Three years ago I bought a Forerunner 405 and although most of the time I loved it, I got fed up of it taking ages to find a signal and then losing it again periodically during my runs. I am now wanting to buy a new running watch and just wondered, over the last three years what has changed and which one I should be looking at now.
All advice gratefully received.
If I was buying one again I'd probably still get the Forerunner 610 that I bought nearly 3 years ago (in the absence of it's next iteration). Never an issue gaining sat lock or losing it - and lasted nearly 3 years.
I have a Forerunner 310xt and I do like it. In particular, I like the fact that it is waterproof, it can be used for triathlon (of a fashion), it lasts a long time on a full charge and it connects via Ant+.
If I was buying again, I would probably buy the 910xt instead, because it has the ability to count lengths when swimming and it is slightly slimmer.
However, if you need a watch simply for running, then there are probably better alternatives, so ignore the above.
Struggling with the signal probably means it was either faulty or the coverage where you're running isn't that good; probably faulty. I picked up a 410 recently; only because they're were dead cheap and have had no problems.
I've never had s garmin but now have s bryton cardio and sm very impressed by it. dc rainmaker has done a great review of the cardio 60 for triathletes. I havr the runners version (cardio 40) which cost less than second hand gatmin310 and the bryton is properly water tight to 30m and not just ipx7 like the 310. i am very happy with it Although the bryton website has taken me a whlie to get around. If you have loads of cash- then the 910 is a great shout, if not the bryton is a good second choice.
I didn't think twice about buying a second 610 after I destroyed my first in a trail run.
I've found this to be the most usable and reliable of the forerunners I've had. I think they've nailed it with the seek casing, touchscreen and display and the functionality is really comprehensive. GPS is generally quick.
On the less positive side, I did find after 2 years the strap had a tendency to come off and the back had blistered. Definitely keep your warranty. I notice on the more recent version Garmin have made some incremental improvements, including a different back and ANT USB.
I don't think Garmin Connect is too bad and Garmin continues to enhance, although there are better third party apps if you make the effort.
+1 for 610
Please please please conside the Suunto Ambit2 S or the Polar RC3. They are absolutely mint watches and probably better than the Garmins!
Out of interest, in what way are they better than the Garmins? Better margins for the retailers
Very please with the 610. I did have the issue with the watch back blistering. It was replaced under warranty after a year
I have the Garmin 410 at the moment, and for the most part I love it. It does it's job and it does it extremely well, though the touch bezel is a bit hit & miss! I've had it for about 5 or 6 months now and it still catches me out sometimes!
the 610 is my next watch, so that gets my vote for now! Just hoping for a price drop sooner or later!
Mmmmm......interesting reading as currently pondering a running watch was nailed on to plump for 610 but stumbled across a criticism about battery life and that recharging kind of zaps it very quickly and not overtime me!! Which is poor when shelling out a lot of cash!!!Any thoughts from 610 users on this?
I have the 610 had it about 15/16 months still playing and tweaking the displays... Great piece of kit.
I've used a selection of Garmins including the 301, 305, 310, 210 and 610 (and the FR50 and 60). I`ve also dabbled with devices from Nike and Polar. For my money, the Garmin 610 is a very good running watch indeed.
Don't get me wrong, the device and indeed the company, are not perfect. I've had a fair amount of trouble with the strap (wrist strap securing pins kept popping out). When I raised this with various Garmin representatives they swore, hand on heart, that they had never heard of the problem. This, frankly, was a lie - one only has to Google the problem to see that it is, or certainly was, widespread.
Their mendacity encouraged me to look elsewhere. I had a good look at the Suunto Ambit range. Whilst undoubtedly powerful (and very expensive) bits of kit, the informed consensus seemed to be that they made for better trail running watches. They had certain obvious defects such as the lack of the vibration alarm and the inability of the foot pods to cut in when satellite signal was lost. Interval functionality was also apparently limited. Have a look at DC Rainmaker`s comprehensive reviews on all watches, including the Ambits. Also, on the subject of customer service, Suunto caused enormous anger when they replaced the Ambit 1 series with Ambit 2 series. Suunto had previously indicated they would provide updates and software patches for the Ambit 1 for the foreseeable future. That all went out the window with the sudden and surpise intro of the Ambit 2. Lots of people who had just spent £350 on an Ambit 1 - assuming it was future proof got rather cross when the Ambit 2 popped up and support was pulled for the Ambit 1 (I think some kind of partial compromise may have been eventually reached). I guess the message is that for most of these big companies profit is king and the customer can go screw once he's handed over his/her hard earned cash.
Having had a good look around, I have slightly reluctantly returned to the Garmin fold. Customer service does indeed suck but the device is a very good one. It is certainly the best running watch that I have used.It works, and it works well. It is generally reliable. It is accurate. It picks up signal quickly and retains it well.I've even managed to sort the strap issue out with the simple expedient of superglue.I've had mine for about 2 years and were it to break down tomorrow I would almost certainly by another one.
I've heard that some people have had battery/recharging issues. All I can say is that I have not experienced that particular problem. The one thing I would say about the battery is that after the equivalent of 3 or 4 hours of running it does need recharging. Battery life on the 310 is much better.
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 |