A disappointing problem with the Nike+ system is that the device is not consistent when measuring distance. I run the same route every day. I measured the route quite precisely using my bicycle odometer: it is a shade longer than 6.2 miles, enough to ensure a 10 kilometer route. The Nike+ system, which is based on an accelerometer which fits in the runner's shoe, clocks this route at anywhere from 5.9 to 6.5 miles.
I suppose that makes the system about 90% accurate, and for a non-competitive slug like me perhaps absolute accuracy is not essential. Still, today I was disappointed when the Nike+ announced the end of my run was 5.99 miles in a time of 1:02, with an average mile pace of 10:29. In reality, at 1:02 for 6.2 miles I achieved very close to a ten-minute mile average pace, which is my current goal.
From what I have observed, the Nike+ records distances as being shorter when the running pace is consistent, and longer when the pace varies throughout the workout.
I suppose that makes the system about 90% accurate, and for a non-competitive slug like me perhaps absolute accuracy is not essential. Still, today I was disappointed when the Nike+ announced the end of my run was 5.99 miles in a time of 1:02, with an average mile pace of 10:29. In reality, at 1:02 for 6.2 miles I achieved very close to a ten-minute mile average pace, which is my current goal.
From what I have observed, the Nike+ records distances as being shorter when the running pace is consistent, and longer when the pace varies throughout the workout.
Page Summary
Designed by 
chasethestars
chasethestars
Comments
When I run or ride I typically do the same course so the distance is not a variable
I'm probably going to return to the basic stopwatch method soon, either instead of or in addition to the Nike+. (Of course, the Nike+ records the time of the run, so it is a glorified stopwatch of sorts.)