The only thing I've gotten lately is my 100 mile bragging rights sticker! :drinker:

Got sick of the barometric altimeter on the Garmin 705 saying I was riding down a hill all day, every time it rained (which has been pretty much every ride this summer), so bit the bullet and bought a Edge 800 to replace it a couple of weeks ago. All things considered its a great improvement on the 705, though they've gone a little overboard with correcting the 705's well documented propensity to over-read on calorie values. For the same ride, the 705 gave a reading of 2899kcals, and the 800 came in at 1688kcals.

I really need to do a bit of testing on the Tacx trainer, and see how the 800's figure compares to the actual calories computed from the power development. Apparently, it's possible to "dial in" the 800 by adjusting your height - if you overstate how tall you are, it reads a higher calorie value, understate and it reads lower. So - if I run a series of 5k rides, comparing the calories from the Tacx and the Garmin 800, I can dial in the Garmin figures to match the Tacx (which calculates calories burned from the Actual Power Development at the rear wheel - almost as good as from a SRM crankset according to my physio/trainer)

I have to say, I had already do this process for the 705, though with the 705 you actually amended the rider weight rather than the rider height to get the consistent figures. For the purposes of the comparison test above, however, I set the 705 back to it's "untweaked" status - correct rider height, age, gender and weight, all HR zones based on correct RHR and MHR - the same settings being used on the 800 - which made the 2899/1688kcal difference of opinion slightly scary!

One thing I "may" investigate is the new HR Belt/Pseudo-Powermeter from Cycleops - the Powercal. It's supposed to be more accurate than most of the HR algorithms in it's calorie/power calculations, and it's only the price of a night out in the pub more than a replacement Garmin belt... and seeing as the HR belt that came with the 705 is looking very worse for wear, I'd probably need a replacement soon anyway!

Oh - and I think I may be in the market for a new pair of riding shoes as well - my current Specialized ones are still in great condition, but (and this has completely amazed me!) as I've lost 140lb, even my feet have got smaller! Yep - not only are they not as fat and pudgy, but the reduced weight has meant that my fallen arches have re-arched, and I now appear to need a size smaller shoe!... Who'd have thunk it :laugh:

I'd be interested in the outcome of your tests to calibrate the 800 to give more accurate calorie burn. I am finding a massive difference between the 800 and my old Polar FT4 HRM - not just a little but like 2/3 of the reading at least. I lost a couple of pounds and yet again it's dropped very dramatically. I suspect the Polar was slightly overstated, but not that much!! Interesting that there is such a difference between the Edge 800 and the 705 though. When I was researching the Edge 800 before I bought it they said the calculations are based on a very sophisticated system developed by a third party.

The only other thing about the 800 is still the varying of the altitudes and gains/losses. Even if the start elevation isn't right, the same journey should still give you the same gains or losses, surely, but my commute comes out differently every day!

And yep, some of my normal shoes became too big for me when I lost 5 stones a few years ago - had to buy loads of insoles!!! Of all the places I want to lose weight feet is probably the place I am least bothered about trimming down!!

Just ordered a new Wahoo Blue HRM and Speed/Cadence Sensor to go with my iPhone Cyclemeter app.

Just ordered a new Wahoo Blue HRM and Speed/Cadence Sensor to go with my iPhone Cyclemeter app.

Let me know how you get on with this; I've got the ANT+ set, but may need a new one for the new bike