Help With Treadmill Speed Calibration

Again, there is no reason to waste money on a stryd.

That idiocy sounds like something a real hobbyjogger would try to recommend. :rollseyes:

shifty principles wrote:

Buncha jerkoff answers here. She asked a legitimate question: how do you calibrate a treadmill?

I don’t know the answer, but it’s a good question.

Don't bother. It won't last. Different users will get different results. A Styrd takes care of that no more calibrating worries. In this set up the treadmil is like a bike. The Styrd is the bike computer.

What you do need to do regularly is oil the belt. And less regularly tighten all the nuts and screws (use lock washers instead of flat). Also carefully clean out all the accumulated dust and grim from the moving parts (rollers).

Speaking of wasting money, this treadmill wasn't cheap, which is why I'm not totally satisfied with the "run by feel" suggestion. I guess I should have just gotten something cheap if I knew it wouldn't matter.

it's cold outside wrote:

That **** sounds like ***

0/10

You are just a troll trying to derail TX's thread.

Rick Sanchez wrote:

Pull the plug from the wall. Turn the potentiometer on circuit board 62. Retest it.

The flux capacitor will need to be regulated as well or the whole thing will probably explode.

Here is an idea: get out of here with your spamming this and other threads trying to sell a next to useless, waste of money, pod device, m'kay?

it's cold outside wrote:

Here is an idea: get out of here with your spamming this and other threads trying to sell a next to useless, waste of money, pod device, m'kay?

The Stryd is actually quite useful for running on ill calibrated dreadmills, they don’t all have HR monitors anyway. I see your point but some of us derive the necessary feedback from pace at perceived effort. Wristband HR monitors blow and I don’t want to wear a strap-on anymore than I want to wear a....ahh...strap-on. Different strokes.

The accuracy of the watch depends on your pace. At some speeds, it can easily be off by more than half a minute/mile.

First, you should actually measure the real pace to see if it is off. Supposedly, the footpod is accurate, but I used a couple pieces of tape, a tape measure, and a stopwatch. I found out that my treadmill was within 3 s/mile of the set pace at all my running speeds. For myself, the treadmill is harder than outdoors even with only a 0.5% incline. I attribute this to lack of wind/cooling.

If you use the tape method, be sure to measure with/without someone on it to see if there is a difference.

If it is off, whether or not it can be adjusted depends on the treadmill. I suspect that most cannot be easily adjusted.

milkdoesthebodygood wrote:

Wristband HR monitors blow and I don’t want to wear a strap-on ...

Look at all the elites and serious racers of today, and you'll likely find over 85% of them own a GPS with a HR monitor built-in. That number may be higher if you restrict it to sub-elites and elites. But what % of that population owns a pod (unless they are sponsored by Stryd)? <5%?

So basically, the GPS is standard equipment, and if one spends their money wisely, they can get one that pairs up with a chest strap which provides running dynamics, thus, a lot better investment than a pod.

This might answer your question. You can try it see if it works. Some of the Nordictracks only have a user incline calibration. This can be found in the online user manual for your model. Good luck. Btw. If it does have speed calibration it’s usually a good idea to run calibration two or three times. Repeatability can sometimes be an issue. If it is then your sensor might be out of position.

https://www.nordictrackfitness.com.au/support/incline-trainers/SpeedCalibration2

I have a different NT treadmill model and it's also off. Get a Ruun from North Pole Engineering and it'll transmit actual belt speed to your watch. It's easy to install and set up.

https://npe-inc.com/runn-smart-treadmill-sensor/

https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2020/01/npe-runn-treadmill-smart-sensor-everything-you-need-to-know.html

it's cold outside wrote:

milkdoesthebodygood wrote:

Wristband HR monitors blow and I don’t want to wear a strap-on ...

Look at all the elites and serious racers of today, and you'll likely find over 85% of them own a GPS with a HR monitor built-in. That number may be higher if you restrict it to sub-elites and elites. But what % of that population owns a pod (unless they are sponsored by Stryd)? <5%?

So basically, the GPS is standard equipment, and if one spends their money wisely, they can get one that pairs up with a chest strap which provides running dynamics, thus, a lot better investment than a pod.

While that may or may not be the case, we are trying to solve the problem of getting accurate pace from a treadmill, not meeting the status quo with regards to standard issue equipment of elite runners. Pace is relevant to most of us and a pod (particularly the Stryd) is a great way to get that data when GPS isn’t available or just isn’t reliable, like when running on trails with a canopy of trees.

Have a technician come and ‘repair’ the mill and my guess is you’re out $150 at least....if you have a bike with a computer on it you could try putting the measured wheel on the belt and see how close the speeds line up at different paces? For me the simplest answer is the Stryd when I’m forced to jump on the treadmill, which is usually a last resort because my legs are too beat up for anything else or there is a blizzard outside....I like having it anyway for the (closer to) instant pace not having to consider WHERE I need to run to use GPS effectively.

Frankly, those pods can be inaccurate as well, not to mention its another thing to futz with, wasting time, with bluetooth connections, etc.

A decent HR monitor gives the final verdict of what was actually accomplished in the workout, regardless of all the elevation changes and pace changes, clothing, shoes, humidity and temperature, etc., since Heart Rate takes all of those things into account.

Check the Runners World issue from a few months ago that explained one way to do this. It involved tape on the treadmill, but instead of using one long piece to measure the belt, it suggested using 3 pieces / 3 measurements and adding them together. Then doing the math. But like others have mentioned, there will still be issues of variance over time, belt slippage, and whatever effect your footstrike causes (related to belt slippage too).

health is the main thing wrote:

Daniels Running Formula tells you how to check your treadmill speed. But it’s kind of common sense. When it is turned off, measure the length of the belt (that you run on). Use chalk to mark a line, and then when the treadmill is running at a “speed” you want to check, use a stopwatch to see how long it takes the belt to do 100 times around. Use simple math to see how far you would have run in those 100 revolutions, and compare it to the speed on the console.

This does not account for the tmill slowing down briefly when you land for each stride, but it’s a good approximation.

This is a good method. It can also be done while running on the treadmill, but I would use a piece of tape so it's easier to see. Also it's easy to skip a count so do it a few times, throw out any times that are way off, and average the rest of the times. Make sure to start your count at zero the first time you see the tape, not one.

Another accurate method is to use a measuring wheel. Use one with a larger diameter wheel, they cost about $80-$100 but you can use it to measure out road distances too. Here's a video of a guy running a four minute mile with a mask on a treadmill, at about 9:30 he shows how to calibrate with a wheel:

That method is unreliable, sorry. I tried it too. You can't say what speed the belt would actually be going with you on it when the treadmill says 15.1mph. My experiments show the belt will be 5-10% faster with no-one on it. E.g. 15 kph according to treadmill without me on it is actually just 14.5 kph belt speed when I'm on it.

All confirmed with multiple methods.

You have to use a sensor that measures the actual belt speed when you are running on it. Runn is the best I have found followed by TreadTracker. Use stickers and high speed video to calibrate Runn and from then on it will always be accurate whether you're on treadmill or not. It measures the belt speed regardless.

LTHR hurts wrote:

That method is unreliable, sorry. I tried it too. You can't say what speed the belt would actually be going with you on it when the treadmill says 15.1mph. My experiments show the belt will be 5-10% faster with no-one on it. E.g. 15 kph according to treadmill without me on it is actually just 14.5 kph belt speed when I'm on it.

All confirmed with multiple methods.

You have to use a sensor that measures the actual belt speed when you are running on it. Runn is the best I have found followed by TreadTracker. Use stickers and high speed video to calibrate Runn and from then on it will always be accurate whether you're on treadmill or not. It measures the belt speed regardless.

+1

Perform the factory calibration via the manual.

Measure the belt.

Count # revolutions while you are running on the belt.....easy enough at slow speeds.

Do math.

Be done.

Alan