Why Do My Cycling Stats Feel Inaccurate Lately? Is Anyone Else Facing This?

[nechtanan]

I’ve been cycling regularly for a while now, and one thing that has really helped me stay on track and motivated is using a tool that keeps tabs on my rides—tracking everything from distance, speed, to elevation. Recently, though, I've noticed something odd with the data I’m getting. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but my ride stats seem a bit off compared to what I’d usually expect from my performance. For example, on familiar routes where I know the distance, the tool has been recording variations that don’t seem quite right. This has been happening on both my road and mountain biking sessions. Has anyone else experienced something similar?

I started wondering if it’s something about my riding technique that’s affecting the readings. I’ve recently been focusing more on endurance and less on speed, trying to maintain a steadier pace throughout my rides. Could that kind of change make the tool think I’m covering more or less ground than I really am? I’d love to hear from other cyclists who have switched up their training routines. Do you think the way you ride affects the data accuracy?

Another possibility I’ve been thinking about is the environment I ride in. On certain routes, I’ve been going through more wooded areas, where GPS signals could be weaker. Does anyone know if that could be a factor? I’d hate to think that something as simple as tree cover could throw off the data by that much, but at the same time, I can’t ignore it. Maybe it’s just me overthinking the tech side of things, but I’d be really interested in hearing if others have found their ride environments influencing their tracking data.

Now, the main reason I’m bringing this up is because I’ve been using a cycling tracker tool that I’m honestly quite fond of. A cycling tracker, especially a real-time cycling distance tracker, is a tool that monitors various aspects of your ride, including distance, speed, elevation, and sometimes even cadence, all in real-time. It’s designed to give cyclists immediate feedback on their performance, helping them adjust and improve their ride while staying motivated. This tool has been a great companion on my rides, offering insights into my performance that I wouldn't have had otherwise. I’ve even been inspired by the way it calculates and presents my stats—it’s made me look at my cycling in a more positive light. That said, I’m still trying to figure out whether what I’m experiencing is unique to me or something more cyclists face with tools like this. My stats have always seemed pretty consistent until recently, so this shift has left me a bit puzzled. I know it could be related to signal issues or ride dynamics, but it’s hard to tell without hearing from others who might’ve had similar experiences.

I’m also curious if anyone has found specific ways to ensure the tool stays as accurate as possible. Are there things you do before or during a ride to make sure the tracking is reliable? For instance, I’ve heard of people making sure their GPS is fully synced before starting a ride or even stopping mid-ride to recalibrate things. Is that really necessary? Or is there something else that might help make sure the data I’m getting from my rides is more consistent?

At the end of the day, I’m not complaining about the tool—it’s been great, and I’ve seen how helpful it can be in keeping me motivated and improving my overall experience. I just want to make sure I’m using it in the best way possible and that I’m not overlooking something that could be causing these inconsistencies.

So, does anyone have tips on how to handle this kind of issue? I’d appreciate any suggestions on making sure my ride stats reflect what’s really going on, especially if you've run into similar problems with the accuracy of your tracking tool.

[Jesper]

I have heard of issues of accuracy with multiple platforms, but apparently considering their wide usage I assume that they are accurate enough for most folks.. Signal obstruction certainly could be a problem, but I am unsure if tree cover significantly affects it. I know weather, tall buildings in dense areas, mountains, etc. can intermittently affect signals. Possibly if your device is not mounted in an exposed manner there may be issues.

I have only used strava once and found it to be inaccurate for my purposes. I do not generally use any electronic devices (phone, gps unit, cyclometer/cyclocomputer, watch, etc.), but my most accurate and consistent readings have been recorded with a basic onboard cyclometer (spd, avg speed, max spd, distance, cadence, time; no elevation) as long as you have it set up properly and your bike set-up is consistent (total weight of you and bike w/assessories, tire pressure, riding position, etc.).

I just finished a block of training over 5 weeks consisting of near daily TT rides. I looked at the clock upon leaving and upon returning. My distance was known down to about 1/100th of a mile so easy to determine needed stats, but all I needed to see was a time reduction, and I did not need that every ride. I only did that on my first and last rides over 5 weeks. I know I improved by at least .5 to 1 minute, but I do not care other than improvement was made. I no longer race so it to see if my body gained some strength as stamina is not an issue.

I know folks get all hung up about theirs stats, heartrate, and what not; but I think, unless you are riding in a new territory or are seriously competing that data review on a second by second basis is a bit over the top although if that males your riding more enjoyable then have at it, but expect variances in accuracy depending on what you use.

Have you tried running two or more devices, applications, etc. concurrently as a means of comparing your ride data to determine the data accuracy and consistency?

My most often used equipment to measure my performance and level of effort is my bathroom scale.

[meamoantonio]

can you share more about the gear that you're using and the area you ride in? some cycling computers work well in certain areas due to the specific satellites that they access to track data