|
dave rockness
|
 |
« on: December 03, 2009, 03:48:30 pm » |
|
ok...I'm caving in. Thought I'd never own a garmin. I'd love to hear advice on the best garmin product to purchase. I'm not looking for anything fancy. Something that gives pace/distance/holds up without paying an arm and a leg. Thanks in advance for your input!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Jon Allen
|
|
« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2009, 04:12:52 pm » |
|
I own the 205 and it works great. I think you can get it for $140 these days online. The 305 is essentially the same, I believe, but with HR monitor.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
April G
|
|
« Reply #2 on: December 03, 2009, 05:21:09 pm » |
|
I have a 205 as well. My husband got it on ebay, used(but works great I have never had a problem) for 100 bucks. If all you want is pace, time, distance, and some splits then it works great.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
MarkP_
Lurker
Posts: 43
|
|
« Reply #4 on: December 03, 2009, 08:45:52 pm » |
|
I've had the 101 an 205, but I recommend the 310XT. It is water proof which will prevent the electronics from dying due to sweat seeping into the electronics. Also, buy it at REI since they have a full refund/return policy...because it will stop working one day-guaranteed!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Davis
|
|
« Reply #5 on: December 03, 2009, 11:55:55 pm » |
|
True, the 310xt is submersible, but the 205 and 305 are splash proof and intended to be used out in the weather. I run in the rain with my 305 all the time and even leave it on in the shower sometimes after my run.
The 310xt is great for triathletes, or ultra marathoners because it has a longer battery life, but in my opinion it's not worth the extra cost otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
-Mike
Running without hills is like motorcycling without corners.
|
|
|
|
James Winzenz
|
|
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2009, 03:05:11 pm » |
|
I have had the 205 for almost 3 years now - still works just fine, although the sound is intermittent. Personally, I don't reallly care about that as long as everything else still works.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
MarkP_
Lurker
Posts: 43
|
|
« Reply #7 on: December 04, 2009, 04:43:07 pm » |
|
My 201 and 205 both showed sweat corrosion in the "speaker" holes which caused an electronic failure. The 310XT does not have any area where the sweat and salt can enter into the electronics.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
dave rockness
|
|
« Reply #8 on: December 05, 2009, 10:40:37 am » |
|
thanks for input...I'll probably go with the 205 and make sure to have a warrantee.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Davis
|
|
« Reply #9 on: December 05, 2009, 05:01:47 pm » |
|
For the small difference in price I'd recommend the 305 over the 205 because of the HRM that comes with it. I don't pay much attention to the HRM while I run, but it's nice to have that data when I review my history in sporttracks. Just knowing my pace for a given day/week/month isn't near as good as knowing how hard I was working to achieve it.
Whatever you get I'm sure you will be glad. Just having the freedom to run whatever direction you feel like and still knowing the distance without having to drive it is well worth the investment.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
-Mike
Running without hills is like motorcycling without corners.
|
|
|
|
jtshad
|
|
« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2009, 12:50:04 pm » |
|
I saw the 305 in the advertisements for $139 at Best Buy...a pretty smokin' price!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Kory Wheatley
|
|
« Reply #11 on: December 08, 2009, 04:50:58 pm » |
|
At ecost.com you can get one for $115.00 (that is the 305).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Adam R Wende
|
|
« Reply #12 on: December 23, 2009, 07:22:43 am » |
|
I like my $305. However, the HRM has caused me problems. For whatever reason the battery door has allowed sweat to seep in on numerous occasions leading to battery corrosion and reports of HRs over 220! In each of the three cases over the last three years I've contacted Garmin and they have sent me a replacement though.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Sasha Pachev
|
|
« Reply #13 on: December 28, 2009, 12:53:01 pm » |
|
My 305 is dead. When it was alive it started driving me nuts because I could never trust the distance.
I think Garmin is a good gadget, but it worth only $30, with $20 credit given for its navigational capacity. It would be worth $150 or more if the distance was accurate within 0.1% consistently (100 times out of 100). Otherwise, there is not a whole lot of purpose to those distance measurements. They are not precise enough for speed work. For easy runs you do not care that much anyway. Some coaches do not even bother counting the miles and have their runners train by time when Garmin precision for the distance is OK.
If you are doing speed work in absence of truly accurate measurement, just pick a stretch from bush A to manhole B and run that stretch frequently enough to the point that your performance on that segment can predict your races. One of the lamest experience I've seen reported on the blog repeatedly is "My Garmin said I ran a great interval!" followed by a race performance that was not anywhere near the Garmin miracle speed. That will never happen to you if you rely on landmarks.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Jon Allen
|
|
« Reply #14 on: December 28, 2009, 01:03:15 pm » |
|
I like my 205. For short speedwork, I agree it is not accurate enough to be 100% reliable. For 10 mile tempos, it's good enough for me. And it's awfully nice when I am running on random routes when travelling or want to meander around town without paying attention to distance. That being said, I only wear mine 3 times per week or so, out of 10 runs.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
