<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Nobel Canyon</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stephenskory.com/2009/10/04/nobel-canyon/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stephenskory.com/2009/10/04/nobel-canyon</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 23:31:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Skory</title>
		<link>http://stephenskory.com/2009/10/04/nobel-canyon/comment-page-1#comment-9934</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Skory</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:59:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stephenskory.com/?p=628#comment-9934</guid>
		<description>My version, the Forerunner 301, was marketed before Garmin differentiated between running and cycling versions, so there is no distinction, and may also have an older GPS chip and software than yours.

Of course, it all depends greatly on the terrain and foliage. In the treeless desert, which is very common around San Diego, it works great, of course. It doesn&#039;t handle fast changes in altitude very well, however. There can be a large time lag in accurate altitude on fast descents.

With respect to your actual question, I don&#039;t see anomalous altitude changes very often, so even if the absolute value of altitude is off (which is easily judged when I ride along the coast), d(altitude) seems pretty good for even small rises in the road.

Isn&#039;t the Golden Bear quarter mile track surrounded by trees? That could be a contributing factor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My version, the Forerunner 301, was marketed before Garmin differentiated between running and cycling versions, so there is no distinction, and may also have an older GPS chip and software than yours.</p>
<p>Of course, it all depends greatly on the terrain and foliage. In the treeless desert, which is very common around San Diego, it works great, of course. It doesn&#8217;t handle fast changes in altitude very well, however. There can be a large time lag in accurate altitude on fast descents.</p>
<p>With respect to your actual question, I don&#8217;t see anomalous altitude changes very often, so even if the absolute value of altitude is off (which is easily judged when I ride along the coast), d(altitude) seems pretty good for even small rises in the road.</p>
<p>Isn&#8217;t the Golden Bear quarter mile track surrounded by trees? That could be a contributing factor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LLLL</title>
		<link>http://stephenskory.com/2009/10/04/nobel-canyon/comment-page-1#comment-9933</link>
		<dc:creator>LLLL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:40:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stephenskory.com/?p=628#comment-9933</guid>
		<description>How reliable is the altitude on the cycling Garmins? For my running version, I often see ~50 ft. of climb/descent each lap of the Golden Bear quarter mile track.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How reliable is the altitude on the cycling Garmins? For my running version, I often see ~50 ft. of climb/descent each lap of the Golden Bear quarter mile track.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

