Garmin Forerunner

[Jeff Lebowski]

I guess road bikers might care more about cadence, but I think there's even an attachment for that.

Yes I have that attachment and it works well. It allows me to keep track of speed/distance on my trainer in addition to cadence and heartrate.

[ERCougar]

I actually like the big display on the 305. I can see lots of data at once.

My only complaint is that there's no display mode that shows the heart rate at any decent size. Major oversight.

Have you looked at the 405? It seems like the display isn't that much smaller; you just don't have that big thing at the bottom of the display. Memory's a little fuzzy, though--I could be wrong.

[Jeff Lebowski]

My only complaint is that there's no display mode that shows the heart rate at any decent size. Major oversight.

No, you can configure the display anyway you want, including what is displayed on each screen, where it is displayed, and how large. You could fill the screen with the heartrate if you want.

RTFD, man. (notice the cool guy use of implied swearing)

Have you looked at the 405? It seems like the display isn't that much smaller; you just don't have that big thing at the bottom of the display. Memory's a little fuzzy, though--I could be wrong.

Looks quite a bit smaller to me:

http://www.amazon.com/GARMIN-Forerun...3447650&sr=8-1

Given that fact and the poor reviews, it certainly didn't seem worth an additional $200.

I also like how I can detach the main part of the 305 and mount it on a handlebar clip. I don't think you can do that with the 405.

[il Padrino Ute]

Looks quite a bit smaller to me

What are "Seven words men hate to hear"?

Are we not playing Jeopardy?

[ERCougar]

No, you can configure the display anyway you want, including what is displayed on each screen, where it is displayed, and how large. You could fill the screen with the heartrate if you want.

RTFD, man. (notice the cool guy use of implied swearing)



Looks quite a bit smaller to me:

http://www.amazon.com/GARMIN-Forerun...3447650&sr=8-1

Given that fact and the poor reviews, it certainly didn't seem worth an additional $200.

I also like how I can detach the main part of the 305 and mount it on a handlebar clip. I don't think you can do that with the 405.

Yeah, I didn't think it was worth it either, which is why I didn't buy it. That detachable thing is cool. I usually wear it on my wrist anyway when I'm biking, but that's a nice option--would it still track cadence on your wrist?

I'll have to read how to configure my display. I'm kind of embarrassed that I didn't know you could do that.

And everyone needs to STFU about the swearing thing.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Yeah, I didn't think it was worth it either, which is why I didn't buy it. That detachable thing is cool. I usually wear it on my wrist anyway when I'm biking, but that's a nice option--would it still track cadence on your wrist?

Sure, it would work from the wrist. The cadence thing is wireless. It monitors both crank rotations and wheel rotations at the same time.

This is the quick release kit:

http://www.amazon.com/Garmin-010-108...7S875PP7DENFAW

It includes a velcro wrist band so that you can go from wrist to bike in seconds. While mounted on bike, you can push the buttons while keeping one hand free to steer.

And this is the sensor:

http://www.amazon.com/GARMIN-010-106...62EDY24AET27WW

[TripletDaddy]

And everyone needs to STFU about the swearing thing.

nice random use of profanity.

You think you are a rebel, but nobody here is buying your act.

[PaloAltoCougar]

We've noticed a quirk in our activity readouts using GarminConnect. On our ride reports, it often shows our maximum speed as being 3,000 mph or higher. We've become faster lately, but I don't that that number is accurate. The same ride on Garmin Training Center doesn't show that, so I suspect it's a bug with GarminConnect. Every other aspect of the report looks accurate.

This morning I went for a short run before heading to the golf course for the first time in many weeks. I decided to pick up the pace at mile 2. Although I ran the entire mile in about 8:30, at one point, per GarminConnect, my pace hit 1800 mph. But Mrs. PAC says she didn't hear any sonic booms while I was out there, so that max probably is wrong, too.

Anyone else see this problem with GarminConnect?

[Moliere]

We've noticed a quirk in our activity readouts using GarminConnect. On our ride reports, it often shows our maximum speed as being 3,000 mph or higher. We've become faster lately, but I don't that that number is accurate. The same ride on Garmin Training Center doesn't show that, so I suspect it's a bug with GarminConnect. Every other aspect of the report looks accurate.

This morning I went for a short run before heading to the golf course for the first time in many weeks. I decided to pick up the pace at mile 2. Although I ran the entire mile in about 8:30, at one point, per GarminConnect, my pace hit 1800 mph. But Mrs. PAC says she didn't hear any sonic booms while I was out there, so that max probably is wrong, too.

Anyone else see this problem with GarminConnect?

Yes, on Wednesday night my max speed was .03 seconds per mile.

Looking at my activity list, the bug started around July 18. Everything before that date looks normal.

[ERCougar]

So my 305 was stolen. Which sucks extra badly because I can't even sell it on eBay, where they seem to be catching pretty nice prices--some people are selling them for more than they paid. I still can't understand why Garmin would stop making what I think was about the perfect product.

I'm trying to decide what to upgrade to. I called the heart rate watch company (heartratewatchcompany.com) and he suggested that I go with the 310XT over the 910XT, but I wanted to get the boards opinion. I know niku has the 910 and it seems like coach has the 310--anyone else? I love the guy I talked to at that company, by the way. I'll give anyone credit when they pass on the upsale, but this guy is obviously a big endurance athlete and really familiar with all of the products. He said that unless I'm really wanting a barometric altimeter and stroke counter, that the $150 price difference is too much to justify the 910. With the altitude correction feature, he feels like there's not much of a difference between barometric and gps altitude, at least when barometric is measured from a watch.

So...thoughts? I want to pull the trigger today because I hate running without gps.

[Pheidippides]

I agree with the guy you talked to. Unless you want stroke metrics and indoor swim tracking (and I do because I swim indoors a lot), I think the 310 is better because of the pricing. I have loved my 910 though, about on par with my 305.

The 610 has had some durability issues - my wife has had to get a couple replacements.

[OhioBlue]

You could always simplify and go with the new Forerunner 10--lots cheaper, easy to use, no frills but solid from what I've read. I have one on the way.

Or if you like all the extra features and can't part with them then just ignore my lame suggestion.

[Joe Public]

Garmin is running a deal for the next few months: $50 credit on the trade-in of an old Forerunner when purchasing a new 210, 610, or 910XT. Details are here:

http://garmin.blogs.com/promotions/2...-in-offer.html

[PaloAltoCougar]

My 305 is still working well after four years, but I'm curious what I'm supposed to get when it dies. I want it to be suitable for both running and cycling, and I don't think I need anything more than what the 305 provides--I'm sure I underutilize what I have now.

What is the logical successor to the 305?

[Pheidippides]

My 305 is still working well after four years, but I'm curious what I'm supposed to get when it dies. I want it to be suitable for both running and cycling, and I don't think I need anything more than what the 305 provides--I'm sure I underutilize what I have now.

What is the logical successor to the 305?

I like the 610 and the 910 a lot.