Which is better?
I am also having this dilema! I have been using the Nike+ sportsband since I started running about 18 months ago, never really had any problems with it until recently, for th last 2 months it's not been able to connect to the site and upload my runs. I am thinking of investing in a Garmin as well. Are you able to keep a track of your runs online somehow? As I do like the Nike+ site with a log of all your stats.
Sounds great, I think I'll take the plunge and get one!
Decided to get the Garmin as was really good value on Amazon however price has gone up again so going to wait - Thanks for everyone's feedback and opinion - If any further updates then fire away in the meanwhile happy running!!!
I have never used a Garmin so can only call out what I think are the good and bad points of the Nike+ GPS.
I suppose the good point is that you can add functionality to the watch, I have been able to do a little more withthe watch that I could when I first bought it. The other plus point is that you can connect it to your Shoe Pod for running indoors on a treadmill.
The main bad points for me is when it comes to support. The Nike website is dire when it comes to speed and also its very difficult to add runs manually.
It depends what you want in a watch but if i had to go back to when I bought my Nike I would have thought twice if I knew the website was so poor. Probably the best idea to ask for demo and compare them side by side in the shop.
I have had a garmin for 3 years now, just a 205, the bulky cheapish one, but it has multisport, gps and easily programmable intervals. However on a recent spur of the moment holiday i forgot to pack it - i love running in new places and uploading the maps when i get home, so much so i decided to buy a GPS watch at the airport. The only thing available was the Nike+ GPS.
So I have both (although the nike for monly a few weeks now)
Nike+ ( In comparison to 205)
Pros - great fit on the wrist (can pull layers on/off easily), better/faster GPS pick-up (than the 205 anyway), friendly interface online, vibrate function would be good for races, good to have the option for a foot-pod for heavily built-up cities/treadmills,
Cons - limited information available on screen (only 2 data fields to garmins 4), touch screen is not particularly handy when running, battery life is very poor as it continues to work as a watch when not used for running, use for speed work is very limited
I think the Nike will be my back-up watch, I'll always be a Garmin girl...
Thanks for the update all - Nike+GPS has gone down to £122 on Amazon whilst the Garmin 410 has gone upto £177..Need to find it cheaper say £145 or so or wait for it to go down again...
Thanks for the update Katiecom and DMax great to get opinions..
Tim, check out ebay - i just did a quick search and you can get the garmin 410 for £130 (incl postage)!
Tim - I got a Garmin Forerunner 110 about 2 weeks ago and it is brilliant.
Only £90 from sweatshop.co.uk (or com)
Let me throw a major spanner in the works!
Why not POLAR? They are one of the biggest and best firms in the world for runners tech after all!
For a runner, GPS is not that necessary. There are many sites which you can use to map your run when you get home (www.mapmyrun.com etc.). A foot pod is much more useful for anybody trying to improve personal bests. Information like Cadence and Stride Length are much more important than any location logging.
ALSO, Polar Personal Trainer 5 software is far more superior than, Garmin BaseCamp. PolarPersonalTrainer.com is likewise more superior to both Garmin Connect and Nike+.
There is a drawback though! Both the Polar software and web-site are considerably more difficult to use (just takes time). Nike+ has that very childlike interface and Garmin is just not as comprehensive as Polar.
Polar also have GPS add-ons, Definitely have a look at them (RS800 is amazing) GPS is NOT the be all and end all.
P.S. You also won't get a better heart rate monitor including R-R (HRV) recording.
A spanner indeed....I have however made a decision and with the price dropping today on Amazon have ordered the Garmin 410 GPS with Heart Rate Monitor...Will update when it arrives on how the running goes - I also secretly hope that the Nike + Band I have been using has in fact been slightly out in recording my distances and the Garmin tells me that I am running further and faster than I previously thought!!! Wishful thinking I am sure....
I've just started running and I'm using the Nike Running+ iPhone App.
It's great and FREE! I would have my iPhone with me anyway to play music, so why not use it to map my run within the App itself as well?
Now, I'm a bit of a Nike fanboy if I'm honest, but I LOVE the Facebook & Twitter integration as well as the GPS tracking, pace measureing and audio feedback through the headphones.
The only thing it doesn't track is the heartrate, but as mentioned before, you can combine the App with various other Nike+ products and heartrate monitors if that's what you want.
For me, it's just about perfect. Who knows, maybe I'll think differently when I've progressed a bit, but for now, it's great!
apologies for gate crashing your thread Tim - I was given a Garmin 410 with HRM for my birthday a couple of weeks ago - I'm really pleased with it and amazed by the detail of the analysis of eadh run - only thing that i'm slighly disappointed with is i had seen the nike + community bench marking from a friends Nike + watch - is there something similar for Garmin that I havent managed to locate?
I used the nike+ pedometer (on a nano) for years when I was more of a jogger than a runner, but it was handy. It got me more into running and gave me enough data to show I was improving...plus I run with an ipod anyway when training so the little sensor wasnt a big expense or problem.
12-18 months ago wanted more accuracy, and it was about the time the nike+ gps watch came out so I thought it was a good natural move to get that......and well I gave it a chance....a good chance....several firmware updates and a replacement watch chance....but in the end the GPS sensor was just so inconsistant it made the collected data useless. I even wore it for a couple of half marathons (one in UK, one in US) and both times it was very short on reporting distance (almost a mile in one race) which obviously ruined all my pacing data I was using it for. So then I picked up a garmin 405 for a song on amazon...and whilst I miss the nike flashy-ness, the garmin data is rock solid and consistant. I ran the brighton marathon this year wearing both....garmin was spot on 26.2 where the nike gps watch was 25.1......yeh, case closed! That said, if you are happy to run with a phone on you, the nike+ app on the iphone 4s (about £3) is really good and pretty accurate as its constantly being tweaked and worked on.
Not really sure what the nike+ fuel band is like for accuracy though? Its chock full of sensors so it might be closer....although costs more than a GPS watch and it doesnt have GPS, but if you are more of a cross trainer it might be worth looking at
I recommend learning how to download workouts and use them on the Garmin. Great for all those "run at pace for a distance/time and recover" intervals in the training schedules.
Visit the official Runner's World page
Follow Runner's World on Twitter
Other Natmag-Rodale Sites
Run For Charity
About Runner's World
Runner's World is a publication of Hearst Magazines UK which is the trading name of The National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.
Website powered by: Immediate Media Company Ltd. | © Runner's World 2002-2013 |