Views on the Garmin Forerunner 110 - Gear

Anne Rogers

04/07/2010 at 11:32

Is anyone actually using the Garmin 110? I've seen various posts about it, but none from anyone who's actually using it. I am doing longer outdoor runs now & because I am a goals orientated person I find it quite helpful to know how far I've run. At the moment that means plotting my route on a map with one of those distance measurer wheel thingys.

I've always been put off GPS watches before by their size. They're all MASSIVE. For someone with a wrist measurement of 15.5cm every single one I've tried on has felt about as comfortable as wearing a brick. Quite a few of them look like bricks, too... My current sports watch has a face diameter of 3.8cm & that feels big on my wrist. I don't want anything much bigger really.

OK, I know they have to cram in all that technology, & you have to be able to see the screen without needing binoculars, but come on guys & gals at Garmin et. al - some of us like more discreet & comfortable kit!

I don't want millions of buttons, or lots of fancy 'virtual partner' stuff. Just the basics. The 110 looks to have them. It is also jolly expensive (no surprise there, then), so I don't want to make a mistake in my purchase...

So come on you Garmin 110 users/fans - comments please!

Grumpydirtbag

04/07/2010 at 17:25

http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/B003EG83LK/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

hope to...

04/07/2010 at 21:18

I think it looks good, apart from the fact it only gives pace every mile/kilometre. I need to keep a closer eye on whether I have set off too fast or too slowly.

If my Garmin 305 which I lost 2 months ago would turn up, I would'nt even be considering this. I could'nt fault the 305, apart from its size.

04/07/2010 at 22:34

I've just got mine and absolutely I love it, I wanted something simple with not too many bells and whistles, and it does exactly what it says on the tin.I'm petite with tiny wrists and the size is fine.

I find the average pace is fine you can set it to lap shorter than 1 mile or 1 k (I think it's in 1/4 mile or 400m increments but I'd have to check). I find average pace is accurate enough for me - OH has a 310xt if it's not set to auto lap pace the pace leaps around all over the place.

I wouldn't hesitate, it's my new best friend.

Anne Rogers

06/07/2010 at 09:11

Thanks folks, especially k, for your responses. Helpful. Just have to try to square buying a 'watch' for £200!

Stevie see

06/07/2010 at 13:48

I am right in saying that for £200 the 110 doesn't tell your current pace? Only every KM? Rubbish that. I really need a GPS that can tell me at any given moment how quick (or slow!!) I'm running. Any suggestions? I like the Garmins just because of the Harmin Connect feature. Not keen on the telly on the wrist look though

Vin Harlin

13/07/2010 at 19:25

had mine for around 3 months and think its great! did not want anything to complicated as the eyes are not what they used to be! very simple to use and read,when you get home hook up to pc and gives me all i need broken down into splits,route etc paid £155 delivered if that helps!no h/r monitor,again not needed..

snake-hips

13/07/2010 at 20:39

where did you get it for £155?

Plus I'm getting a garmin, just need to decide between the 110 or 305/405 - anyone any thoughts on this?

Like the OP I need figures to stay motivated, I'm guess all the garmins can offer you mile splits (in a graph format) ?

14/07/2010 at 06:15

If you want simplicity on the move but graphs with all the info when you get back then I would go with the 110.

If you want more buttons to fiddle with, virtual training partner etc then you will have to go with 305 or 405. The 305 is a bulky beast, the 405 is more like a large watch. Some people report problems with the touch bezel in the rain/sweat, though I believe you can lock the bezel. You could go for the 310xt of course but that is more dosh.

OH has a 310xt and I have a 110 they both produce the same data when up loaded to Garmin software on PC.

When you think about it how much info do you need when actually running, if you are running with your eyes glued to your watch you are probably going to trip over something (or fall in a river which is what my OH nearly did the other night PMSL)

(I'm guessing £155 without HRM I have seen it for round about that if you Google. Personally I would have the HRM if you are into the numbers, I find it very handy and always set the display to show it)

Deeman

14/09/2010 at 08:43

I have menioned this on another post about the 110 already, but worth repeating here as I thought this was a good review of the 110

http://gpswatches.org.uk/garmin-forerunner-110-gps-watch-review/

the same site also does price comparison on quite a few retailers

http://gpswatches.org.uk/garmin-forerunner-110-price-comparison/

at time of posting this the cheapest price was £127 for a unisex 110

Tim Kerm

24/10/2011 at 22:48

I recently bought the Garmin Forerunner after reading a decent review here:

http://muffintopexercisesrevealed.com/heart-rate-monitor-watch/garmin-forerunner/110-review/garmin-forerunner-110-review

I must say I'm pretty impressed with some of the features. Very simple to use yet, does the job you need it to do efficiently.

Hope this helps

RoadRunner76

24/10/2011 at 22:52

They're all pretty expensive, aren't they? And not exactly on the small size, so might that not attract the wrong sort of attention potentially? All I want is something to accurately measure distance, speed and calories burnt - isn't there something out there that would do the job for much less outlay?

Right now, I plot my routes at MapMyRun or similar, but that's no use if I do a 'go anywhere' run, because I won't remember the route and we all just feel like going out there and running anywhere occasionally, don't we?