune into your body and run to perceived effort than a power meter. People will naturally run up a hill a lot slower than they run down(except in hill training efforts). When you’re in a steady state, you will soon feel uncomfortable and out of breath if you try to run up a hill too fast. People will naturally adjust stride length shorter up a hill and longer downhill. On Strava they give grade adjusted pace which is sort of proportional to power output, but you cannot see it live of course. Maybe some people don’t tune into perceived effort, because I frequently get overtaken up a hill but stride past the same person on the downhill…yet my Strava grade adjusted pace is very constant, suggesting equal effort up and down the hill.
I don’t think caloric consumption/sec should be confused with power. Power should be the force/sec developed by the leg muscles in driving you forwards on your run. Calories will be used for lots of things during your run, like temperature control and sweating, breathing, pumping blood, digesting gels, kidney function, brain function etc. etc. In a similar way, power in a car is ultimately the energy/sec driving the wheels round against the road, not to do with charging the battery, cooling the engine, running the air conditioning unit, operating the electrics. Neither is HR is a good measure of power as far as I can see. The heart can be pumping fast and shallow, or fast and deep. The blood vessels may be constricted or dilated, affecting blood flow, depending on the temperature and the release of adrenaline and other hormones. A faster HR may merely indicate an attempt to overcome inadequate blood flow, not to increase power or speed.
Vertical Oscillation is not very meaningful unless divided by stride length, as it is on the Garmin 630, but not on my Garmin 620. This is because, the longer you stride, the more you need to rise in the air on each stride…like a ballistic missile. Elite runners need to have a long stride length (e.g., Mo Farah nearly 2 meters) as well as a fast cadence, so need to fly through the air and get more vertical oscillation than shorter striders. However, when divided by stride length the VO figure will be not necessarily be any higher than the short strider. So at 6’6″ you have long legs and probably a naturally longer stride length than most people. You will also be a lot heavier than a shorter runner. Therefore it would be inefficient to raise yourself too much in the air with each stride. Your best bet might be to work on gradually increasing cadence without losing your natural stride length.
Is there a chance you could explain your thoughts on “running/training with power” vs conventional pace/time?
Cycling, I completely understand — It’s hard to measure effort level as there is a significant effect on your power usage whether you’re biking into the wind, uphill, downhill, are drafting, etc. Even on the trainer, it’s hard to be consistent.
Running though is less effected by environmentals and it’s easier to correct and adjust times (like doing 800m repeats in 2:45 on a windy day instead of 2:40 on a calm day), and treadmill running is mostly consistent to running outdoors, effort wise.
I guess what I’m asking is: running is a very time-based sport. Whether that’s a PR, qualifying for Boston or qualifying for the Olympic Trials. I know going into that race what pace I need to run to hit that time and how fast I need to train to be able to maintain that pace on race day. I just don’t see how a power meter fits in to all of this — with the exception being trail racing or mountain running (like the Pikes Peak marathon).
Based on your experience, how do you see a power meter fitting in to your average competitive road runner’s training to make them faster?
You understand how a cycling power meter works so you understand how a running power meter works. You could use pace but rarely do we run on a flat course with no wind or external conditions. The best part of power isn’t the watts but using NP, IF, etc. These are available on the fly to assist with pacing. Obviously power wouldn’t be great in short races like a 5/10k but for longer races or training, it can be immensely informative.
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
Cycling/running power meters are analogous for training intensity control and race-day pacing. But there is a difference. It is possible (but pretty rare) to use a cycling power meter to optimize form. However, this can be a substantial benefit of a running power meter. A lot can go wrong with form during running, and long runs really beat on you relative to long rides. The Stryd power meter makes it clear when your form is deteriorating or improving. That can be useful to understand why something is happening in a race, and can also be useful to determine which conscious form changes and conditioning approaches are improving economy (efficiency) and which aren’t working. That is a major focus of the new Stryd.
I’ll use the Boston Marathon as an example as it’s popular and there’s a ton of info on the course elevation changes out there.
My goal in 2014 was to break 2:30, which is about 5:42/mile. I don’t have a number since I’ve never used a power meter running, but say 5:42 miles for me is around 250w. Running downhill uses less power, running uphill uses more power.
The first ~4 miles or so, you drop 300 feet. I might only use 215w running downhill at a 5:42 pace. If I kept the 250w, I might be running 5:25 pace, which then puts me out in a position with people I’m not capable of actually running with. In addition, going out that fast on a downhill increases the damage to my quads from the impact, which will come to haunt me come miles 21+ for the final decent into Boston.
Then look at Newton hills between 17ish and 21 — 250w could be 6:40 pace up the hills, far off of what I want to run and since I know the hills are only 50 or 100m or so, I know I can handle the extra watts (or strength etc) without crashing after if I stay close to maintaining my goal pace.
That’s why I don’t understand in what sense they’re useful in racing. Your power input (stride, cadence, leg lift etc) all change on hills. And outside of trail running or outlier road courses, hills aren’t going to play a significant part in the overall race if you’ve properly trained.
Hi Robert — Thanks for the input. I can totally see how that could help you narrow down deficiencies in your form.
Do you guys plan on doing any demos of the product at local running stores? This actually came up in a discussion with the group I meet up with at Wash Park in Denver a few weeks back.
I think the biggest issue is the lack of actual information on the product, data and how to actually use the data its giving. I’ve love to get a hold of one for a few weeks to see what kind of data its putting out in everyday runs vs workouts vs long runs and how it changes over the course of a workout. See how long it takes to get a baseline wattage and if that baseline changes over the course of time and how to actually use that number.
Ideally, we need a few “Ray” level reviews out there from long-time competitive runners who can get into the nitty gritty of it.
When I got my first Garmin in college, it changed the way I trained. I could accurately tell how fast I was running and provided useful information that allowed me to reach my potential. I’d love to see Stryd become the next step in helping runners reach their potential. Currently, I just don’t see the reviews and knowledge on how to use a power number out there to benefit from it.
We do plan demos in the future, and will be getting more information out in the coming weeks that make the nuts and bolts of using it more concrete. We’re just swamped at the moment getting everything in place to start shipping.
On the bike, more power means more speed. So maximizing power is a primary training goal.
Not that simple with running.
The most extreme example would be running in place. Your power output may be very high. You need it to put your body weight against gravity over and over again. but your speed is zero!
Are they developing an app for the Apple Watch? Stop waiting for Garmin and cut them out of the loop.
But that doesn’t really solve the problem though. They already have their own phone app. Their challenge is getting that data into areas that their target market athletes would use: Garmin Connect, Training Peaks, and Strava.
At present, I’d guess the target market overlap between those using a running power meter and those using the Apple Watch in workouts is approximately 1%.
Does it also transmit standard cadence/speed/distance — that is, can it also function as a regular foot pod?
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
The Pioneer does cadence but doesn’t do speed and distance at all. It leaves that to the sports watch or smartphone.
The new Stryd transmits cadence, speed, and distance. And the speed and distance numbers are shockingly accurate in our tests. This isn’t a major marketing focus because there are other solutions that are pretty good at speed and distance, but if you get annoyed by the tendency of GPS units to always know where you are, plus or minus a meter or so, but never know exactly where you are, and then estimate a faster pace because it thinks you are taking a circuitous route, you’ll be pleased with the new Stryd. Also, better than other footpods in our tests and no calibration.
So to be clear: You can pair it as an ordinary food pod and use the standard running app in a Garmin watch?
I don’t care about the power stuff, but if I can replace my Garmin food pod with something that doesn’t need calibration and is as good as a GPS on a good day (~1,5%) measuring distance I would buy this just for this.
Apparently my gait varies a lot with speed so I have to remember to put in different calibration factors if I run short intervals vs running distance runs for example. And those factors differs quite a bit.
I’m interested in how accurate the new Stryd unit is for running on a track. On a 400 meter track, GPS is next to useless (phone / Polar V800 etc) and my Polar footpod requires calibration and even then is inaccurate if the pace varies between sessions.
I’m also delighted that Stryd moved away from the chest strap and as an original backer – am inclined to get the new unit if it proves accuracy for pace / distance on a track.
I would like someone to convince me for these two things:
1. Running power is better than pace for running at flat and generally smooth surfaces. For trail running where you basically walk on the uphill and try to stay upright on the downhill both are irrelevant.
2. You can use it the same way as cycling power meter and have the same benefits.
Answering the second question will also answer the first. It works like a cycling power meter but with one exception. Cycling power does show rotational forces but a running power meter shows 3D forces. You have horizontal forces moving you forward. Vertical forces are the osculation. Finally, lateral forces are side to side forces. You want to minimize vertical and lateral while maximizing horizontal, as it is the one which moves you forward.
“You want to minimize vertical and lateral while maximizing horizontal, as it is the one which moves you forward.”
The first part of this sentence is wrong.
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
Training intensity is related to pace, incline, and form. Running on a flat surface and measuring pace fixes two of these contributors. So on a track, the primary benefit over pace is to account for the impact of form on training intensity, and allow the optimization of form through conditioning and conscious chances.
Power is relevant during trail running. It’s great for pacing or maintaining consistent training intensity on hilly runs. That was the first big benefit I had from running with it.
Runners have been reporting performance benefits from using it like a cycling power meter. Akio Yamauchi, Rachel Zambrano, and a few others have talked about those use cases on Facebook.
Adam, I was sceptical as well but backed the original kickstaretre campaign. I credit Stryde with improving my pace by 30 secs per K, thats massive. be it psychology etc I found with power, you keep a number in your head and the pace follows. I try keep to an average of 280 watts, approx 270 on flats and over 300 on a hill, walk, pace drops. Sounds crazy but it works.
How is it wrong? I used the word minimize, not eliminate. Obviously, there will be some vertical movement but you want vertical oscillation to be minimal. I suggest you read about running mechanics and force measurements performed in a lab.
Because I am a biomechanics PhD and am very familiar with that equipment and the research.
Studies have found correlations between reduced vertical oscillation and improved efficiency. Same for increasing cadence. These are correlations, not necessarily causal.
Limited studies tried to train people based on these factors, and they failed. But the reasons aren’t surprising if you really understand biomechanics. People are different, just because some Kenyans run with lower vertical oscillation doesn’t mean you have the anatomy or training to do so.
That doesn’t mean nothing can be done, but sadly more subject-specific modeling / analysis is needed.
I just have one question Ray -Have you seen actually improvements to your running that’s measurable? ie 1/2, full marathons, etc.? Could your wife be a good test subject as well.
While i’m a big proponent of training with a power meter on a bike I’m not convinced this is a device yet that’s matured enough to use for running.
Agreed that it would be far better to have a datafield available within any app, than to have to always use the Stryd app.
Then you could set up your own data screens and options in different running apps (run, race, running intervals etc.) and be able to use Stryd during a structured workout.
Power meters make sense for bike training. This is an interesting concept, but how does it account for things such as running up a mountain, jumping up and over rough terrain, rocks, logs, etc.?
As a mountain/trail runner, I’m unfortunately not convinced there is any benefit from a device like this. Track workouts and VAM are much better predictors of fitness and effort.
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
It’s essentially a portable 3-D motion capture system. It knows when you’re jumping. It also has a sensor to measure incline. People are using it to good effect in trail running. It’s tuned for running, though. We haven’t tested it past the line dividing running and gymnastics.
Track workouts have the benefit of taking incline out of the picture. But form remains. The power meter can help determine the implications of form and conditioning changes on running economy (efficiency). It can also be useful to enable comparison of performance between runs on different terrain.
I just can’t wrap my head around how a power meter would work for running, much less so as a pod and not something built into the sole of a shoe. Is more wattage better, or does that mean you’re stomping? What about all the other factors that make up someone’s run form, from hip extension to knee angle, and pelvis and core stability and thoracic rotation. Maybe I’m just looking in the wrong places, but an old fashioned slow motion run form analysis that’s broken down by a movement specialist like a DPT seems a far better investment and would yield better insights into where you need improvement.
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
Training to condition your body so that it is capable of producing more wattage for longer time periods is good. Conditioning your muscles and tendons and consciously adjusting your form so that you require less wattage to maintain a particular pace is also good. The benefit of power is that it shows the implications of form changes so you know if you are going in the right direction.
You can make form changes increasing efficiency from a physics standpoint but actually become less efficient in application. Not to mention you can run a much higher risk of injury.
If you want to be more efficient then rum more. Your body will automatically find a more efficient mivement pattern.
Not necessarily, no. I can swim more, and swim “harder” – but if my form is less than perfect (and it definitely is) then that extra work is wasted work, unless the form is changed. If I make a change to one aspect of my stroke and then see a corresponding change over time when applying that change, I’m going to work harder but more importantly, i’ll work hard more efficiently.
Yes but swimming and cycling are not running. Your body didn’t evolve doing them. Youre cerebellum isn’t adapted to automatically assess output vs effort in those sports. There’s some evidence it is in running and that conscious efforts to improve biomechanical efficiency actually decrease it. Personally I’ve seen when using the Garmin dynamics they have improved as I got faster but I haven’t really been able to consciously alter them.
Power I get, but I’m still waiting for any evidence that the running dynamics are useful for training prospectively not just retrospectively.
While I expect the power estimations to be useless, using it as a much more exact replacement for my current Garmin foot pod would be interesting.
Will it work?
If you treat it like a normal foot pod, it provides cadence and pace. The pace number does not require calibration and in our testing, it has been more accurate than GPS and every other foot pod we have compared it with. Our signal processing engineer is particularly happy about this, because it is a conventional metric so he can compare it directly to market leaders and ground truth and see where we fit in (at the top of the heap according to him).
Also, there are quite a few runners out there who think using power during training and race-day pacing is resulting in better performance. We have some terse quotes at link to stryd.com and you can find most of the original material on Facebook. I first learned about those experiences by seeing their posts: it wasn’t some kind of planned effort to put words in their mouths. Most of the quotes came from folks who supported us on Kickstarter, suffered through all the problems with the earlier firmware versions, but ultimately fit power into their training and believe it made them faster. Curious?
I agree. I am very frustrated with the accuracy of the Garmin footpod on treadmill runs. I would buy it just for a more accurate pod that will consistently record the correct speed/distance. I am not really interested in the power metric, but I could see it being useful for an application like Zwift.
I need your opinion. Considering running is my primary activity, would you rather buy Garmin 235/Fenix3HR or combine Scosche Rhytm+ with a watch that doesn’t have optical heart rate monitor.
Have you seen any improvements in Garmin’s optical heart rate monitor accuracy over the past few months due to firmware updates?
Weird. I actually liked the heart rate strap. I was hoping they would add an barometric altimeter to it as well. Personally Im getting sort of tired of the limitations placed by Garmin on their devices. If a third party device can do it better Im all for it. I buy the cheaper watch and the third party device. win/win. More specific to running as well. i hope stryd does not change their product because one person will not review their product.
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
Both the Stryd Pioneer and new Stryd devices report altitude in the Stryd PowerCenter.
Cool. Well considering the new 735xt does not have a barometric…Will I be able to use my current stryd heart rate strap to get the more accurate barometric altitude instead of the GPS?
Yes. Try starting the smartphone app after a run, activating the Stryd (put it on or touch the terminals so it blinks) and hitting the “sync” circular arrow button. It will send the data it has on everything, even metrics the Garmin doesn’t know about, to the PowerCenter. You can then review the data there to see all the different types of information available. It will also communicate everything the watch can understand during the run for real-time feedback.
but can stryd’s elevation data from barometer overwrite the garmin’s less accurate elevation data from GPS only? (in FIT file, live, on the go)
maybe stryd’s more accurate speed/distance also beats Garmin’s less accurate GPS source?
Maybe STRYD’s location is also better than a wasit band for the RD POD or the chest for the HRM-TRI ( a location which STRYD moved from over their previous version partly for accuracy reasons)
The problem with stryd is that it isn’t tied to any outcomes in a meaningful way.
The consensus seems to be that since power meters affected cycling then they will affect running in the same way.
Why is power data lacking?
Has anyone ever said if only I knew my power data I could have pb’ed that run?
This is a toy right now until some legitimate studies come out showing it can improve outcomes, and I stress the studies part of that. One study by the brand sponsoring it doesn’t cut it.
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
The studies are coming. Hans van Dijk will have an article in the September issue of Losse Veter, a leading Dutch magazine on running, that compares VO2 and Stryd power. Stephen McGregor at Eastern Michigan University is in the midst of a study now, as well, and the plan is to send that to a peer-reviewed venue. We did a small-scale internal study comparing Stryd and VO2 across different paces measured using a Parvo machine and had a R^2 value of 0.98. There are several other third-party researchers working with it now. We’ll link to the resulting studies from our website as they are released.
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
“Has anyone ever said if only I knew my power data I could have pb’ed that run?”
Akio Yamauchi, Rachel Zambrano, Chris Turner, Gui Campos, and others have posted essentially that on Facebook. This was incoming. I found out about the results from unsolicited Facebook posts and emails, but asked if we could use their quotes on our website.
Ray, I do hope you’re having a laugh with “in leopard print or Pokémon patterns only”; plain black would do just fine (and without that odd looking jewel thing). If Stryde could do the CIQ datafield that records to the fit file you suggest and Garmin pull their finger out to enable power in running in Garmin Connect, then Stryde will likely be getting some of my cash. I’ve been using a CIQ running power estimating datafield, that seems to do a good job of indicating relative effort; so I’m ready for the more reliable data whilst running and the ability to analyse after. The only reason I can see for Garmin not to add power to runs just yet, is that they have their own power estimating system in the pipeline somewhere (would need barometers adding to their running watches though, to get the precise and responsive elevation change data required); any thoughts?
I’ve considered buying the stryd before but have decided not to for now due to the lack of Garmin support. The IQ App with ability to write the fit file is a good start but a solution i don’t really like, would prefer an IQ Connect field showing power. But what they need to do is enable the power meter profile for running as soon as possible. My understanding is that Stryd and Garmin have been talking about this for a while, but…. why is it taking so long? I know Garmin takes longer to release firmware updates on older devices but even newer watches like the 735XT received an update to enable the SMO2 profile but still no word on the power meter for running. Maybe they don’t want to enable that before they enter the running power meter market?
Ray, maybe you can share your ideas on if Garmin plans to support power meters during running in the short term or maybe make us wait a bit…
It really seems like a cool idea. However I share the skepticism of most of the commenters. And quite frankly I feel as if the the metrics I get from Garmin’s running dynamics might be just as useful. Which might be the reason Garmin is hesitant to support this and other accessories like it. Not saying they shouldn’t be more open but these accessories have not truly caught on and Garmin may feel it can all ready deliver similar data in some way or another. I mean seriously looking at the running dynamics meter during an activity I see when I’m most efficient. Why not just use that as a target for intervals or form improvement.
At people in a one piece tri uniform have the potential of using it now. With the chest strap version – that can’t be submerged – I couldn’t ever use it to race.
I recently used mine in an Ironman with a one-piece suit. Just wear the strap on the swim and attach the pod in T1.
Can you provide a chart comparing Stryd’s power to GAP?
I’m using live GAP with my Garmin now. When a friend who has Stryd has compared GAP to his Stryd power, they correlate about perfectly.
The major flaw in GAP (and apparently Stryd’s previous power estimate) is that Calories expended while running downhill are seriously underestimated, just as they are when using heart rate, if Perceived Effort and Time to Exhaustion do correlate well to Calories expended.
The reason the downhill estimate’s suck is because they are basing on the same models of grade adjustment which were developed in the laboratory on a treadmill, which is not like running outdoors, especially on steep negative gradients and super especially on lower friction surfaces.
I think power for running could be used similar as we use heartrate today .
Sometimes it is hard to compare two runs on the same route and know if you have progress. e.g. comparing a run from last winter with a run in summer just based on heartrate and pace might be difficult. If you have the power data as a second way of estimating you effort, it might be easier to see progress
(or the lack thereof 🙂
Similar during runs: After a while you will know how much power you usually produce for a given effort.
If you run on new terrain or in the mountains, you could adapt your pace accordingly
This all depends on what factors influcence the powermeter. And we don’t know this yet.
But we have ray to gather some data. I am looking forward to looking at that.
It must be a real challange for Stryd to estimate power (center of gravity) from the foot pod in the same way as they did for gen I. But if they are able to calculate distance that accuratly they must be able to determine how the foot moves during each step and then it should be possible to estimate the corresponding movement of the center of gravity. I guess that we will see plenty of different applications in sport for this technology in the future. However, as a recreational runner with a gen I I’m still trying to figure out how useful it actually is for me. As I understand it, the Stryd people describe that Stryd could be useful for pacing, to improve technique and to estimate degree of fattige. At the moment I see pacing as most interesting. I’m looking forward to see what ray will write on this subject in the future.
I must however say that it is not easy to use Stryd even for us suunto owners. The reason for this is that Suunto only allows one HR-monitor to be paird at once. Using a suunto HR monitor for OW swimming and a Stryd for running means that you have to re-pair everytime you change activity. Luckely for us in northern europe, this will soon not be a problem.
Any validation that these metrics are accurate?
From the power side of things, they’re validating them on force plate treadmills at the local university (I believe it’s the University of Boulder). However, that really only handles a clean indoor environment.
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
Some studies will be appearing in the coming months, e.g., Hans et Atty’s will have an article comparing Stryd power with VO2 soon. We’ll be linking to such third-party research.
Thanks, more specifically I’m interested if you can provide validation for your claims of leg stiffness, running efficiency, and vertical oscillation, since we both know you aren’t measuring those directly with your sensors on the foot. Leg stiffness and vertical oscillation are more likely to be decently accurate when placing sensors on waist / torso, so I’m curious if you guys could really do this decently.
VO2 matching I think you guys would do well, as you could just estimating horizontal & vertical speed and pop that into a simple gradient based equation of work output, just as a GPS watch could do, but you guys probably do better with a higher resolution speed estimate.
I made an error in the previous email. The author is Hans van Dijk.
What ever happened to RPM2 and their insole power meter?
The RPM2 power meter is about the only one that actually measures force directly with piezoelectric sensors, like bike power meters actually measure force with a strain gauge. The Stryd only uses accelerometers to guess at power–not actually force generated with footstrike. So far, the RPM2 is highly accurate when compared to huge, expensive lab-testing treadmills with force sensors, the kind used by universities and Nike and Olympic champions like Michael Johnson (who is a partner in the RPM2 project and is already using it with his world-class clients near Dallas).
About the only limitation to the RUN power meter is that the current version is Bluetooth only, and you must either carry a phone or download a remote session to your phone/tablet after the run (the insoles can record a run without any device once started, like the Garmin swim HRM). But the prototype for their new ANT+ compatible version (will work with Garmin and similar wrist units) is nearly done and will be available soon. There is also a project for a bike power meter via the insole, but the force sensors are not quite ready yet to mimic strain gauge from the crank. Think of the Garmin Vector Pro pedals, but from the shoe insole, not the pedal. As with the Garmin Vector’s first version, this is hard to do for all riders, measure accurate power from different sized feet and pedal angles.
But the run RPM2 insole is highly accurate: on par with Garmin’s accelerometer data of things like ground contact time, vertical oscillation, stride length, etc. And it adds force measurement (directly, not guestimated like Stryd) which no one else is doing yet. The problem right now is, even the best running expert, physiologists and physicists don’t know really what “running power watts” means like they do for cycling with angular momentum. Power does directly affect running speed, and the best runners generate more power mucj like the best cyclists do, but its also dependent on other mechanical issues determined by the accelerometer–that is, the skill of the runner. Two runners with the same power can have different speeds, and the same runner will have fast and slow days with similar power–more variability of non-power issues than cycling. Think of everything rolling resistance, bike fit and aerodynamics have to do with actual speed, and with running it’s the other factors are all determined by the runner his/herself with their stride technique. This is to be expected, because running is more eccentric and more of a skill than pedaling in a rigid circle. But the RPM2 measures the skill stuff well, too, and having both in the same device and the same graph after every workout (it’s right there in the phone, the graphs and the data) is really helpful.
When they get the Garmin compatible version, probably this year, they will dominate the market.
Hmm…sounds an awful lot like a marketing pitch from a marketing company for RPM2…with an e-mail address that seemingly says marketing…
Also – can you share the highly accurate studies of RPM2 in both cycling and running, specifically against other power meters cycling and in running against a force-plate treadmill?
I use that email for all public forums, credit cards, online purchases, etc., knowing that I will RECEIVE, not send, marketing material at that address. As you can see, the domain name is completely different. I’ll bet you have more than email account yourself.
As for the treadmill comparison, it was recent and as yet unpublished. They’ll probably send you a pair to test yourself eventually, after ANT+ is done, and then you can see for yourself. Anyone can buy a pair and go run with them if they are willing to deal with the bluetooth-only hassles. And if I was a marketing company, why would I downplay the cycling accuracy? Wouldn’t I push that, too, if I were prejudiced.
I’m just a tri-geek and technogeek with Fortune 100 tech company and NASA engineering experience. Someone asked a question on your respected website, and I answered it to the best of my technical ability, my own opinions and deductions, no one else’s. Just like you when you test stuff from big companies, right?
One more thing: I said nothing negative about the Stryd product or to contradict your review. I think it’s a good product, for what it does, and it is more mature in the market, into successive re-engineering versions. But you know, Mr. Rainmaker, that a foot pod cannot measure power directly, or really measure force at all, and power (watts) is the scalar product of two vectors, Force dot Velocity. It is like the pre-strain-gauge power meters of 15-20 years ago when they attempted to estimate power via things like gear inches, cadence to guess at power.
Nor did I ever say anything about “highly accurate studies” of the RPM2 for cycling, only running, and I think I only said lab-grade treadmill tests, not published studies. But I do hang with scientists and engineers at universities, and I get invited to things like treadmill and wind tunnel tests, and sometimes I’m asked not to publish them. Nike is famous for this–they don’t even allow pictures of their run testing equipment at facilities (and no, this test was not done by Nike, but I’ve seen such).
Just want to be clear on what I did and didn’t say. I thought the most interesting part is that no one is quite sure what “watts of running power” even means yet, not Jim Vance, not anyone yet. It’s not as simple as Functional Threshold Power on the bike, not at all, and this from the world’s fastest runners who are using power meters in real-world tests right now. It is a big step forward, but people are still feeling around in the dark, because there is so little data. In five years, we’ll know what we are talking about with REAL runners in road races and triathlons, and then people will start breaking records with them, just as they do with bike power meters.
I do love and respect your opinions, especially the technical ones, Mr. Rainmaker
Finally someone says something that makes sense – I am not a scientist but I did study engineering in college many many years ago, but the thing I remember is that Power is a function of force and distance, and hence for the life of me how can Stryd figure out power other than by mathematical deduction. From my simplistic perspective , my running speed is directly influenced by cadence, and power (which effects the stride length), and to some degree hip extension (assuming all external variable such as terrain and weather are constant). If I increase my power my stride length will increase as I will have a long flight phase ( where both legs are in the air). So for a given course, if I increase my power output from 200 W to 300 W at a constant cadence of 180 spm, I should be running much faster. Somehow the statement that the lower the Power the more efficient I run does not make sense to me because if I don’t apply any force for push off ( power), I am limited by the cadence and the length of the my leg.
Nail on the head Ray – well done. As an original backer of Stryd I have lost patience trying to get it to work with TP, Strava and Garmin Connect. This is a particular issue if you also record cycling and swims with your Garmin as the Stryd Power Center does a lousy job of trying to sync them across other platforms – plus the running in cycle mode just drove me nuts. Too many work arounds.
And as for Power Centre – do not even bother using that on Internet Explorer.
Disappointed with the basic things and blame Garmin too in this mess.
Dear Roman Furberg, I need only say that a basic engineer also should have learned about F = m x a. I bet STRYD does a pretty goed job using their technology and knowing your mass. But hey, I could be wrong. Their technology is at least proven for measuring pace and distance damn accurately. I bet power will be similarly close. I can also imagine that an insole just measuring pressure will have some issues measuring speed and pace, but maybe you or JR could enlighten us on this subject.
Now let me be fair, Power can be fun; but for me the STRYD is mainly for pacing and distance purposes. It showed some additional advantages with the software on the platform
I’m so sad….I just ordered the old gen stryd yestetday T.T
I share your pain as I did the exact same thing. I’ve written back on the order email to see if it was possible to exchange, as mine hasn’t been processed yet, I’ll keep you posted.
Thanks Ben. I’m doing the same and hopefully they will give us a positive reply =)
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
Email us (firstname.lastname@example.org) if you have a special circumstance. We’re a small enough team to make the right thing happen instead of being slaves to policy.
I sent an email to email@example.com this morning (in Australia), I’m hoping that it would be possible to get the new version instead of the old one as I have received no shipment information yet. I ordered the stryd on the 08/22/2016.
Thanks a lot.
A lot of activity the past day, so we are running a little slower than normal, but I expect this will be resolved to your satisfaction within a day.
I got 75% off for the new Stryd. I would have preferred a swap, but that’s still a very good gesture from your company. Thanks for that.
I got the same!!!
Thanks Stryd and Robert! Happy with Stryd and for sure I’ll promote your company among my runner friends.
Why so sad? The Stryd Pioneer is still an awesome unit and does a great job at providing you with power – and also gives you HR and R-R.
As regards the software usability piece, I agree. We tested the initial device but found the data presentation part lacking. So, we’re in the process of building our own software for making the most out of run power. I can’t say when it will be ready, though.
You kind of wonder if Stryd have tried to “do a deal” with Garmin in the same way Strava have now done so. Garmin now have native (not even CIQ ones) running data fields for 3rd party muscle oxygen devices too so not as if the precedent is missing.
That said I remain somewhat sceptical about the real point of this power thing given I do not see how wind and surface can truly be taken into account as many others have noted. Running is so much more controllable than cycling anyway and if you want to do say a 20 min threshold run you usually don’t go and seek some stupidly hilly course with bumpy/soft terrain to do it on because you think it will have the same effect as a relatively flat and firm one.
And there is the use cases from elite athletes (or lack of). Just who is actually anywhere near world class is using this and has “improved” as a result? It is kind of nice to be able to told you are somewhere between pro and age grouper but then again so does your race times.
So looking forward to the review but if it is true that they have managed to have invented a “better” foot pod then that could be a reason to use it anyway. TBH though in the same way some don’t like wearing HR straps, I really don’t like wearing foot pods.
One of the main advantages of cycling powermeters is the rather constant relationship between mechanical work and caloric consumption, e.g. gross efficiency does not vary a lot. That’s why you can easily gauge your food intake with your powermeter. Perfect for weight managment.
According to A. Coggan on the Wattage forum this is not as straight forward for running. (Gross???) Efficiency varies much more (according to him).
Does this new metric “efficiency” solve this problem? I would consider buying a device if I could use it for weight managment.
Since most questions get a quick response from Stryd here I assume the anwser is “no”. It is not possible to derive energy cost from the metrics reported by the device? Or at least not a very accurate one.
I was kind of hoping that Andy would wade in, but here goes.
When we varied pace and compared Stryd power and metabolic energy expenditure measured using a Parvo VO_2 metabolic cart, the average R^2 value was 0.98. For calorie counting, you’ll have a (mostly) constant multiplicative offset sitting between chemical energy and mechanical energy related to your efficiency (and I mean real efficiency, the way physiologists use the term, not the way runners and most coaches use it). You can make a guess of around 20-something percent, but if you want it tuned to your body’s genetically influenced energy production systems, you’ll need to calibrate it with VO_2 or something else that can measure the chemical energy use more directly.
So, bottom line, we think Stryd will allow a more accurate estimate of calorie consumption than anything else you can practically wear outside the lab but if you need very high accuracy, you need to do a VO_2 test to figure out how efficiently your body converts chemical energy to mechanical energy. Also, we had a limited number of test subjects (9 runners). There are some very sharp physiologists doing studies with Stryd now, and a paper comparing Stryd power with VO_2 will be published in September, with other papers likely to appear later. Most if not all of these will come from outside of Stryd because we are prioritizing product development over whitepapers and you’ll believe third parties more than us, anyway.
You are spot on at the end bit, very cumbersome to use with Garmin but their new IQ app seems to work well and has hopefully solved these issues.
I have to say I would be very interested in using the Stryd as a footpod if it’s true that it doesn’t require calibration for accurate pace / distance. I’ve come to hate GPS with passion since the lack of GPS pace accuracy can ruin your data showing crazy 400m records during a workout that just aren’t true only because the GPS decided to take a swim to a nearby lake. This will remain in your historical workout data unless you manually edit the route later.
Does it work as a traditional foot pod with any app/device that already supports bluetooth footpods, or only with the Stryd app / compatible watches? Does the stryd app allow you to override GPS data in pace / distance? Is there a possibility to correct it later if you know the real distance? A lot of questions, hopefully at least some can be answered. The Stryd website offers quite limited information on this.
Also, how about creating an Android Wear app? (Adding this comment here since there apparently are Stryd people following this discussion.). That way you could have a manufacturer independent platform for displaying real time workout data. You can also connect bluetooth HRMs under Android Wear (check the Ghost Racer app for instance).
If you treat it like a normal foot pod, it provides cadence and pace. The pace number does not require calibration and in our testing, it has been more accurate than GPS and every other foot pod we have compared it with. Our signal processing engineer is particularly happy about this, because it is a conventional metric so he can compare it directly to market leaders and ground truth and see where we fit in (at the top of the heap according to him). It isn’t a big part of our marketing message because there are other pretty good solutions for pace that cost less, but if you are a pace connoisseur I think you’ll like the new Stryd.
When you say “if you treat it like a normal footpod” does that mean you have to chose whether to connect it either as a footpod OR a power meter? Would it not be possible to connect it as both? A bit like the Garmin Vector does both power and cadence on the bike?
I’d really like it to be able to do speed/pace/cadence/power if it can. Will avoid the crazy GPS speed spikes/lulls (especially when running under trees etc) and also give the option of turning off GPS when battery life might be an issue.
If the pace is that accurate, then shouldn’t distance be as well? If you have pace, you have also distance, because in the end pace is just time vs distance.
The thing I’m most interested is post run analysis of true speed graph against altitude, cadence etc. I just can’t get that with GPS. Even if the total distance sums up right, the pace will be incorrect in many places. First slowing down, then catching up (like dog on a leash).
So if it’s as good as you claim, why not just get a route map from GPS (only thing that it’s actually good for) and use Stryd for everything else?? I mean, if you have finally created a device that can capture IMO the most important metric for running (in the end speed is all that matters) and without calibration, why not use it fully, or have I understood something wrong? 🙂
I think distance has been mentioned somewhere but I could be wrong. But I’m sure in foot pod mode it does distance as well.
I’m just wondering if it can be connected as both a foot pod AND a power meter concurrently. That would be perfect for me as then I could switchange off my GPS on longer events. I do like the idea of getting more accurate treadmill distances as well for those workouts. I’m to anal to just accept the differences lol
Wow, interesting! I’m a gadget and stats freak, so I guess I’m part of the target group. But $200 for a footpod? That’s steep. The added benefit of these new stats may easily convince a pro, but for the average Joe, they sound like ‘interesting, let’s see if they’re useful at all’. It might turn out to be something like vertical oscillation, which to me means: ‘Meh, look at it once, forget about it’. It would have to be a lot more useful than that to justify that investment, and I would have to be able to see how I can easily influence what is measured, so I can learn from it. E.g. do an interval run trying out various cadences, on flat ground, uphill and downhill, and get an indication of which cadence is the best. Or trying out different types of foot landing, larger stride length, angle of body, or more lift of knees.. In short: what will stryde show me that my heart rate won’t?
The thing that I’m most excited about with this product is wireless charging! Why on earth hasn’t this made it’s way into more gadgets?!
Does anyone remember about 5 years ago when it started to make its way into smartphones and other mainstream gadgets and all the tech media were forecasting the end of the USB charging cable and saying we would just be able to chuck all of our gadgets on a big wireless charging mat on our bedside table and not have to worry about fiddling around?!
Well 5 years down the line, we’re still no closer to it. I can see valid excuses for watches and the like (the fenix 3 is big enough as it is without cramming a charging coil in there) but why not for bike computers?! Why not for tablets and laptops?! I want the future now, dammit!
It doesnt really charge wirelessly. There is a wire in there somewhere and it has to connect to a wall socket but I understand what you mean…. 🙂
1. Agree with what others have said, data field is far better than an app, its just a pain having to have a separate app and it does cover all my use cases.
2. As I understand it, you can’t run Garmin interval workouts in the Stryd app… so that’s very helpful. And yes, I may need to tweak those work outs to reflect power targets rather than pace targets but seriously, it doesn’t make sense for stryd to put more effort into an app (than a data field would be) only for it to cause users more stress and faff as well, the app is a poor and technically complex solution to a simple problem.
3. I CAN’T USE THE APP IN MULTISPORT MODE – so that’s great, and yes training with power is helpful but its pretty pointless knowing what my power capabilities are if, as a multisport athlete, I can’t a) use that information in multi-sport mode and b) cant track the ultimate performance output of my training effectively. I am still left at the end of a 70.3 trying to decide whether my run was quicker because it was an easier course or delivered a better performance.
I must say that my first 6 weeks with Stryd have been rather frustrating to say the least and because of that I haven’t (yet) built my training plans around running with power in the same way that I now do all my bike intervals etc based on power.
I’ll make sure our IQ app developer sees this. We’re doing what we can with an app because that’s something we have a lot of control over.
The final Discount price for backers of the first unit is going to be $99 with shipping on September 15.
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
Sorry, Ray. I should have known that would leak out.
Luiz: We begged Ray not to include that because we thought people who don’t “get” Kickstarter might have the wrong impression. But we didn’t ask you to keep it quiet, so that is our problem.
Here’s the deal: Our Kickstarter backers spent hard money on the first-gen Stryd when it was an idea and a few prototypes. They saw the potential and trusted us. Then they waited months before receiving their products, and interacted with us to help improve it, some on a daily basis, for many months. These folks got us started, and they are like family. So this is something very special, very unusual. Giving this kind of discount would be just plain unsustainable if it weren’t confined to Kickstarter backers.
I bought the stryd almost 1 year ago from the stryd website. It`s still far from being easy to use, and you have to compromise on either usability or data. I have been patient and waited while stryd developed the product, but I am not feeling like part of the family anymore.
You know, hats off to that attitude. I personally think $199 is too steep as a regular price, but at the same time I have no problem with you offering this to your 1st hour customers at half the price. It actually helps convince people to give other kickstarter projects a chance, if you are this loyal to them in return. Way to go, Stryd.
We will continue to support the Stryd Pioneer, and we have several improvements specifically for it scheduled for the coming months (September, we will be focusing on the new Stryd). Also, a lot of what we are doing for power-based run training will work with either Stryd. We’ll be including power-based training plans with the new Stryd, and those will be available to Pioneer users as well. We plan to support the new Stryd and the Pioneer with the same apps, so most improvements will be available to users of both. There are a few things that require a fundamentally different sensing technology than the Pioneer, so some things require the new Stryd, but Pioneer users will see continued improvement. If you’re running with Stryd, we still view you as family.
Thanks for this interesting article.
You didn’t mention Polar (V800), only Suunto and Garmin. Is there nothing new from polar to support power in running mode?
Have a nice day,
Correct, no power meter support while running for Polar.
Thanks for your fast reply.
So as an Ambit 3 Peak user, will this connect and record power natively out of the box? Obviously the proprietry stuff – leg boingyness etc, will be via the app and I can live with that, although I’m hoping there’s some solution to merge that data for later data examination (ie. when I ran up that hill there my form collapsed about 5 minutes before I did)?
Another question regarding it’s use (or my running)… I’ve found that my wrist measured cadance rarely changes (seriously it’s like a mentronome) but my stride distance changes drastically, given that variability, is a foot based cadance measurement going to give me accurate results?
After a firmware update Ambit3 was able to record power from gen I nativly when paird as a HR monitor. This worked pretty well. Prior to that (see the first-hands-on by DCR) I think you had to pair it as a power meter but could use the running profile. Since there is no information about gen II on Stryd webpage we don’t know yet.
Thanks for the hands-on, Ray!
Interesting that Stryd do not have the option of a dual-leg system. RunScribe does and Runscribe Pro x2 comes in at the same cost of $199, and purportedly accommodates “Simultaneous LvR” analysis.
Any thoughts on this?
When stryd first came out, i made a comparison of how and why a cycling power meter is useful to me on my bike (although i am basically and ultra trail runner) and how a running power meter could be used in the same way with the same benefits. Here is the list (or at least what i can remember of it):
At the same effort (same hr), when you are riding a bike you move about 2-4 times faster than running and typically over 20km/h. That means that air plays a significant role in how fast you move. More over, there are wheels, spokes, water bottles that all catch wind. So training by speed is almost meaningless and using power as a metric for training, makes sense.
In running at 15km/h, which is a tempo run speed for an advanced runner, wind plays a much less important (if any) role. Yes you could go out and do a tempo run at very windy conditions, but are you really so burnt ?
When riding your bike, for the whole activity, your bike contacts the ground with two wheels. These wheels have tyres with various types of treads which additionally break down day by day. The tyres also have pressure which might change day by day. The above factors contribute to rolling resistance.
Running on the other side is a sequence of half squats where 2/3 of the time you are on air. There is no rolling resistance.
When on the flats and especially on a climb, pacing on a bike is critical. You can produce the same power by altering you cadence and the force you apply on the pedals. So you can keep 250W with 90rpm, 80rpm, 70rpm, 60rpm and every rpm in between, by increasing the force you apply on the pedals. This means that you don’t only pace how fast you and the bike moves, but you also “pace” which body systems contribute to this. With high force and low cadence you switch the focus to your muscular system for doing most of the work and with low force high cadence you switch the focus to your cardiovascular system for doing most of the work. You can do all the above adaptation within a couple of seconds and all that is possible, because on a bike you have gears, 22 of them.
In running you also have gears, just 3: walking, jogging, running. When you go uphill your gears reduce to 2.
You can use a cycling power meter as a testing tool:
How much faster at 200 watts these wheels make you ?
How much faster at 200 watts your new carbon bike, with the same wheels as you old aluminium bike, makes you ?
How much faster at 200 watts these new tyres make you ?
There is much potential in testing equipment in order to maximize performance.
In running, if it was a direct force measurement power meter like rpm2, maybe you could do some testing with different shoes, but with stryd no.
But the big difference between cycling and running power meters is:
1. where you apply the force ?
2. what happens to the thing that you apply the force ?
3. is this force trainable and produces results ?
The answers are:
1. in cycling you apply force to pedals while in running you apply the force on the ground (earth)
2. In cycling the pedal retreats to your applied force and moves forwards producing speed, in running, earth sends back the force to you body and at you face.
3. In cycling you can do strength training and increase the force you apply at the pedals, thus making them moving faster and finally increasing the speed you bike moves, in running you can do strength training to decrease the impact and effects the ground reaction force has to you body.
Well, back then i didn’t need more to convince that a running power meter is a waste of money.
Only two gears going uphill? Simply not true, I can run, walk or jog (at very different speeds for each).
Additionally you completely ignore stride length, in the same way that I can cover a lot of distance with 1 pedal stroke (in a 53-11) I can apply more force when I run, effectively “jumping” further with each stride or shorter steps more akin to running a 34-25.
As someone who has looked at how their cadence, speed and stride length vary (according to Garmin) for me, when I run faster than 4:30 per km my cadence stays much the same (about 195-200) whilst my stride length increases drastically, i.e. by about 30% between marathon pace (4:28) and sprint intervals pace. This is the equivalent of holding the same cadence and cranking up through the gears thereby increasing power. Just because you can’t push a button to automatically change run cadence, power, speed etc it doesn’t mean that thinking about your stride pattern doesn’t impact this.
@Panos, regarding the wind: I hereby invite you to join the ‘Egmond half marathon’ next january (www.sauconyegmondhalvemarathon.nl/english). I first ran that race last january, and reconsidered calling any previous runs ‘windy’ – what with the first 7km being on a beach, windforce 7 straight in your face. It makes a difference. It makes so much of a difference, even the Elite runners hadn’t run this slow since 1985. Wind matters 🙂
As a mountain runner, I am not convinced yet of training with a power meter. I can understand it’s a useful tool for road runners (runners with not much changing conditions) and especially after reading “Run with Power” but what about uphills? Downhills ? technical terrain ?
Running power meters are still in their infancy and I hope it will become THE training tool soon
Full disclosure: I’m with Stryd.
One of the big benefits of using a power meter is that captures the effects of terrain on training intensity. That was the first substantial benefit I had from using it. I thought I was pacing myself properly on hills before, but when I started using power, I found that my breathing rate stayed constant through tough hills, and I didn’t end up wiped out after each big hill. Looking back, it should have been obvious that I wasn’t compensating enough when on steep inclines, but it wasn’t obvious. You can see the details of my personal experience with the Stryd Pioneer here.
link to facebook.com
The new Stryd gives a similar experience for controlling training intensity and pacing, but makes it easier to work on form.
But really what are you offering over grade-adjusted pace that others provide?
Full disclosure: I am with Stryd.
Feedback on how conscious actions and conditioning influence form and economy (efficiency).
I understand the idea of training with power meter and while it is interesting and exciting, I don’t fully understand how I can use it in the environments that I run in. How can it take into account terrain technicity ? Will running downhill on a smooth trail give different results than running on the same downhill grade with a lot of boulders ?
What I forgot to add would be that :
I understand that for cycling, a power meter is THE tool to train with asit is able to measure the direct force applied to the bike but it doesn’t seem to be the case for running, am I correct ?
I haven’t found yet how the power is measured (“Train with power” doesn’t realluy go over that aspect), is it mainly an algorithm taking care of that after grabbing the data from an accelerometer ?
I am just asking to be convinced 🙂
This iffers no advantages of learning to run by feel. Also, when your conditioning improves your paces drop using the same perceived effirt.
I don’t need a device to tell me my conditioning.
It accounts for the incline, as well as changes in form that result from changing ground surface condition. If you are hopping over rocks, it will see that you are generating more power to do that. But if you are using your hands and scrambling over boulders… that’s where I stop making claims.
Running uphill is one area where I can clearly see the benefit from running with power.
Going downhill you face a bit different challenges though. For me it’s usually keeping the stride fast and relaxed enough to not brake too much, but at the same time trying to preserve those tired legs from all the bounding.
So the question is, does Stryd currently offer any benefits for downhill running?
I’m sorry, you keep mentioning efficiency. How are you defining it?
Federic I thought I would comment although I do not have Robert’s knowledge. I do live in Boulder and have talked to folks on the Stryd team off and on. I was an original Kickstarter purchaser and I run ultra marathons in the mountains primarily in the West here. I think that training with Power as opposed to HR or Pace (useless for me) is a great improvement. I have noticed that on days I am fatigued or on long runs it requires much more effort to maintain the same power output. I use Power extensively now for Tempo or interval runs and for reverse split runs. For races, I only have one 50 mile race where I have Stryd data and a 100 mile race where I will wear the Stryd to see what happens. I am hooked and think it will benefit me but will take time to understand how to incorporate the information into my training.
I am particularly interested in the new unit and have already ordered one. I hate having to charge my watch during races and the footpod is going to be perfect. I will get accurate pace/distance and power from the footpod and run the watch at 1 min GPS fix (I don’t care how accurate my track is in a race). No charging and no battery to carry!
Stryd interfaces great with the Ambits, I have an Ambit3 Peak. It is easy to structure workouts using Power and see power in data fields. I wish we could organize training plans in Movescount with power, I have requested this and we’ll see if it happens.
So, my conclusion is that training with power will improve your running. Much more reliable for me for training. Racing with power I am not so sure about yet…we’ll see.
Thanks for your comment on training with Power. It looks like we practice similar activities in same type of terrain.
I can see that power can be a great tool for training, especially for people like us encountering terrain changes, slop changes…etc
However, I don’t find that the hardware and the data analysis is completely set up yet to effectively and completely rely on it for training.
Chest strap or foot pod ? Mono foot pod or dual foot pod ? Very well defined algorithm or daily chainging algorithm ?
You see, those questions are great examples that the technology and data analysis is not ready yet.
I’m holding my breath, it shouldn’t take too long until athletes, coaches…etc pick it up and make it a ready tool to use.
I especially plan on using both HR and power to train, I am convinced that coupling both would make training even better.
Hi, I have just started using the Stryd Pioneer and look forward to the pod version when it arrives next month. Although my comment isn’t related to the powermeter itself, dealing with the fellows at Stryd is without a doubt the most pleasant experience I have ever had with a vendor (of anything, anywhere). I have/have had approximately 1 million electronic devices over many decades, so I am not saying this lightly.
Thank you. We’re a small team and sometimes it feels like we are spread so thin we can only do half of what we should be doing. I’m glad we got it right in your case.
I’d second this. I got in touch post-order about something and had it sorted out within a few hours. If that quality of service scales with the company it could be industry leading.
does this new unit pair/work correctly on an Ambit 2 ?
Robert, what metrics from Stryd can be dispalyed on the ambit? Only power or speed/pace and cadence too? If the (Stryd) Speed/pace estimate is more accurate than that from a gps it would be quite good if that was dispalyed.
It actually pairs better with the Ambit2 than the Ambit3. 🙂 The Ambit2 uses ANT+ and doesn’t have the “one connected pairing per device” restriction of the Ambit3, so you can connect to both the power profile (to take power and cadence) _and_ the foot pod profile (to take speed/pace, distance and cadence).
The Ambit3 it’s currently only one or the other.
I just got my invite to order the new footpod version with discount. Order submitted!
I hate chest straps, so felt really bummed when my KS reward morphed into one. (It’s just sitting on a shelf somewhere.) I feel like Stryd really stood up by giving us the discount offer. They now join BSX in my crowdfunding hall of fame! Thanks!
Thank you for your patience and sorry that what we could deliver last year didn’t fit your training style.
hm.. with wireless charging unit can be made pretty waterproof and easily withstand washing machines.. 😉
and chest strap is nuisance, yes, but if i running [del]comm..[/del] barefoot or in something like fivefingers classic clipping a unit seems problematic.. 🙂
Without laces, the best thing I can suggest for now is duct tape. Suggest shaving your foot hair first.
Some Vibram models have laces. I’ve managed to attach a foot pod in my Vibram Bikila Evos for example. Only use them for my shorter runs though.
Great sounds Interesting for more data gathering
Obviously an Garmin integration is a must buy perhaps Garmin has something similar in the oven???
Does the foot pod work on a threamill euqualy?
The new Stryd works very well on a treadmill, and gathers accurate pace information. The Pioneer relied on the GPS of the sports watch or smartphone it was paired with, so using it on a treadmill wasn’t a lot of fun (needed to enter the speed in the app). That’s something we would have loved to have done better with the Pioneer, but it required a fundamentally different technology to do well.
Hi there, byou really need to find a new more powerful hosting solution for your site. It is slow as S**T
Anybody else running into trouble? We tried reproducing it from machines in a few different states.
1) Accuracy. The whole premise of running with a power meter is that you can precisely control your effort. But if it’s off by even 1-2%, then you’d be better off just doing your workouts on the track. (And incidentally, most experienced runners have no trouble hitting a 400 split to within a second of their intended time.)
2) Wind. (This is really just related to the accuracy point.) You say that wind is rarely a significant factor, but that just makes me think that the device isn’t all that accurate. You don’t need to be running in a gale to experience a 5-second per mile shift in pace. And most serious runners would consider 5-seconds per mile to be significant. That’s over two minutes in a marathon!
3) Hills aren’t that important in running. In cycling, hills not only have a huge effect on speed, they’re also a central aspect of a lot of races. In running, hills have a smaller effect, and running races tend to be comparatively flat. Even Boston would be a fairly flat course by cycling standards.
That said, I hope I’m wrong and that these devices do improve performances on hilly courses. I’d be particularly interested to see what elite runners think, rather than age group triathletes.
Biomechanics PhD & Algorithm Developer here (not in same market as Stryd).
I applaud Stryd for coming up with something new, but their device obviously can’t match accuracy as a cycling power meter. It’s just not possible with the sensors they are using. And even with the ‘right’ sensors, it still wouldn’t be as accurate as a cycling power meter. That doesn’t mean it won’t eventually be useful.
Hills are obviously hugely important if you are a trail runner (probably the target audience), but if you run flat then speed is the best power metric. This is probably why they are introducing efficiency and other metrics to give something to the flat running crowd.
But this is my main problem – just like Lumo, it sounds like they are making assumptions about what is optimal running form, and this is really absurd (if you really know the research).
We’ll have more information out on our approach shortly. For now, I can say that it does not assume a particular set of numbers quantifying running form are optimal across different athletes. It will guide you to a different form than another runner with different physical structure and conditioning. The foundation for this approach is leg spring stiffness, a fairly well developed concept in the physiology literature.
I wonder if it would be possible to swap existing HR-style Stryd for new footpod style. I bought Stryd for full retail price (was too late for Kickstarter campaign), and ended up not using it just because I like Garmin Running Dynamics, and running with two straps is too DCR-y.
We will be sending out an offer to everybody who bought a Stryd Pioneer from us shortly. If you bought the Stryd very recently (after 15 July) and haven’t used it much, email us (firstname.lastname@example.org) and we might be able to arrange something better.
… and the Pioneer will still work and be supported. These offers are to thank our earlier customers and make sure they end up with the product they want the most.
I bough it long time ago (February, IIRC), just didn’t use much – two straps are too much. I’ve been following that epic thread (the one on Stryd forum) but didn’t post anything. Glad to know you are supporting earlier customers! Cheers!
How is leg spring stiffness calculated? Will two runners of equal pace have the same result? It’s not clear to me that simply running faster by definition increases your efficiency.
It is voodoo that a simple device can calculate this with any accuracy. You can take averages which may provide you with very inaccurate results.
There are other variables such as ST vs FT which would have to be taken into account. You would also have to look at how muscle mass is dustributed as well (ie-thin calves are easier to move). There are others as well.
I bought original stryd because I thought they would over time improve the available metrics and the very basic app and website. I assume these features will not be added for the strap-based pod and instead I have to buy a new device to get a fully working running power system.
A $50 discount means that will cost me $350. That is not value!
I see from an earlier comment that the pod deals with speed on a treadmill much better now. Does it still need the incline programming in or do the improved sensors account for the changing incline?
Which of the current sport watches offer best experience if I want to view and record current pace / distance from Stryd and use the GPS only for route / altitude? Or is it even currently possible to use the way I want?
I run mostly predefined routes so I always know my reference distance. So I don’t really need GPS. I want at least the HR / speed graphs and altitude data recorded however for comparison later.
Would Vivocative HR do with connect IQ app? Can the app use the optical HR / strap and barometric altimeter from the watch (garmin digital elevation maps are almost useless I live)? Will it support taking manual laps (I don’t really need a programmed interval feature)?
Can the Stryd record elevation data by itself? Then even a refurbished FR 225 would do…
do you think that the stryd pioneer will be compatible with zwift running?link to zwiftblog.com
I love the idea of a running power meter, because I often travel to hilly areas and would benefit from having a target number to run to instead of trying to dynamically figure out how to adjust my coach’s assigned pace to the terrain. Maybe I’m missing something, though– it seems like without a data field, the only way I’d know if I am on target power is to use the Stryd app, which isn’t gonna happen; I can’t run with my phone in front of my nose the whole way.
Hi, if you have a Fenix3 or another Garmin watch with ConnectIQ, you can download it and see power on the run.
I was hoping it actually measured the amount of power your foot transfers to your shoe (via an insole or whatnot), instead it seems to be based on an accelerometer and algorithms. I assume it would be way off if you do something like a tire drag run?
Just looking for something to accurately measure how hard I run when I’m dragging a tire behind me.
Such thing exists and is available through RPM² (more info here : link to rpm2.com)
Soneone else asked this question before, but I didn’t see the answer: how would the dat from Stryde would compre to a cycling power meter, if you attach it to your cycling shoes.
It would be fantastic to have a device that could do running/cycling power, specially at $200. I would get it in a heartbeat.
Ray: I would be interesting to compare the data of a Powertap to Stryd, just to have an idea if it would be even be close. 🙂
If I understand everything correctly power is calculated via an algorithm where weight goes in. How sensitive is weight? Do I have weigh myself every time before I go out for a run. Weight difference may be substantial between a short run with minimal gear and a multi hour mountain run with hydration bladder and in winter even snow shoes in the back pack. Even within a run weight will change significantly. Speaking here for the long distance crowd.
It could well be that as you said, at lower speeds your efficiency goes down the drain and you could see higher power values due to more vertical oscillation at such paces.
I personally had that during my critical power test with Stryd a couple of months ago: lower power during the 3 laps part than during the 6 laps … Just sayin’
I am really interested in this product. I do a lot of trail running and particularly races that involve a lot of elevation change (i.e. Pike’s Peak Marathon) and currently I train/race in those conditions based on HR. Of course, HR has the “lag” problem so in THEORY this product would eliminate that issue.
I do train/race in a variety of different shoes though. Aside from having to remember to switch the pod from shoe to shoe, are there any anomalies introduced by different shoe types?
Is the Stryd Rep not participating on this thread anymore?
Two things– did anyone receive the new Stryd? I pre-ordered and thought it was supposed to be shipped out 9/15.
Second– I saw an email that Stryd is going to connect to Zwift so that Zwift will now have running. That is cool assuming it works well.
There was an update email a week or so ago saying some of the components got held up in Customs. I think it said they’re looking to start shipping this week?!
Everyone seems to be obsessing with how it works and “how accurate it is”…
But really to be extremely useful all you need is consistent performance.
It doesn’t matter if it says 100W or 3,000W, as long as it measures what it measures consistently.
It doesn’t matter if it matches your bike. And it doesn’t matter if it matches the gen 1 stryd product. It will give us all a warm fuzzy if it does, but it isn’t necessary to get the benefit of the product.
i think Stryd got it right with the form factor and by not including wind, only one leg, etc. they got the variables that make the most difference, achieving a nice balance of price and performance.
Buy this thing because of the footpod accuracy, the relative measure of effort going up hills and at different paces (the overwhelming majority of power input variables), and the fun of buying new technology and learning hands on vs reading it a year later.
Is it perfect? Undoubtedly no. Does it have value? Undoubtedly yes. Is it going to be fun and interesting to use? You bet!
but is it always consistent? Weight is a factor that goes into the calculation. Weight changes during a run (speaking here for the long distance folks). And of course with gear. Do you have to weigh yourself before and during a run? What is the effect? Perhaps not so much an issue for level running but what about mountain running? The vertical component it the most prominent there.
I have no idea what the effect would be. Is this already factored in in the accuracy level?
Does it indeed measure wattage with precision over a variety of grades? Am I able to use it as a guide for effort when trail running?
“But really to be extremely useful all you need is consistent performance.”
I disagree: I don’t just need consistent performance, I need relevant measurements. As I was saying earlier, the algorithm(s) used to measure running power seem to be changing often, how is that reliable ?
The location of the pod is changing (chest vs foot), how does it affect power measurement ?
I’m not ready to train with power yet because I don’t feel like the technology is ready and because I am not convinced yet
In terms of weight loss it should be minimal if you are fuelling and hydrating correctly. I’d say no more than 0.5-1kg change in weight assuming you’re drinking. And if you’re not then a 1-2% error in the reported power figures is likely to be a small issue compared to the dehydration?!
but is this already factored in? Does the claimed error already include this?
Work on a hill is defined as W_hill = m x g x h. Hence, depending on the weight of a runner, 1 kg can introduce an error of 1.5 to 2%.
Is this already included in the claimed error?
Furthermore, running very long distances, especially in winter, requires some gear. I live in the mountains, I often take my snow shoes with me. And additional gear.
So how easy is it to change Stryd’s weight setting. Do I change in my Gramin watch (which is a hassle)?
And what is the actual error introduced?
For city park runners I don’t see many issues with that, but I don’t think it is fair to be called “obessive” when asking certain questions on a new product and how it matches a certain use case.
You change weight in the phone app I believe. I’d assume weight loss during a run isn’t taken into account as there’d be no way for them to be able to even guess your fuelling strategy but I’ve found if you email them they get back really quickly.
As someone who deals with data all day I wouldn’t call anyone obsessive 🙂 I’ve already sent them loads of questions.
I didn’t mean it as an insult… but to obsess means to fixate…and this thread is hard to read without taking away a feeling that we are collectively fixated the margin of error coming from the device. 🙂
This is new technology and at the price point, if you take it for what it is, I find the price point pretty compelling.
A garmin footpod is what, $50? And never accurate. Mine is a constant recalibration after every run. If I’m sore from a hard workout and my stride contracts a bit, I can be off by 5% easy. My tempo runs and speed workouts are a joke if I use calibration from a long run. It’s basically useless at a $50 price point for a simple footpod.
Granted the stryd costs 4x as much, but it seems (we will all see) you get an amazingly acccurate foot pod. I’d pay $200 for that just to have a useful number while running under dense tree cover, and to forget about calibrating constantly. The normal footpod is now basically a toy and the stryd is a tool.
So if you look at it that way, it’s a premium footpod that you can’t go wrong with if you have the funds.
That is a contribution to the running technology world and I’ll take one please.
On top of the footpod functionality, you get what I would consider usable power data for the majority of people. I’m not a professional athlete and I can’t hold a pace to within 1% on any kind of natural surface, so I really don’t care if it is perfect or not. As long as I know I need to drop approximately 30-40 seconds per mile on a 6% grade, or that my most efficient pace is X, or get some usable coaching on form…it’s doing more than the $200 price point would suggest to me.
I just think expecting flawless precision is totally unrealistic for an application like this at any price point. And at an accessible $200, it seems totally reasonable.
If your bar is 1% accuracy and nothing else will do… then you shouldn’t even be shopping for $200 electronics to up your game. My freaking $500 gps watch gives me a materially different number every time I run the same route. Why would something that costs 40% as much and in its first iteration as a footpod be held to a higher standard?
While it is reasonable to assume a laboratory grade precision instrument will cost you in the 1000’s, one must keep in mind that a) computing power is getting cheaper every year b) different companies base their pricing differently and with different application of margins upon cost. To the question why a 500$ GPS watch is still off in it’s pace and distance relative to a 200$ footpod, we cant answer that easily without also looking at how the product is used as opposed to anecdotal evidence.
Still wondering if it’s okay to switch the device over multiple types of shoes (i.e. maximal Hoka type vs minimal race flat vs trail shoe, etc), and if that introduces any variation in the results.
I basically never wear the same shoe brand/style two times in a row in a week of running.
There are two shoe clips included with the foot pod, so the implication is that switching between shoes is not an issue. It’s also touted as being very accurate without calibration due to the wealth of sensors on board.
Will it detect increased power required when pushing a jogging stroller?
I just got my Stryd. I’ll do a baseline run and a few days later one with my daughter. I’m not hopefully that it will be able to tell that a stroller is involved, but I’ll be able to confirm before too long.
My basic understanding of how it works is essentially taking your foot speed plus the barometric altimeter reading (for incline or decline) then factoring in your weight, and spitting out your power. It doesn’t measure direct force so unless you manually changed your weight to account for the stroller, I can’t imagine it giving different numbers at the same pace with and without a stroller.
I went out on Friday and ran with my 9-month old daughter, and then the same exact course today. Not surprisingly, I ran faster without the stroller, so it’s not quite apples to apples, but I think it’s safe to say that the difference in average power below is from the difference in pace, and does not take into account me pushing a stroller.
Without stroller: 7:01 min/mile average; 252.3 watts average; 146 bpm average
With stroller: 7:14 min/mile average; 246.2 watts average; 152 bpm average
Thanks for checking! Was assuming not but couldn’t help but imagine possibilities if it was stroller capable 🙂
Agree, thanks for checking.
I’m curious if there is any difference in running on a treadmill at different inclines? Like massively different incline…0% vs 14-15%.
I will try and check this for you today and post the results here….
From my talks with themy they’ve not built in auto incline detection for the treadmill yet but it should be relatively soon. Outside it uses the altimeter but inside you really have to use the app and tell it what incline you have set.
For now, because of this I’m doing intervals with constant inclines. Not ideal but hopefully this will be sorted soon!
This thread really has just withered and died, where previously even the Stryd rep was pretty active. Lots of questions by potential customers but no info in response. I am wondering if there is some news coming on the device, lack of replies here means it could possibly be negative.
I received mine last week. Overall impressed so far and the Stryd guys are really good at coming back to you. Could be why they’re not on here as I expect they’re pretty snowed under.
Still a few issues being ironed out with the IQ App and Field but just installed the latest version so going to try that tonight. The previous version worked but it just didn’t always connect.
The Form Power (lower the better) is quite cool!!
Justin & Lee (and anyone else that has received theirs) –
Can you give us a little context around how you’re using your Stryds and what watch/app combo you’re utilizing?
I am using a Garmin 920xt and the Stryd Connect IQ Data Field. I’ve had some odd issues with the data field. It seems like I have to remove and re-add the data field from my Run “app” on the 920xt in order for the power data and other running metrics to be captured.
So far I’ve only gone on one run with it (at least, when it’s actually recording the data), and I use it in conjunction with the BSX Insight. I have no clue what I’m doing with all this data, but once I get used to the products and running with them, I will figure out a training plan that utilizes both.
I’m using a Polar V800.
I use the Stryd footpod with the Polar H7 strap. Using a cycling profile, I can see power data on the V800 as I run – as well as cadence data etc. Once finished, I sync with Flow, and then change the exercise to a running profile in the app or on the website and I still see all the power data / metrics.
The only issue currently is that the Stryd stops the Polar H7 connecting via Bluetooth. So when I initially start an exercise profile in pre-activity mode, I don’t see the heart rate data – I just see blank info. However, as soon as I start the watch for the exercise it records the heart rate data using the old Polar “GymLink” protocol. Heart rate data is recorded and displays while running and in the app afterwards. It just doesn’t show when paused.
Stryd are aware and have said they plan to address this. It isn’t really an issue with the Polar H7 Strap as the heart rate data is displayed and recorded using the old protocol – but it does stop the Scosche Rhythm and other devices from connecting to the V800 over bluetooth.
I’m impressed with the new device.
The hardware is nicely designed. The charging base is really nice and convenient. It fits securely to your shoe and is way easier than the Polar footpod to move to a different pair of shoes as you don’t have to thread the laces semi-permanently through the holder.
As well as power information, I was interested in getting a device that could also serve an additional purpose as a more accurate footpod for treadmills and track work when I didn’t necessarily need power data displayed instantly on my watch. So for track work I can use the Stryd as just a pace / cadence device and concentrate on my tempo and get slightly more accurate real-time pace information than available via GPS. With offline sync to the Stryd app the power data and other form metrics are still captured for later analysis.
Regarding accuracy of the footpod, the last run I used it on showed as 13.84km as measured by the Polar V800 GPS and offline recording by Stryd footpod showed 13.4km – so within approx 3.2% of each other.
I’m hoping that they can improve this accuracy further – but out of the box with no calibration currently possible that is better than what I have achieved with prior devices.
I see Power data and cadence information in Flow from Stryd. I also use RunGap to post the workout from Flow to Strava, Runkeeper, Training Peaks etc after the session. Training Peaks picks up the power information in the graph and also in the tables.
I’m using mine with my Garmin FR920XT watch. At the moment mostly just doing workouts tof collect some data. In his book Jim Vance advises spending a few weeks not looking at the data (whilst actually running) to collect some baseline figures of your current running economy. For now I’ve put an estimate of my running FTP into Trainingpeaks so that I now get a TSS rather than rTSS value. Based on my threshold runs on my 5k loop (flat and has been decent weather) it looks like my estimate is ball park correct.
I currently have it set up as Garmin Connect – Stryd Power Centre – TrainingPeaks. This works well BUT currently it causes two issues, firstly I still have to have a direct link from Connect to TP for swims, bike etc so I get each run twice in TP so have to delete the non-power one. But also, Power Centre is picking up any workout from Connect and sending it as a run to TP do again these need deleting. It’s not a massive deal, just a bit frustrating.
I’ve got a run analysis session with a trI coach next Friday and she’s said to bring it along to have a play. In the IQ App it displays what they call Form Power which is the bit you need to try and minimise so will be interesting to monitor it as she suggests tweaks.
Here are some observations from some runs today.
1/ Accuracy – using Stryd on a running profile on V800, with GPS turned off, it recorded 13 laps of a 400m track as 5.3km. Approx 2% off.
2/ Using Stryd as a footpod for pace / cadence on V800 stops the watch getting any heart rate data – even via the old Gymlink protocol. So you have to prioritise whether you want Heart Rate info or pace / cadence.
3/ Using cycling profile, you can get heart rate (Polar H7), power and cadence from Stryd on the V800. You can then change the exercise from cycling to running in Flow and it still keeps all the Power / Cadence data. This doesn’t work for track work though as in a cycling profile it relies on GPS for the speed / distance information. It does not pick that data up from Stryd. If you turn the GPS on then you get inaccurate distance / pace as GPS sucks on a track….
4/ GPS sucks on a track…. but then we already knew that.
5/ Polar V800 has a calibration factor. I will try adjusting that tomorrow to see if it gives me a more accurate pace / distance calculation on the track.
So really, Stryd will be pretty flexible once it no longer grabs the HR Bluetooth channel. That change will allow me to get heart rate data and more accurate pace / distance on a track.
Once they fix the merging of exercise files in PowerCenter, then I’ll be able to sync the offline Stryd data for track workouts and then see more metrics for that run.
And for other training sessions I’ll be able to see power / cadence by using the cycling profile.
This is not really the place to ask your Stryd specific questions. Try the Facebook community or the discussion forums on their website.
This is excellent info guys, keep it coming.
I’m wondering what type of results show from the Stryd with regard to power when having to walk extremely steep inclines. A steep incline at walking pace can have the same effort/HR impact as running on level ground. For example, I’ve seen formulas showing that 12-13% incline at 4mph (15:00 min/mile) is about the same as running a 9:00 min/mile on level ground. So for races like Pike’s Peak Marathon or Ultra Mont Blanc, etc that have extreme inclines for long periods of time, I would like to see if this device would show a consistent power output on those terrains even when the pace falters/slows.
This is pretty easily tested using a treadmill, most of which go up to 14-15% incline.
Have taken the plunge and ordered one. Shipping within 5 weeks they are saying. If nothing else decent pace on a treadmill will be useful for Zwift Running which tried at a Zwift demo evening last week and is apparently due to be launched early next year. Was great fun (especially overtaking cyclists on sharp climbs!) although that was on a Tacx Magnum which does not need a foot pod or any other sensors attached to you for pace. The comments here suggests that the Stryd works well on a treadmill. I assume then it can detect different treadmill inclination settings?
Observations on treadmill use after two weeks
– distance/pace/cadence all seem to work well (consistent with what I expect based on Garmin foot pod).
– it records power but I have not seen the expected effect of incline on power. I have not done a major “hill” workout yet, so the range is limited to 0% to 4% on any one workout, but HR tracks incline as it always does, pace is constant cuz you can do that on a treadmill, but no change in power. I do see the expected power change when running outdoors on real hills.
– Next week I’ll test on steeper incline, but I’m curious about other’s experience on treadmills with this device.
They’ve not yet added the auto incline calculation into the algorithm, they haveven said this is something they are planning to do in the coming months. Will be a big bonus when they do!
The reason why it works outdoors on real hills is because it has a barometer. It knows you’re increasing your elevation. Then again, so does my Fenix 3 in regular running mode. No Stryd needed. It knows I’m going up hills, and Training Peaks creates a grade-adjusted pace.
My big question is whether Garmin could estimate power with simply the Fenix 3 and a regular $50 Garmin footpod?
Curious your thoughts on Shft.run versus the new Stryd foot pod; or any other competitors.
I have convinced myself that I would like a power meter but not sure which one to go with the few options on the market now.
I’ve had the new Stryd footpod for a week now. For the most part it works pretty well in conjunction with my Fenix 3 and the Stryd datafield. There are some issues, such as footpod cadence currently being doubled (to be fixed next firmware update), and Garmin Connect not always reading/displaying the IQ developer data (being investigated), but Power shows consistently on the watch, is recorded in the fit file, and it is consistent with effort from run to run. Stryd PowerCenter shows power and running dynamics in a nice graph but is otherwise pretty minimal. Strava still doesn’t show running power, although it is definitely being stored, as syncing from Strava to somewhere that does support running power will send the power through. Training Peaks sucks in the power just fine, and that’s where it’s most important to me. With a reasonable estimation of running FTP, running TSS is pretty close to TP’s HR+elevation calculated rTSS.
The one big disappointment for me at the moment is that the inclusion of IQ developer metrics in an activity currently breaks tapiriik.com syncing. This appears to be because Garmin’s web service API errors out on activities with IQ data. Hopefully that’s not a sign of the API’s last hurrah, since I really love tapiriik syncing run titles and descriptions for me along with the data.
“Training Peaks sucks in the power just fine, and that’s where it’s most important to me. With a reasonable estimation of running FTP, running TSS is pretty close to TP’s HR+elevation calculated rTSS.”
Training Peaks rTSS doesn’t use heart rate. It uses your grade adjusted pace. Training Peaks hrTSS uses heart rate data. See:
link to help.trainingpeaks.com
On Strava, you can see power in the segment effort views on the iOS app along with HR, cadence, pace, elevation.
How can you get a single view that includes Stryd data and heart rate? My running watch is too old for ConnectIQ (and I don’t plan on hauling my Edge 1000 around). I do run with a cellphone… but the Stryd App won’t synch with an HRM (in my case a Stages).
I guess if the Stryd App would pair with my HRM and store the data, that’d do it (I’d just export the .FIT).
So here’s how I get a consolidated view with a Polar V800. Not entirely sure on your Garmin watch, but the process should be similar
1/ Run with your watch connected to HRM and Stryd (I use cycling mode on V800 as that is the only way it can record power)
2/ I upload my run to Polar Flow website and convert from a cycling activity to a run
3/ I download a TCX file from Polar Flow website
4/ I have Stryd set up to record data offline as well
5/ Sync the Stryd offline data to the app on your phone. This pushes it to the Stryd website.
6/ Upload the TCX file that you downloaded to the Stryd website
7/ The Stryd website merges the offline Stryd data that is captured with the TCX file containing the GPS and HRM data
8/ You can then download / share a FIT file with other sites
I believe that it merges by aligning the power data from the TCX file from the watch and from the offline data that is recorded by Stryd. It would be good if somebody from Stryd can confirm that. So I guess the important thing is that your watch can at least record the Power data while you run.
This process works well for me on Polar V800. It means I can run without my phone and still get all the data / metrics.
That worked splendidly. I hadn’t realized importing from Garmin Connect would match up the workouts and combine the data fields. I sure wish BSX would do this!
And I’m really happy with things so far…
Glad it worked for you.
Stryd also just released today a firmware upgrade that should broaden the flexibility of the footpod for other devices like Polar V800 etc.
I notice if you do a workout on the treadmill and merge files like you state, the distance and pace will disappear from the combined FIT file which is annoying.
I don’t think that is correct anymore. I completed a treadmill run today using iSmoothrun recording power, distance and pace from the Stryd footpod. I uploaded the offline Stryd file to PowerCenter. I was able to merge the TCX file from the ismoothrun app with the offline recorded file on the Stryd PowerCenter website. This trimmed the workout to the correct duration based on the TCX file – therefore getting rid of the irrelevant data at the start and the end of the Stryd file.
I also corrected the distance at the end of the treadmill run in ismoothrun app – to the distance reported by the treadmill – and that distance shows up on the Stryd website and on Runkeeper etc.
So I now have all the data accurate in PowerCenter.
I haven’t tried downloading that FIT file to post anywhere else – I don’t need to as I can post the file from ismoothrun to Strava, Runkeeper, TrainingPeaks etc.
Works really well. 🙂
Just received the Stryd foot pod and have one question. I will be using it with Suunto Ambit Peak 3, and paired it it as a power pod rather than foot pod, which I understand is the recommended pairing in order to use the power features during running mode. I also have a power meter for my bike. My question is when doing bike/run bricks. Specifically, once I get off my bike, and have the bike power meter paired with my Suunto Peak, and am ready to run, and want to use the Suunto Peak with the Stryd foot pod, do I have to pair the foot pod again with the Suunto Peak as a power pod to record running power?
That’s how I understood it works at the moment, which kind of sucks. I read that the original Stryd that measures HR is paired as an HRM and Suunto added support specifically for the Stryd so the watch fetches power in the background too. I expect they’ll add the same type of support for this one, otherwise it sucks having to choose between footpod features and power when you could get both.
If you pair the Stryd Summit foot pod as a foot pod, you’ll get awesomely accurately pace/distance, but you won’t get power. It needs to be paired as a power pod to get power.
Unfortunately without pod pools in the Ambit3, you would need to stop the activity, re-pair the power pod profile to connect it to your Stryd and then start a new activity. And the same when you get back on the bike.
The Stryd Pioneer HR pod has a neat pairing trick in the Ambit3: pair it as a HR pod and it recognises you’ve got a Stryd and it will silently connect to the power profile to take _only_ power. However if you’ve also got a bike power meter paired, activated in the sports mode you’re using and it connects, power will come from the power meter rather than the Stryd. ie, the pairing trumps the secondary connection from the Stryd HR pod.
Could Suunto to a similar trick for the Stryd Summit foot pod? ie, pair as foot pod and it’ll silently take power from the power profile? Yep, but it’s more a “nice to have” compared to the Pioneer where it really was a mandatory feature to have both metrics coming through at the same time.
Thanks! Hopefully watch makers will react quickly and add multiple powerpod options soon.
I couldn’t resist, I went ahead and ordered the Stryd. Apparently, the device is already compatible with my primary running watch (Vivoactive):
link to stryd.com
Looking forward to trying it out. Also looking forward to DCR’s full in depth review!
Just as an update, my test unit just arrived today. Neither I nor DHL can seem to account for where it temporarily disappeared to for the last two weeks after entering the country, but today the DHL man arrived with it.
I’ve been training with the PM for 1 month+ and feel it helpful in maintaining output in training (also enhancing efficiency, i.e. pace/power). Read a lot in their forum and get that run power value (also for W/kg) are quite personal compare to cycling power.
One big question is that: how much could I trust this power value?
In some interval runs, I felt like I’m giving the same effort (i.e. RPE), having very similar running form and pace (i.e. verified post run by form power and avg pace) in different intervals, but the power output can be differed by 4-5%. And this could affect the efficiency calculation.
Maybe I’m not as experienced to use “RPE” though…not sure.
So I really look forward to your review, and how accurate/useable this power measurement compare with other products in the market. Though I know it’s a new thing in the run sports and might take years to learn its usefulness.
Well I just got my device in the mail.
But unfortunately I broke my ankle trail running the very day after I posted the above, so it will be January before I can try it out. 🙁
Well, that’s a little weird. The link to Stryd’s site I posted in the above comment on November 18 had a specific page for the “Vivoactive” watch for a how-to guide for set up. But now going to that link, only the Garmin 310/910xt have specific pages for set up and there is no “compatible devices” page like it used to have.
Looking forward your review on this Ray.
How about the TICKR Run? Isn’t the only difference that the X has on-board memory to record activities when a phone etc. isn’t present?
Unless I’m missing something, it seems to me, aside from the “running metrics,” the Styrd is just a glorified footpod, like a Garmin pod, but with a pressure altimeter? Since my Fenix 3 already has an altimeter, it seems to me that Garmin Connect could do a pretty good job at estimating pace as it is, just Garmin pod and Fenix 3. Power is simply work over time, and work is MxD. Garmin Connect knows my mass, the Fenix GPS or the Garmin pod knows the distance, and the altimeter can factor in gravity. I’m going out on a limb here to say that the Stryd is just a glorified footpod, more accurate since it doesn’t require calibration. It’s a $200 version of my $50 Garmin pod?
Correction, I meant power.
“Since my Fenix 3 already has an altimeter, it seems to me that Garmin Connect could do a pretty good job at estimating ***power** as it is….”
Have asked similar on the Stryd.com forums but useful for any experience here. I noticed that the Stryd foot pod has got an automatic calibration on 2 735s that have been using on all runs with the Stryd for the last week or so. One is 100.7 and the other 100.9 although these had dropped from about 101.5 after a 10K race yesterday. I am thus wondering if, given these are fairly close to the default “no calibration needed” 100 figure, I should just turn off auto calibration and just use 100? Comparing speed graphs link to mygpsfiles.com shows good correlation but I presume this is with the “calibrated” value.
Tim, I checked mine multiple times with my 735 on a calibrated treadmill, and for me over a range of paces the most accurate calibration factor for me is 101.5.
I am wondering if pairing as a footpod to a Garmin device makes use of the full capability. I am going to try the Stryd phone app for my next treadmill run to see.
Yeah Joe that is my point really. Ray’s comment above that “However unlike a traditional footpod there’s no calibration required” is patently incorrect when your best results are with 101.5 as opposed to the “uncalibrated” 100. I’ve just seen a comment on the Stryd forums that mine works great – with a calibration of 105. My latest auto calibration is 102.6. For me, on a treadmill, I found it works “pretty well” at 100 but works best with a calibration bit above 100 say around 100.5. So, for this pace piece, I am not seeing anything fundamentally different to the “traditional” footpod. Anyway bit of a side issue really, the power numbers am seeing look consistent although still trying to get my head round how am practically going to make use of it all.
Tim, big difference for me is that it is accurate on the treadmill over a broad range of paces as opposed to the Garmin footpod where I needed different calibration factors for different pace ranges (easy, tempo and interval) to get accurate distance / pace. I had a power test run I did on the treadmill the other day with broad range of varying paces (8:50 – 5:50 paces) and over 7 miles there was <1% difference in distance accrual. When I consider the ramp effect of the treadmill (pace jumps on console, but ramps on actual belt) this is extremely accurate.
I’d like to add different stack height shoes (I’ve tried 4 different shoes from 8 mm-28 mm) or where you wear the sensor doesn’t seem to have much effect either, as long as it’s properly attached to your shoe and facing the right direction. Yes some users may have to calibrate (I need to enter calibration of as much as 1.05), but would seem you only have to do it once. At least this is my experience with it so far.
It is definitely much more advanced than a traditional foot pod, no doubt about it.
I have the old Stryd HRM strap. Does it record cadence? because I can get the strap to pair with the Zwift ios app but I’m not moving on screen.
How far away are you from publishing an in-depth review on the Stryd Foot pod? 🙂
Just got the Stryd v2, looks nice!
I simply can’t get it to “Pair” with my Suunto Ambit 3sport…. and I have tried everything on Stryds and Suunto’s own website + elsewhere.
It looks like it doesn’t activate when I move it, so it won’t connect – any idea?
Did you definitely fully charge it? The charger is a bit oddly designed as in it looks like you place it at the top of the contoured side but you actually place it in the middle of the shiny side.
Apologies if you knew that but a couple of people did it when it came out (luckily I saw someone ask about it or I would have done lol)
Are Stryd and Garmin here yet? because this is just what I want too. (actually, I want the algorithm built right into my F3HR like I had from DanielP’s app on my Suunto, but in the meantime, If I’m going to plink $199 down on a Stryd: “…I just want to be able to use the normal running mode and collect power meter data and show it in Garmin Connect. That’s all. Oh, and then I want apps like Training Peaks and Strava to display that data. No acrobatics required. I just want it to work.”
are they there yet?
Stryd have both a ConnectIQ App as well as a data field. It sounds like what you want is the data field. It allows you to add a field to any existing activity on your watch and capture all the data you need. It will then display the power data, along with the extended metrics in Garmin Connect.
I believe the power data also works with Training Peaks, but none of the data points collected via CIQ fields work in Strava.
The StravistiX plugin for Strava now appears to incorporate running power meter data.
Hi Ray, just checking if you plan on releasing a review or a comparaison with Runscribe. That would be awesome. And what about Milestones? Love your work and value your opinion but could also understand that you have many requests. Thanks
I’ve been using all three lately on my runs. My shoes are full of pods. Just in data collection mode mostly right now, working towards a review.
Ray, are you also planning on reviewing the power meter SHFT.Run ?? (link to shft.run)
Excellent as usual! =D
Is the Stryd pod compatible with running in Zwift?
(It isn’t one of the two you mentioned in your Zwift running preview and I want to be sure Stryd didn’t implement a different/incompatible spec).
Yup, it is indeed compatible! Enjoy!
Very useful review.
Like a number of comments, I”m looking to be sold on this device. I sorta hung up the shoes on road races, and switched to ultras. I dont live near the mountains, but I fully get the dramatically changing pace and speed up and down hills. I’m an enthusiast, and an elite or age-group winner. I like that I’ll get accurate distance, I dont use cadence much, and pace is not of great value, except at times I will look once have a higher RPE. peraps in those instances I could observe higher power output and know I need to back off a bit.
But I’m not sure how i would apply and use power information in trail running. Is the goal to maintain consistent power over all the different terrain and elevations? Uphill/Downhill? What about walking the uphills, or flat our taking walking breaks. How should power be factored into that.
So part of the question is how should this device be used. How would I apply the data its giving me during the event.
Lastly, didnt Garmin just finally open up the power ANT standard. So does that allow nature connectionwith stryd on say the Fenix F5x?
Not wanting to continually repeat the same question that others always ask…..but is there “any” indication from Garmin that they might natively support running power? Garmin IQ fields are “OK” but not being able to see averages and live power at the same time and not being able to save more than 1 output to garmin connect is pretty frustrating. I can only presume this is harder than it appears otherwise I don’t understand why Garmin wouldn’t just enable power meters in run mode….
Is there any light at the end of this tunnel?
@Dan K good question
I haven’t seen any indication of movement there. 🙁
Anything yet after another year has passed?
Hi, as primarily a cyclist I’m getting used to using a recently acquired power meter on the bike. I run occasionally when I can’t bike, often hill / fell terrain and being a bit of a geek am I intrigued by the potential of running power. My missus hasn’t yet sanctioned the purchase of a multi sport watch, so currently I carry my edge 820 cycle computer in my hand and manually change ‘ride’ to ‘run’ in post-hoc analysis. One drawback of this is that I don’t get pace data from the 820 so have to do mental arithmetic mid run on the speed number, and its meaningless when I’m slogging up the steep hills off road. Does anyone know whether a Stryd would pair as a power meter to my edge 820, and then report as running g power after changing sport afterwards ? Might save me buying a rather pricier watch in the short term
It does broadcast as an Ant+ power meter as that’s how Suunto watches connect to it so my guess would be yes.
You can also sync from the pod to the mobile app after to get the full range of other metrics (form power, leg spring stiffness etc)
I’ve been running with Stryd for a few weeks now. My wife and I have been testing out the pacing, cadence, and distance data. Compared to GPS on a smart phone and TicWatch S, it is no comparison. The TicWatch S running apps are often 30seconds to 1 min/mile off my real pace for 50% of the run. In terms of actual distance, compared to Google Maps distance markers, I find Stryd to be within 5meters. For a total 5 mile run, Stryd is off maybe by a few meters. The GPS watch / smartphones are often off by 50 to 100 meters. That’s just unacceptable. I believe the next generation of GPS chipsets may finally beat out Stryd in terms of accuracy and real time pacing data. I’ve read that there will be a new GPS chipset that gets to within a foot of accuracy. That might be something to look forward. Only time will tell. However, Stryd is here. I highly recommend it to anyone who wants better pacing info. Just make sure it’s on your shoes snug and that your laces are pretty tight. I was getting kinda bad pacing data from it when I wore my shoes loose. The footpod should not be able to move at all on the laces.
If the Stryd guys are reading,
any idea why your shipping from europe to within Europe is a shocking 20USD? Most expensive companies are around 4E within Europe, so this is pretty shocking.
I bought the stryd some time ago. During the first months of use it worked very well in giving pace and distance as well as a lot of other information. Recently though it keeps losing connection with my Fenix 3 watch and therefore I keep getting 1 or 2 minute miles.
I contacted stryd about this and they said it was a problem with the watch (this is true because the stryd does record the correct pace and distance in their app). I contacted Garmin and they said this is a third party device and therefore they can’t do anything about it.
Conclusion, I am stuck with a foot pod that keeps giving me wrong data when I am doing my workouts.
Has anybody had this problem?
Ray, I just saw your video of you running with the Stryd. You mentioned that you were also wearing the Garmin HRM-Run strap to compare data. Did you post that comparison somewhere?
Did Garmin ever make it possible to gather data in running mode? Or do you have to use cycling mode while running?
You’ve been able to use it in running mode for quite a while now. You use the Stryd data field within that mode.
Thank you! I just did some poking around and found that you first have to download the Stryd Power data field first to the ConnectIQ. Got it!
A improve a lot of with STRYD. 10.
#Trideporte #UltraIbiza #RunningBetter
Probably late to this topic but just pulled the trigger on a stryd.
Looking online it seems that stryd has some problems with suunto now that movescount is moving to suunto app and also not all stats will be there.
If what i gathered was right, stryd would work wonderfully with apple watch! seemingly if you ran with their own app on apple watch you will have all the data and great integration.
Thus, apart from battery life, for short to medium runs apple watch have become a serious runners watch with stryd integration?
I see that new orders ship in 3 weeks has anyone heard of a new model coming out?
Stryd 3.0 with Wind Measurement and new sensor will be announced today or tomorrow:
he new Stryd features a suite of new sensor technology including:
Re-design of pod structure (including the clip), to enable air flow detection
Stryd states that the external shell is able to analyse in “real-time the air and wind you are running through”
Added temperature and humidity sensors
Increased internal storage by 64x, better for the ultra training and racing as well as much higher precision data collection – as that additional granular data needs space.
Added magnetometer to enable several new and exciting and planned-for capabilities, including improved accuracy (to be enabled in future updates).
Antenna range has been greatly increased
But no comment on whether this is a hardware change or software tweak.
More importantly, perhaps is the question of how will this affect battery life?
Part of the resign has meant that we now have cable charging with two contact pads under the Stryd, rather than the wireless puck.
Stryd suggests the wind training benefits on a race are to be threefold:
Stryd – Mental benefit
Windy courses can dampen spirits and performance expectations resulting in significant impacts beyond that which the weather alone would have wrought. With the training from Stryd, you’ll have a much better understanding of a realistic impact, allowing a more realistic mental approach to the race
Stryd – Control
Tail winds are difficult to judge, both when training and in a race. You’ll likely be running faster than a gentle wind, so the impact can’t be directly seen, and thus using that wind benefit has so far been down to personal feelings.
Stryd will allow you to determine your best response to the tailwind. Gaining a measurable advantage in training, which can then be deployed in a race without the risk of exhaustion from overexertion
Stryd – Draft
I’ll be honest, this one sounds very interesting, but I wonder to what degree there will be a measurable benefit? Stryd suggest that being able to train and see the effect of drafting will enable people to focus and refine their drafting technique, bringing the obvious race advantages
Stryd – Power is in the Training
Stryd hardware is very much only part of the story. As mentioned earlier it is people like Ruby Zambrano who have been able to take the hardware dreamed up in the research labs of Boulder, Colorado, and create training plans to harness the data
Haha, that’s naughty. Didn’t you see an embargo?
Has anyone had the problem where their Stryde dies (dead battery), they charge it, and then it refuses to wake up when moved? That’s what mine is currently doing. The app connects to it, it can reset it, it can track it during a run, but when I move, the light doesn’t flash and my watch (Fenix 5+, firmware 8.40) can no longer find it.
Any suggestions anyone? It’s pretty obvious that the device works, in that it sends and receives data. Should I try factory resetting my watch?
Well, I resolved my own problem. Resetting doesn’t seem to do the trick, but if you power OFF your watch, and power it back on – all is right in the world and your Stryd is recognized once more. So if you have connection issues with a Stryd on your Garmin Fenix 5+ series – try powering off and on your watch.