Fast Running Blog

I've already asked a few of you this question in person but I wanted a wider opinion. I currently run with a Gramin 201. It is adequate but sometimes takes 5 minutes to get a signal and is a little bulky. My big 3-0 is coming up and my wife is looking for a gift. I’m thinking about the 305 and wanted some additional input. Obviously, I’m a number freak and the more the better, also after having worked in a cardiology department for 6 years I’d be kind a curious to see what my heart rate does during some of my runs.
Questions to Sasha, if I order through the FRB link do you get a kick back? Is the warranty still good?

I don't really know anything about these but I have looked at them. I kind of want one for Christmas. My brother in law works for a sporting store and can get it at %10 above cost for me, but the thing he told me is right now there is a coupon for the 305. If you look up Garmin 305 coupon on line you can print one off. They are for $50 rebate no matter where you buy it.     

Adam:
I do get about 4%. The warranty depends on which one you get. I do not have control over it, I just refer customers to Amazon, and the rest goes from there. On Amazon you can get either new or refurbished, and the warranty will depend on which kind you get, I suppose.
My opinion of 305 is that it is not worth the money. When the price drops to about $60, it might be. It is too unreliable to do any kind of serious speedwork with. It is OK for estimating the length of a course if you run it about 10 times. It is better than nothing when you are in a race with messed up mile markers, or in a relay with no mile markers at all. HRM on mine worked decently for a while, and then broke during DesNews. In all honesty, I have not missed it. After all, it is more important to me how I feel, than what the HR reading happens to be. I now only wear it during races mostly for entertainment - it beeps at me every quarter (or so it thinks), so I play the game "Do you think Garmin got this one right?" as well as get the encouragement from the fact that I am about one quarter closer to the next mile marker. It is also good for situations when you are trading leads with somebody in a race, but I've been able to do the same just with a regular $10 watch by raising my hand and waiving to the partner to come forward if he forgot it was his turn to lead. If it breaks altogether, I will not get a replacement.
When they come out with a GPS that uses a higher level precision GPS data, it would be something to look into.

I would quit running if I didn't have my Garmin. I bought a 305 off of Amazon and the warranty is from Garmin so you should be OK. The only thing I would change is I would get the 205 instead. The heart rate monitor is worthless. I used to base workouts on % of MaxHR and there are just too many variables that go into HR on any given day. So I stopped wearing that more than a year ago.

The watch itself is a great watch. It's accurate enough. The one place I notice accuracy problems is running around a track. It always shows each lap as about .26 when in reality a lap is actually slightly less than .25. So I just use the stopwatch part of the watch during track workouts. Since I'm OK at counting laps, I really have no need for the GPS part to work on the track.

I was never a watch wearer. Then got obsessed with the numbers. When I got married a friend got "my wife" and I a Garmin 201. I think my wife has used it twice. I thought that if it was worth upgrading, then she could have a fulltime Garmin of her own. Thanks for the input. Though, it sounds like that for now I'll just be happy with what I have. My main complaint is the long delay on finding a signal from day to day. However, now I normally just put it outside while I'm getting dressed and it is good to go when I am. I have never raced with it and I'm not sure if I'll be able to. I worry about loss of signal but then again two races in the last year have had such horribly placed mile markers that I was running paceless. This brings up a good point. How many bloggers race with a Garmin or equivelent? Sean I agree with you, if I'm on the track I stick to the stopwatch. It is more pure somehow. Thanks again and at least for now I'll hold off...

From what I understand, the Garmin 205/305 is a huge improvement over the old 201/301. I have a 205, and like it quite a bit. The accuracy is quite good, for a cheap, handheld unit. Yes, $200 is cheap in the GPS world, especially for a unit that size. To have truly "great" accuracy, you would need to port around an antenna, do differential correction, etc., and that's not going to happen for a runner. Plus, you are constantly moving, and a GPS can only do so much in those circumstances. So all things considered, the Garmin is really good. I agree that it is NOT good on a track and other very curvy routes.

I race with mine if I doubt the validity of the mile markers, or if I doubt I will see the mile markers. It's usually pretty good over 5k/10k, less good for a marathon, as all my bad tangents add up and throw everything off. I recently bought a little Nike watch just for racing and track intervals, and will use it when I don't feel like lugging out the big Garmin. I probably use the Garmin on 60% of my runs. I like all the stats and especially the mapping features (being a map nerd), as I can export my tracks to Google Earth or my higher-end GIS software and use it for base mapping and other fun functions.

If you really like numbers, take a look at the Polar RS800sd. I reviewed it for TheFinalSprint.com earlier this year and was impressed by its ease-of-use and staggering array of stats. It is a foot pod, not a GPS (although I think a GPS might be available). There are some downfalls to food pods, but also some advantages. The heart rate monitor is among the best. It along with speed and distance, it alsomeasures stride length and cadence, which is rare. See full review here:

http://www.thefinalsprint.com/2007/05/tfs-review-polar-rs800sd-polaradidas-project-fusion/

I'm on my third 305 of the year. One bounced off the freeway, One was stollen out of my bag on the way home from Boston and now this one is working great so... The price for three add's up, but I still think it's worth every penny. I honestly couldn't run without one. I love the freedom of being able to just "go" anywhere and I have my distance and all the other facts. I've ran three marathons with one and love having it there to check the pace. In a race it's very easy to fall off the pace if your not paying attention. But if you ckeck your garmin twice a mile or so you can set the cruise control a lot easier.

3 Garmins, Clyde?  You must really like them!

I am anti-GPS, relying on my internal pace calibration (usually very accurate, sometimes not) and my trusty Timex Ironman.  Run based on how you feel.  I make fun of my running buddies with their GPS's and their obsession with running "exactly 8.0 miles, not 7.97".  I call them GPS slaves.

If I were to ever buy one, it would be the 205.  Or one of the footpod type of things.

Yeah, as I recall, you were pretty anti-FastRunningBlog too. Now you post regularly on the blog and on the message board and on other peoples' blogs. And you have an avatar of Hulk Hogan. You'll get a Garmin eventually, and you'll love it!

Jon, I have to second Paul's comments. One day you will break and never look back. I still remember in high school when I was completely opposed to ever buying clothes or anything else for that matter “designed for runners”. All I needed was shoes and shorts. I remember thinking dryfit was just a gimmick. Then my senior year my mom but me a pair of running shorts. I couldn’t believe what I’d been missing. Now I look like one of the guys I used to make fun of, dryfit this dryfit that, fitted socks, fuel belt and a Garmin. Sometimes I feel more like a cyborg than a runner. But at the same time something is to be said about the comfort and ease of use of each of these products. In the summer I still have to head out the door with just shorts and shoes from time to time but otherwise I am a convert. I even had another 305 discussion this morning and the door is not fully closed on that option.

That has to be my favorite thing about a GPS watch.  I have a Garmin 305.

I second that.  I didn't want to get the 305 because my exercise HR has historically been higher than normal, and I didn't want it weighing on my mind.  But I just love heading out the door with my 205, set the autolap to every mile, and know how fast every mile is.  I also like the instant pace screen, although I know it is not totally accurate, but it still helps me.

Ok, I love mine and feel it is worth it. I have never been a big watching my splits during raining runs type of guy I have been more like Jon just run how I feel. However, the reason I love it is that it is a great training tool for post workout analysis and tracking progress over time. It is like having your own coach there to record every run and mile splits and then afterwards give you some great feedback on your times and progress. So in my case I use it mostly for analysis purposes and do not let it drive my runs or become a slave to the splits during my actual runs. I started with a 205 as I have never been a big heart rate monitor fan either but upgraded to the 305 to try and get more data feedback after workouts, etc... Again, I rarely look at my heart rate during an actual run or workout but afterwards it provides some good data and hopefully over the long term I can see the changes and improvement in conditioning from not only times but also through HR data as well. So, I love it for those reasons and also it has been great when traveling when you do not have a course or route and need to see the mileage when just randomly running through unknown territory. So in dissagreement with Sasha I feel it is well worth it and do not regret buying it. However, Sasha only buys shoes every 3000 or so miles versus the recommended 500 or so miles so for him what things are worth is all relative. He is very frugal when it comes to money and I admire him for that but I like toys and spending money on them is one of my many faults. As far as price you can look online at a place called MegaGPS which is out of Alpine, Utah and they have them for $229.99 with free shipping. Also it looks like you can get a $50 rebate from Garmin as well so this would end up costing only $179.99 after mail in rebate. Links below:

http://www.megagps.com/index.asp?PageAction=PRODSEARCH&txtSearch=305&btnSearch=GO&Page=1
http://www8.garmin.com/whatsNew/currentpromotions/

Can someone smarter than me tell me why the Garmin measures a lap around the track at .26-.28 instead of .25, or even more accurately, .24? Is there some scientific reasone why?

A unit as cheap as a little Garmin just doesn't have the precision on tight corners. I've noticed the same phenomenon on tight curves on the road too. It's pretty amazing what the Garmin can do as it is, considering it only has a tiny internal antenna. Also, GPS is much more accurate if you are stationary. When you go from collecting points to tracks, the accuracy drops a lot.

I really like my 205 which I use now instead of my Forerunner 101 which I used for over 2 years.  It has been a great training tool.  I, like Ted, use it primarily as an analysis tool, but do use if for relative feedback during runs to gauge my effort and help me hit my mileage goals as I tend to wander a bit and adlib on even my normal routes.  It has far better sensitivity than the 101, still can take a while to acquire the signal and the memory doesn't seem to last as long as the 101 (probably due to the sensitivity of the data readings).  It will be a great addition to your training tools if you get one.

Love my garmin 305.  I used to rely religiously on the HR monitor for speed/effort, but I too have found the fallacy in that method and now only used it on recovery runs to keep myself honest about how easy they should be.  I do use it to learn more about my perceived effort under different environmental conditions.  For example, the other day my effort was easy, my HR a bit higher than normal which I attributed to the slightly warmer than normal temps and higher humidity.  I also use the training center saved data to look back over time and see how my pace at effort levels has improved over the past year.

Sean, on our local HS track, I noticed that the distance actually varies depending on which wrist I'm wearing my watch on (inside or outside)!  As long as it has a good fix, it seems to record my distances spot on.  Elevation is a different story.  If you're having problems with distances on tracks, you might want to temporarily switch away from the Smart Recording option to the one that takes readings every second for more accuracy. 

Of course, being in the NW around big hills, GPS satellite visibility is a bit problematic at times, which can affect results a bit.  But I'm happy with being within .05 miles on a 12 mile run. 

All in all, as a gadgety guy, I love mine, but have also begun to learn that I also need to learn to quit relying on it always and interpret body feedback better.  Still, a great tool as far as I'm concerned.

In respone to Sean's question.

I think the track measures long because the Garmin thinks that we run straight lines between the points it records. When we round the corners it doesn't realize that we ran a good tangent. It probably thinks we ran a rectangular course rather than a circle. Look at the map and you will see the points do not follow the inside lane very well.

I think that the Garmin has a built in mechanism to assume we are running a fairly straight line. There is a random variation in the coordinates it records, but I think it has a way to ignore this and interpolate a straight line. I am guessing the it does not know what to do when we are opn a track runnig around in circles. 

These are just my theories, but it makes sense to me.

In response to Sean’s question around the Garmin and Track accuracy....  I have been evaluating the Garmin 305 and recently received it as a gift.  After about a week, I am in hooked... being an athletic engineer and loving data it is a dream come true.  To my amazement it is pretty darn accurate!  This made me think about the question raised regarding track distance and Garmin accuracy.

My conclusion is this: When you think of a track it has different lanes.  Each lane around the track has a different length; which is a direct result of the circumference of the lane/circle and the width of the respective lane.  Based on this if you notice a staggered start is created with different starting points for most sprint type races.... this staggerd start yields a finish of the same distance for all lanes.   In longer races around a track they may not stagger the start but after a certain distance will allow all runners to come out of their lanes (i.e. they will move to the center most lane as it has the shorter circumference/distance).

In conclusion: If you are running around a track with a garmin and you do not run perfectly within the inner most lane then your distance will be increased by the amount of time you are outside of the inner most lane. 

f.y.i. for those of you who are interested the calculation is:
L = 2S + 2pi(R + (n-1)w) where L = lane distance, S = length of the straight, R is the radius of the turn, n is the lane number and w is the width of the lane. Therefore the extra distance run in lane n for 1 lap is equal to 2S + 2pi(R + (n - 1)r) - 2S - 2piR, which when reduced is equal to 2pi(n-1)r. The total distance run is (N(designated race length + 2pi(n - 1)r). The track distance formula for each lane equals the (designated race length) + (( 2 * pi) * (track lane number - 1) * track lane width).

Enjoy!

and regarding the track accuracy - in running the inside lane the entire way for 1 mile - every lap was exactly 0.25. I just went up to the 305 from the 205 only so I could view my heartrate.

I will be hitting the track for a workout tomorrow and will try switching it off of the "smart" setting. That could very well be the difference.

Holy Cow Kevin !

I knew I should have paid more attention to Math in school.  My motto was "you'll never to use this stuff anyway."  Now I can apply Math every time I run around a track.  Cool.

Regarding the precision of the 305 I am not yet convinced and fear that the Garmin exaggerates the distances. I wore mine in a 10k race and the Garmin showed that I had run 10.6k! Could some of those who have used their Garmin in official races comment on the distance shown by the Garmin vs the official distance of those races?

Torkel, you could try turning off the "smart route" setting and turning on the "every second" setting.  Then run a course you have measured with a wheel.  That would probably be the most accurate way of knowing about your watch.  I have compared mine with Google Maps and Google Earth and have found it to be pretty darn close.  I have run only one USATF measured course with my watch and that was a Marathon.  I ended up with 26.44 miles.  I believe they measure them with close to perfect tangents.  I imagine the extra mine showed was not that bad over that distance considering my tangents.  But I did try to run them the best I could through out the race.

You do have to be careful with the "every second" setting, though, as it will record a LOT of data.  If you are not diligent about deleting old information off your device, you can quickly run out of space.  Prolly not recommended for distances over 1/2 marathon . . . unless you plan on deleting the history from your device as soon as you put it on your training log . . . :)

I have only had one warning that my memory was low.  But I usually clear it monthly.  I did clear it before my one and only Marathon and was worried I would fill it up before I was finished.  But it worked fine for 3:31:26  :D

Mine is nearly dead (I assume dying battery) and I do not miss it. Even if I could get it replaced for free, it would not be worth the hassle.

Anybody know how to change the language of the Garmin Training Center? I know the newer versions are supposed to be made for that but I haven't been able to figure out how to do it.