My Dad has been a fan of metrics forever and had been trying to get me interested in a GPS watch when I started showing some interest in running. I thought the device he loved - the Forerunner 305 - looked ridiculous. I have tiny wrists and simply didn't want a 305 no matter what it could do for me. The 405 was new at the time (2008) and a much better looking watch to me due to its more standard watch-like shape and somewhat smaller size. So I bought it with my REI rebate despite his feedback that it was an inferior product and unbeknownst to me that he had already ordered a 305 that was being shipped directly to me.
My memory of the specifics about these devices is a little fuzzy from time and they are memories I'm mostly happy to let go of since buying a 910XT. But I was moved to put them to paper before shipping it off following my ceremonial last run with the 405 last night.
 |
| L to R: Garmin Forerunner 305, 405, 910XT. |
 |
| The strap's hard plastic does not follow the contours of my small wrist very well, making this fit more like a bracelet rather than snug like most sport watch bands. |
This watch does not turn on/off so one needs to pay attention to the battery life. It has a menu option to turn the satellites off which preserves battery life, taking it from ~8 h with the satellites on to reportedly 2 weeks with them off. I won't pull any punches, it takes a long time to get a satellite lock with this watch and it seemed to need to do so often. I used this watch very routinely when training for Ironman Lake Placid and would be disappointed to find that after running from the house wearing it (on a one way run from home to work, for instance) that when I turned the GPS back on at home later in the day for a bike ride, it couldn't find me and had to re-search for satellites though I was only 3 miles from where I had last turned it off. I'm unsure this is reasonable.
Two of the places I frequently run are tree-covered trails and both are places where the 405 would lose satellite signal. Losing signal mid-workout isn't ideal but what I found more annoying was the message box that would pop up to indicate the signal was lost. This error box unfortunately blocks the entire screen so you can't see any of the display. This message can be cleared in 2 ways, one is to have the satellite signal restored and the other is to hit 'enter' to clear the message. The problem was that locking the bezel meant I had to first unlock the bezel (by pressing both buttons simultaneously again), then clear the message, and then re-lock the bezel so my desired display wouldn't accidentally get changed. Believe it or not, this was all a bit challenging to execute while running a hard workout and right after doing so the damn message would pop back up because the watch was insistent in sharing that information. If losing the signal wasn't frustrating enough (because it meant the recorded distance information would be wrong), the darn pop up message would essentially ruin the rest of my time-based interval workouts.
Given this watch's slimmer profile than the 305, I also tried to use it to time some of my swims even though this model doesn't have a setting for recording swimming. The watch should be waterproof to 1 m (for up to 30 min - OOPS) but the bezel may not get on well with chlorine and it's possible I noted a decline in the bezel's performance over time.
Yesterday, this watch took >3 h to go from zero to 90% charged. After charging and turning the GPS on it took 10 min to get satellite lock. Granted it had been a long while since I'd last used it (Jan 2012!), but this is still very much longer than the 305 took. Data transfer is wireless via the ANT+ stick, which sounds nice, but I spent more than 1 hour trying to get the computer to recognize the device and transfer the old data, and another 20+ minutes trying to get the one new file to transfer. It really is a small wonder that I never took a hammer to this thing.
 |
| This watch is awkwardly shaped and clearly meant for a much larger wrist. |
The 305 has an on/off power button and the first thing it does when you turn it on is attempt to acquire satellite lock. This model also takes awhile to do this but is faster than the 405 and holds them much better. In fact, I'm unsure I've ever lost signal on either of the two trails where the 405 routinely had this problem. Unfortunately this model suffers from a poor programming feature in that it has to look for satellites first and only after an extended problem doing so does it ask if you are indoors. At this time it's possible to turn the satellite off so you can use the timing and heart rate monitoring features during an indoor workout. All the buttons require a good deal of pressure to depress which I find awkward to deliver while I'm running. This model displays a message "charging in progress" when it's plugged in but doesn't give an indication as to how far along it is, which both the 405 and 910 do.
Pulling this out of a drawer after a long time of non-use, charging took maybe an hour but I don't know how low the battery was, again since there's no percentage of charge displayed. Satellite connection was achieved in <3 min. Data transfer requires the device be placed in its cradle and the cradle connects via a wire to your computer's USB port, but there is no problem getting the computer to recognize the device is present (unlike with the 405).
 |
| Still a bit larger than my wrist, but this point is exaggerated by the quick-release strap which makes the watch sit up a little higher. |
 |
| Pictured here are the Garmin Out Front bike mount, the Quick Release Kit wrist strap, and the attachment mounted to the back of the 910. |
| 305 | 405 | 910 | |
| Distance Recorded | 7.74 mi | 7.74 mi | 7.79 mi |
| Elevation Gain | 566 ft | 683 ft | 180 ft |
| Elevation Loss | 574 ft | 691 ft | 194 ft |
| Min Elevation | 49 ft | 49 ft | 113 ft |
| Max Elevation | 177 ft | 177 ft | 234 ft |
| Time to
lock satellites 24 h later |
<2 min | 5 min? | <1 min |
What do I think would be better? A still slimmer version of the 910 would be nice. The 920 is that but has a bunch of features that I'm not interested in. One is a larger screen which to me just about undoes the benefits of the device being more slim. Another is a touch-active screen which I also don't care about following my experiences with the 405 touch bezel. It also has a variety of other enhancements that don't interest me, such as additional swim metrics, the inclusion now of run metrics, inclusion of MP3 and email/text capabilities. I know 3 people to have purchased the 920: two triathletes who love it and one runner who feels it's fraught with problems, not the least of which is GPS inaccuracy. Either way, I can't imagine what feature it could possibly have that would move me to buy yet another $350 GPS watch. The 910 does everything I need it to.
 |
| T to B: Classic strap, Premium Soft Strap (2010), Premium Soft Strap (current, bought mine in 2014). |
 |
| The back sides of the straps, showing the plastic nature of the classic strap and the plasticy business portions of the soft straps. All are powered with CR2032 coin cell batteries. The battery is quick and simple to change on the classic strap (open cover with a quarter) and more of a pain in the ass on the other straps, requiring a tiny screwdriver to remove the 4 microscopically small screws that are on the back side of the oblong plastic part you see installed on the front of those straps. Let's just say if you're using one of the premium straps it stinks to be travelling and realize you need a new battery unless you travel with that tool. |
 |
| 3 Heart rate monitors and GPS devices at once, for science!
The white goop is Buh-Bump conductivity gel which I usually never need but
used here to help all 3 straps have the best chance of being read. Even at 35 F I still sweat more than sufficiently and soaked all the straps. This experiment taught me that I can actually wear the new strap at the bottom of my rib cage and still get data.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment