Best GPS watch for cycling and running?

rflook

Hi,

I am starting to get a bit more serious about my fitness and would like to buy a GPS watch. I have been looking at the Garmin Forerunner 620 but am struggling to justify the price tag. I really want something which can be used for both running and cycling and is able to connect to my phone (Android) via Bluetooth.

Something which is aesthetically pleasing would be nice but is secondary to the above features. Does anyone have any devices which meet these requirements that they would happily recommend?

Many thanks

Monty Zoncolan

I have the Garmin 610 which I got fairly cheap from amazon. I'm a runner who cycles rather than vice versa so bought the watch version. Properly set up it will do anything a bike-mounted Garmin 500 will do, with the only drawback being you need to look sideways and flick your arm round to see the display - fine at a leisurely pace but not so easy when going for it in the drops. But as a compromise it does all I realistically need.

rflook

I did look at the 610 but unless i am mistaken it doesnt have bluetooth

super_davo

You could do worse than the Tomtom Multisport. I got one from Halfords for a crazy deal - about £65 with the cadence sensor. It replaced a Forerunner 305 which was excellent, just very bulky.
I can only find it now for £115 from a few places, but its still worth looking at.
Pro's - excellent bike mount, superfast GPS fix (I'm amazed as it can find satellites inside my house), intuitive interface, small enough to wear as a regular watch, can even handle swimming, easy Strava uploads
Cons - propriety charging cable, no ANT+ (bluetooth only), my phone (Nexus 4) doesn't work with the TomTom app so can't comment on it, doesn't have an easy multisport mode for triathlon like the 305 did, no mapping capabilities at all
I've got an Edge 800 for normal cycling and use this for running ans triathlon - and the quick GPS fix means I now use it for the bike computer on my commuting bike.

Monty Zoncolan

rflook wrote:

I did look at the 610 but unless i am mistaken it doesnt have bluetooth

You're right. I tend to download everything to my laptop via the wireless USB 'ANT' device. I can then access it on my mobile using the Garmin app.

curto80

Fenix 3 no contest. Pricey but it's a brilliant piece of kit.

ai_1

Curto80 wrote:

Fenix 3 no contest. Pricey but it's a brilliant piece of kit.

Why no contest? Where does it win out over the 920XT?
IMO, the triathlon focused watches are far superior if you'll use it on the bike since they can be bike mounted very easily without having to resort to wrapping the strap around the handlebar. The 920XT is also substantially lighter and a bit less bulky than the Fenix and I for one certainly prefer less bulk and weight on my wrist when running.

If it wasn't for the OPs requirement for bluetooth I'd recommend the Garmin 310XT or 910XT.
The 310XT is several years old but will still do the job very well and the prices are now very reasonable.
The 910XT is a great watch. It'll do pretty much anything you'll want for running, cycling or swimming. The price has come down now that the 920XT has been released but it's still expensive. I have one and really like it.
Neither is very suitable as a day to day watch but they're very good bike and run computers. neither have Bluetooth.

The 920XT does allow bluetooth connection with your phone for live tracking etc.

Here's a VERY thorough review:
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2014/11/garm ... eview.html

At the bottom you'll find a comparison to some of the alternatives, i.e. the Suunto Ambit, Polar V800 and the other Garmin watches.
The same site will likely have reviews of any other watches you're considering.

djp66

rflook wrote:

Hi,

I am starting to get a bit more serious about my fitness and would like to buy a GPS watch. I have been looking at the Garmin Forerunner 620 but am struggling to justify the price tag. I really want something which can be used for both running and cycling and is able to connect to my phone (Android) via Bluetooth.

Something which is aesthetically pleasing would be nice but is secondary to the above features. Does anyone have any devices which meet these requirements that they would happily recommend?

Many thanks

What you haven't mentioned and therefore we cannot know, is whether you use/plan to use sensors and of what type on your bike or when running? Or is the GPS functionality enough?

There has been mention of the Garmin fenix 3 and a counter suggestion that the 920XT is better. The link provided reviewed the 920XT before the fenix 3 was out but the later review of the fenix 3 does compare it directly to the 920XT - have a look at http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2015/03/garmin-fenix3-detailed-review.html

My view is that either could do the job you want but neither would do it perfectly for me, e.g. I don't like the square form factor of the 920XT, but it is thinner and lighter (but not a lot - 2mm and 21g) and definitely not thinner if you use the quick release kit which is required to achieve the easy bike mounting mentioned. I do like the 'normal' watch look of the fenix 3 and I'm not a serious runner, the hiking/navigation elements are more important to me.

After borrowing many from friends to try, including a couple of polars, the tom-tom multisports and numerous garmins, I settled on the fenix 3. But that is what worked for me, not necessarily you. DC Rainmakers site is great and will give you all the comparisons you need.

One thing I will strongly caution you on though, don't link whatever you buy to your phone and setup email/text notifications. It turns you into a slave to your messages, I have always been a "I'll get to it later" sort of person when it comes to beeps etc, but when it vibrated on my wrist I felt the need to immediately check it out so I turned the damn thing off :evil:

Hope that helps.

kingtubby

Garmin Vivoactive....just got one, been great for runs and cycling, only loses out to 800 on mapping...

AllanES

kingtubby wrote:

Garmin Vivoactive....just got one, been great for runs and cycling, only loses out to 800 on mapping...

I'd agree with this.
Just got one last week and love it already.
Only downside (might be significant though!) is the lack of a map to follow on longer unknown rides.
But for local/commuting rides/runs it's great.
Added bonus of course is the step counts and phone notifications.

tangled_metal

AllanES wrote:

Added bonus of course is the step counts and phone notifications.

Aaah those step counts. Good for making you feel like you have done more than you have. I always have me phone with me and it has google fit on it. You look at the way it records and the active time shown makes it out that you are doing something worthwhile for fitness but questionable. Plus the default goal is one hour of being active a day. Anyone not reaching that is either leaving their phone at home or just sat on their behind watching TV all day. Unless you do over 10000 steps of course they are just a bit of fluff data to make you feel better about not being able to get out on your bike IMHO.

Still, I do want an activity tracker because my phone is not recording all my steps!!!!

AllanES

Tangled Metal wrote:

AllanES wrote:

Added bonus of course is the step counts and phone notifications.

Aaah those step counts. Good for making you feel like you have done more than you have. I always have me phone with me and it has google fit on it. You look at the way it records and the active time shown makes it out that you are doing something worthwhile for fitness but questionable. Plus the default goal is one hour of being active a day. Anyone not reaching that is either leaving their phone at home or just sat on their behind watching TV all day. Unless you do over 10000 steps of course they are just a bit of fluff data to make you feel better about not being able to get out on your bike IMHO.

Still, I do want an activity tracker because my phone is not recording all my steps!!!!

Agreed.

The step counter is more a bit of fun than anything.
It's all relative I guess and does give you at least some indication of how active you are/have been.
My wife has a FitBit something-or-other and on the same walk there can be a wide discrepancy in the numbers.
I don't use the step count as any sort of basis for determining my fitness and whether I should go for a bike ride or run.

tangled_metal

A lot of this daily tracking is fun I think. It is for me at least. I am only using google fit right now at work. Want that elusive activity tracker that will work on the bike and other activities with the HRM on the watch. Plus the ability to carry out sleep monitoring too (REM, light, deep sleep, etc.). So far there are a few that do sleep metrics well, a few that do HRM well and none that do both well.

My wishlist is a sports based watch with a chest strapless HRM, good activity tracker functions such as sleep, steps, etc. One which is good at detecting activity type whether cycling, running, swimming, hiking, yoga or whatever and just monitors it in the best way. Then syncs to a custom app on android that shows the data really well according to the sport. A watch to be worn all day and night (very comfortable) with a decent battery life (about 5 days is enough). If it had GPS great but perhaps it could reliably use the phones if needed or perhaps someone like Garmin could link it to a hiking GPS or bike GPS?? Not a difficult list really since at least everything on this list is accomplished by different trackers already, just needs to be integrated well.