Runners/hikers - garmin forerunner 305 - yay/nay?

[davidB]

I'm looking to pick up 2 of these for xmas presents to my younger brothers who are both into jogging/hiking.

anybody on here use one enough to steer me away from buying it?

I love my edge 305, is the forerunner just as reliable and basic?

 

[DM67]

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0011UIXNE...e=asn&creative=395093&creativeASIN=B0011UIXNE

I use the 405 for running as it is more watch-sized than the 305. The 305 is still pretty good if you go that route. It is a slightly older model, though.

 

[ajsura]

405 def

 

[jeff^d]

The 110, 210, and 410 are the newest iterations. I'd recommend one of those as they have better battery life, more reliable signal, etc.

The 305 is almost 6 years old, still a good device but not worth the same price in my opinion.

 

[jae2460]

I have the 405 and it works great for running, hiking and biking. The only problems I had with it is that certain gloves (mainly really thick, cold weather gloves) don't work well with the touch bezel and the battery life is short for REALLY epic rides (I did a couple century rides last year and the battery didn't quite make it; probably means I'm too slow). I wound up switching to the Edge 500 for cycling and love that, but still have the forerunner and use it if I go for a run or a hike and have used it on occasion for a ride.

Oh, and one time in the 3 years or so I used it regularly it didn't work--a hike up Upper Yosemite Falls--a 7.2 mile / 2700 foot elevation gain hike. It was all over the place with distance, elevation, etc. I was telling people in my group how we were half way there, were almost done with elevation gain, etc. as I was used to it being bulletproof. But it was WAY off for some reason. It told me we did 8,925 feet of climb, that our moving time was only 2:02:33 but elapsed time was 6:18:52. The only thing I could think of is that the remoteness of the valley caused the GPS difficulty, but I don't think that should matter. Never figured out what happened and it never happened again.

I'm happy with the 405 though, and I paid $300-$400 for it I think as I bought it when it first came out.

 

[madridg]

Thr 305 is a good, inexpensive all in one gps watch. I bought one so I could easily switch between running and biking and also between bikes. The head is a little large, but not bad for the price- I've seen tham as cheap as $99 (!).

I bought the 405 and hated the bezel, accidental touches changes the screen easily, which sucks. If you lock out the screen, then you have to unlock it before changing it, not something you want to do while running/biking.

 

[WallyP]

I chose the 405 over the 305 because of it's smaller size and versatility. I've had it for three years, and use it extensively for running and biking. Overall, I am happy with it and would recommend it over the 305 for the following reasons:

Pro's:
-Looks and wears like a watch, instead of a wrist-based computer.
-Paired with a heartrate monitor and foot pod, I can track all sorts of cool data, seemlessly upload to the internet via ANT stick, and analyze route, elevation, performance, and history.
-Display can easily be customized to show you data on your run that is useful for your unique needs.
-Yes, the touch bezel can be cumbersome at times, but once you get the hang of it, it is really easy to use.

Con's:
-I'd say it has been accurate 97% of the time, with errors similar to jae2460 happening one or two times.
-Short battery life - needs to be recharged every 48 hrs.
-Cost $300-$400 was high, but my ROI is satisfactory with its high usage and utility.

 

[1TrackMind]

If you don't mind the size and want H2O proof, get the 310xt. I have had it for almost two years, it rocks!

 

[jae2460]

If you don't mind the size and want H2O proof, get the 310xt. I have had it for almost two years, it rocks!

Oh yeah, the 405 is not very water resistant / if at all because of the touch bezel. The ANT+ stick is slick though and it interfaces better with Geoladders if you use that site (than Edge 500, 800, etc.)