UKC

High time I invested in one.

So,any recommendations ?

Cheers

In reply to andymac:
Can't fault my FR630hr

Would probably get 735xt now but either would be a great choice.

In reply to Indy:
Cheers.

Yes,just looking at the 630 on Amazon.£255

Not totally clear ,but did yours come with a chest heart rate monitor?

#Edit ,yes seperate hrm included.

In reply to andymc:
re: FR630 etc
Watch the battery life, I sold mine (very slow runner!) as if you into Ultra's you will probably need something else such as a Fenix.

In reply to Indy:



Ive got this. Great watch and i get to slyly see my emails/notifications without looking at my phone. Works well as a running watch too.

In reply to andymac:

The 735Xt is a triathlon watch, if you just want a running watch then no point on paying for stuff you wont use.

Go for either the 230 or 630 depending on how geeky you are about the sort of stats that you probably didn't know could even be tracked. Check out dcrainmaker.com for reviews and comparisons between any of the Garmins.

I've got the 230, has a 16 hour battery life in GPS mode, and does all I need, including smart notifications and step counter, etc. The new Garmins can get apps added to them, I've got one that gives me my grid ref in OS coords for running, walking in the hills.

Some of the Garmins ( and other makes ) come with wrist based optical heart rate monitoring ( eg the 235 is the same as the 230 buy with OHRM ). These are pretty accurate at resting heart rate, but are pretty inaccurate at high intensity ( doing intervals etc ) - you can't beat a chest strap for accuracy, so best avoided imo.

In reply to steelbru:

>I've got the 230, has a 16 hour battery life in GPS mode, and does all I need, including smart notifications and step counter, etc. The new Garmins can get apps added to them, I've got one that gives me my grid ref in OS coords for running, walking in the hills.

Have you actually achieved this time. My 620 had a 10 hour battery life and was great watch, but I never got more than 7:40! Sold on eBay now.

In reply to andymac:

What's it for? I deliberated for ages and finally got a Polar M400 for running and some other training and it's brilliant.

In reply to SouthernSteve:

No, not yet tested it down to zero battery to see how long it lasts.

I'm guessing the quoted times will be the maximum possible, in terms of various options/sounds off, rate of GPS sampling, screen brightness, no notifications coming through, not using the light, etc, etc

In reply to andymac:

As the replies so far illustrate - it depends what you want to use it for.

I've had an Garmin 310XT for the last 5 years or so. This is aimed at the triathlon market. I liked it on the bike but felt a bit self-conscious running with an big orange lump on my wrist! More recently I've found it's been taking ages to acquire a satellite signal before I start, which is a pain.

My focus now is ultra running, hiking, biking and triathlon; maybe all day on the go sometimes.

I've just ordered a Suunto Ambit 3 Peak HR off ebay, £229 is a good chunk off RRP; 310XT will be ebayed shortly. Friends and online research tell me that the GPS accuracy and battery life of Ambit3 are superior to Garmin's Fenix 3, which is the equivalent. Suunto software also shows you these amazing animated videos of your route, after the event, from a birds' eye view; I love that. Fenix 3 has some extra functionality and looks prettier, but I'm not so fussed about that.

Check dcrainmaker online for all you ever wanted to know about such gadgets, and much more besides..

In reply to andymac:

I use a Garmin 230. It's fine - does the job very well, gets a GPS fix very quickly, doesn't look horrible (in fact, the option to add apps means you can give it an analogue face for everyday wear if you want). Battery life is good for the length of runs and races I do. Individual workouts can be programmed via Garmin Connect.

Having used other Garmins previously, I did look at the 630, but decided that the extra features wouldn't make me run any faster, and I was also put off by the touchscreen, which on the 610, was absolutely f*cking woeful.

And I'd support what everyone else says about the dcrainmaker reviews - they're an excellent resource.

In reply to steelbru:





This is why constant OHR is great - you can track your RHR and use it to manage your training load effectively/nourish your inner data geek. You can also use a chest strap with OHR devices so you can have better quality measurements whilst actually training - best of both worlds IMO.

In reply to andymac:

There are so many that you need to think about what you want out of it.

I've just ordered my new one. I knew I wanted good levels of waterproofing and the ability to show lat long co-ordinates.

I would have liked on wrist HR for those times I couldn't be bothered to use a chest strap, but I've had to forego that at my price point to get better waterproofing (10ATM rather than 5ATM). I've made other compromises too, but hopefully the Suunto ambit3 vertical will suit me.

I think most would find it hard to recommend a single model based on 'just want one' You can spend anything from £80 to £600.

I guess those on the forum who know you and your running/exercise regime will be best placed to advise.

Cheers

djb

In reply to andymac:

I have a FR230. I like it. I don't run far enough to test the battery life to the limit I'm afraid, but it has lots of features I like. I have installed the dwmap app which is basic but cool. I create a route on Strava, export the gpx, import that to the app and sync it to the watch. It's a simple 'you're a dot, your route is a line' deal, but it saves looking at a map or getting your phone out. You just keep the dot on the line and it's there on your wrist. I used it on a long route in the Peak at the weekend and found it really useful.

In reply to andymac:

Thanks guys

In reply to andymac:

Went for the Garmin 230 in the end.

Heard of a few people who have had issues with the touchscreen on the 630, as someone mentioned on this thread.

Wasn't convinced the 235 with wrist Hrm would be accurate ,so 230 it is.

In reply to andymac:

Much the same as my thinking. I've had a 230 for a few months and love it.

- I had a 110 prior to this and the 230 is waaaaay faster picking up a signal. in fact the 110 is woefully slow at times

- bluetooth syncing with my phone is absultely crucial to me and mostly works perfectly (never 100% with Garmin!)

- the extra 'analytics' that come with the 620/630 are not useful to me and the 620 in particular is a good bit bulkier than the 230

- the notifications are surprisingly useful, I can check if I have urgent emails from work, more importantly texts from the boss , and immediate instagram feedback if I'm out for a long run (vain I know)

- it vibrates as well as beeps on the mile (110 only beeped and I'd often miss it) - I like to monitor mile splits

- I like the adjustability of the screens and other info like Vo2max etc.

- the chest strap is much better than earlier Garmin ones and like you I wasn't convinced by the optical wrist monitor (according to the reviews)

- did an ultra on Saturday night and it lasted 13 hours in use - I haven't charged it yet and it still isnt on low battery

- I think it looks ok too, better than the 110, it's quite subtle