let me add my comments to the pace discussion:
Finaly the GS-Team implemented an other algorythm, I think based on the last 600 m, to calculate pace.
The display of GH625 refreshes the pace-values every some seconds in a little range.
It's not exactly like that. I have found the latest posting by Geoffrey, where he explained:
The inital pace is base on the beginning 3 mins to calculate. (=3min/dist).
And re-calculate by every 3 sec shifting. (=3min/ dist)
This all applies to the GH-625 algorithm.
For the new GH-505 I have to admit, that I didn't take much care about the pace values
(maybe I should do next time...). But I can tell the reason, why I didn't watch the pace:
From the long and very detailed discussion about pace for GH-625, I had to understand, that:
I think we runners have to live with the low sensitivity because of the systematic GPS-error which is relative high at slow speeds like running-speed.
In the meantime I have accepted the fact, that we have to decide whether we want to have a
* Low sensitive but rather constant value showing an average of last 3 Min. (or similar) or
* High sensitive but randomly jumping value showing an almost current value.
Both are not what I originally wanted to have and what compares to what you are used to from
higher speed moving (bike or car).
So I know, that pace won't never be perfect. However - for me the GH-625 calculation was okay.
Whatever algorithm we might have - I always will have in mind, that the shown pace is not my true pace !
And I have accepted, that with current technology it will not be possible to show an exact value.
And "exact" means for a runner to see the difference between a pace of 4:30 or 4:40 (Min./km)
And this could be very important (especially in a competition).
So as a summary, for me it doesn't matter which algorithm we use. Both are not more than a guess.