Garmin edge 520 vs 810
Avo
Posts: 9
Hello. I am in the market for a new cycling computer and am torn between two models. The main reason for the new device is to read power and cadence. The 520 can do this but the lack of touchscreen and memory makes me unsure about this model. The 810 is €60 (70 usd) more expensive. What are your thoughts, 520 vs 810? Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
0
Comments
-
I think the new answer to this question is the 820... I've been looking at was about to go with 520 myself until the 820 came out
Dc rainmaker site gives good info.0 -
^ I concur0
-
Yes the 820 appears to be a great device but my budget is €350, so it's just a bit too pricey. The 520 seems to be the go to device for many who don't need a whole lot of navigation but the buttons look a bit of a nuisance. On the other hand, I am concerned that the 810 will freezemid ride. So I am stuck.0
-
Avo wrote:Yes the 820 appears to be a great device but my budget is €350, so it's just a bit too pricey. The 520 seems to be the go to device for many who don't need a whole lot of navigation but the buttons look a bit of a nuisance. On the other hand, I am concerned that the 810 will freezemid ride. So I am stuck.
The 820 is 30 Euro more than your budget, seems so close to settle for something less than the best option.0 -
The 520 memory thing is actually a real faff. Having to take maps off and put others on is just annoying. Wouldn't have to be much bigger, maybe just 150Mb rather than 100Mb.0
-
For the €350 I would like to get a speed and cadence sensor, along with a hrm. The 820 bundle is about €450. So atm 820 is a no go unfortunately. Does anybody here recommend the 810 over the 520? Thanks0
-
Avo wrote:Does anybody here recommend the 810 over the 520? Thanks
No.
Had both and the 520 is just better.
The 810 was good but had too many issues.
I am actually about to upgrade to the 820 from the 520, purely down to mapping.
You wont regret buying the 520 or the 820, you just might if you buy the 810.0 -
Thanks for the reponses. I came across the mio 505hc for €320. Looks like really good deal. Any thoughts on this model? Cheers0
-
Avo wrote:For the €350 I would like to get a speed and cadence sensor, along with a hrm. The 820 bundle is about €450. So atm 820 is a no go unfortunately. Does anybody here recommend the 810 over the 520? Thanks
Yes definitely. Touch screen over pressing buttons any day and a proper map capability with a good size memory to load full OS maps of Europe rather than a bit of London.I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
You cannot compare a non full mapping Garmin to a full mapping one.
You either want full mapping or you do not, and go from there.
The 810 is old.
What is it with Garmins that people want old outdated tech so badly?
Is it cyclists?
Do a lot of cyclists not really want the devices, so begrudge spending money on them?
Its not something that happens in other areas of tech as much is it?
Why are there even new 810's available to buy?
Old stock? Or do Garmin still make them?0 -
Carbonator wrote:You cannot compare a non full mapping Garmin to a full mapping one.
You either want full mapping or you do not, and go from there.
The 810 is old.
What is it with Garmins that people want old outdated tech so badly?
Is it cyclists?
Do a lot of cyclists not really want the devices, so begrudge spending money on them?
Its not something that happens in other areas of tech as much is it?
Why are there even new 810's available to buy?
Old stock? Or do Garmin still make them?
Old or not, it still works (subject to firmware glitches until fixed just like every Garmin Edge device including the 520) like mechanical groupsets and rim brakes do.I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
Well if he can buy a discounted 810 with mapping for a good price, then why not? (the 810 has only just been replaced by the 820, btw)
I am still using an edge 800 and it is fine. Should i change that too just because it is old?0 -
robbo2011 wrote:Well if he can buy a discounted 810 with mapping for a good price, then why not? (the 810 has only just been replaced by the 820, btw)
I am still using an edge 800 and it is fine. Should i change that too just because it is old?
No. You already have it and if it's working and your happy with it then no need to change it.
What carbonator is saying is that the 810 is an old model (an old model which from my experience was prone to issues). The OP is buying a new device. The 520 or 820 is new and both are better than the 810.
If you are wanting a new tablet would you buy a first gen ipad or the latest model??? Exactly the same principal here.0 -
Anybody recommend the Mio HC 505? It is about the same price as the 520.0
-
redvision wrote:If you are wanting a new tablet would you buy a first gen ipad or the latest model??? Exactly the same principal here.
Your analogy is incorrect. It should be between the latest iPad and the immediately previous model on a end of line discount, not a 4 generation earlier model!
Like I said, depends on the price and what the user wants to do with it. Anyway, the OP wants a Mio now.0 -
robbo2011 wrote:redvision wrote:If you are wanting a new tablet would you buy a first gen ipad or the latest model??? Exactly the same principal here.
Your analogy is incorrect. It should be between the latest iPad and the immediately previous model on a end of line discount, not a 4 generation earlier model!
:roll:0 -
If OP has already ruled out the 820 due to cost, then as someone already said the question is whether the OP wants mapping or not. If they do then the 520 is a poor choice because of the low amount of memory, knobbled mapping capability and lack of touch screen. If they do want mapping then (old or not) it has to be the 810.
Personally, I think they have only just brought out a model that might be better for me than the even older 800. But the 820 has a smaller screen, so I would still buy an 800/810 if buying new today and irrespective of the cost. The 1000 was a fail - too big and poor battery life. The 820 is a good proposition but for navigation I think the screen is just a smidgen too small. And I prefer resistive touch screen that still works with normal gloves on.
I like the way that on the garmin website they try and make the 820 look bigger than the 520 but they are actually the same size...0 -
apreading wrote:If OP has already ruled out the 820 due to cost, then as someone already said the question is whether the OP wants mapping or not. If they do then the 520 is a poor choice because of the low amount of memory, knobbled mapping capability and lack of touch screen. If they do want mapping then (old or not) it has to be the 810.
Personally, I think they have only just brought out a model that might be better for me than the even older 800. But the 820 has a smaller screen, so I would still buy an 800/810 if buying new today and irrespective of the cost. The 1000 was a fail - too big and poor battery life. The 820 is a good proposition but for navigation I think the screen is just a smidgen too small. And I prefer resistive touch screen that still works with normal gloves on.
I like the way that on the garmin website they try and make the 820 look bigger than the 520 but they are actually the same size...
I've just changed from an 810 to an 820 and prefer the larger screen of the 810. The 810 was fine, never had a problem with mine other than when trying to use Bluetooth on it and following a course at the same time, but that issue has plagued the 1000 and 510/520 for some users. I switched only for some of the updated features such as VO2 and Live Stress Score and because I got it at the discounted price. If i'd have been paying full price, I'd have stuck with the 810.I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
Carbonator wrote:
The 810 is old.
What is it with Garmins that people want old outdated tech so badly?
Is it cyclists?
Like no touch screen on the 520?
I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
philthy3 wrote:Carbonator wrote:
The 810 is old.
What is it with Garmins that people want old outdated tech so badly?
Is it cyclists?
Like no touch screen on the 520?
If you're comparing the touchscreen 510 to the non touchscreen 520 the 510 was slow and glitchy to the point I hated it. I for one was glad to see the return to buttons on the 520. Riding in the rain I so much as tap the screen of the 510 to clear it of water it would throw a wobbly. I even started using my old 500 on wet or night rides as the 510 was so annoying to use.0 -
philthy3 wrote:Carbonator wrote:
The 810 is old.
What is it with Garmins that people want old outdated tech so badly?
Is it cyclists?
Like no touch screen on the 520?
Errr, I said get an 820 :roll:
As I also said, the 5 series and 8 series are not really comparable anyway.0 -
Carbonator wrote:philthy3 wrote:Carbonator wrote:
The 810 is old.
What is it with Garmins that people want old outdated tech so badly?
Is it cyclists?
Like no touch screen on the 520?
Errr, I said get an 820 :roll:
As I also said, the 5 series and 8 series are not really comparable anyway.
I was referring to you calling people for wanting outdated technology. The 520 has reverted to outdated technology by going to buttons rather than an improved touch screen. Double :roll: :roll:I ride a bike. Doesn't make me green or a tree hugger. I drive a car too.0 -
philthy3 wrote:Carbonator wrote:philthy3 wrote:Carbonator wrote:
The 810 is old.
What is it with Garmins that people want old outdated tech so badly?
Is it cyclists?
Like no touch screen on the 520?
Errr, I said get an 820 :roll:
As I also said, the 5 series and 8 series are not really comparable anyway.
I was referring to you calling people for wanting outdated technology. The 520 has reverted to outdated technology by going to buttons rather than an improved touch screen. Double :roll: :roll:
Sometimes 'improved' tech is no improvement at all. A solid button click may sound like a step backwards but at least I know its responding. Trying to tap a screen in the right place leaving sweaty inprints on the screen on a device which can be slow to respond or not at all first time all while travelling at speed. I don't want to be more than just glancing down instead of taking my eyes off the road for too long. If I know the button will do what I want I don't even really need to be looking at it.0 -
philthy3 wrote:Carbonator wrote:philthy3 wrote:Carbonator wrote:
The 810 is old.
What is it with Garmins that people want old outdated tech so badly?
Is it cyclists?
Like no touch screen on the 520?
Errr, I said get an 820 :roll:
As I also said, the 5 series and 8 series are not really comparable anyway.
I was referring to you calling people for wanting outdated technology. The 520 has reverted to outdated technology by going to buttons rather than an improved touch screen. Double :roll: :roll:
Not quite sure you can call a 520 outdated technology because it does not 'choose' to use touchscreen.
Live starva segments and Group Track capabilities (group trackable) seem pretty bang up to fcuking date to me, and just the type of thing old tech buyers poo poo.............. until its old tech :roll: :roll: :roll:
Garmin have their reasons for not having touchscreen on the 520 I guess, but you could have got a 1000 and now an 820 if you want touchscreen that bad.
Was the 510 touchscreen?
Anyone know why they dropped it on the 520 if it was?
People love the 500, yet moan about no touchscreen on the 520 lol
They just love knocking expensive Garmins, until they are not expensive, then they buy one, say its the best thing ever, and move on to knocking the newer models.0 -
Carbonator wrote:philthy3 wrote:Carbonator wrote:philthy3 wrote:Carbonator wrote:
The 810 is old.
What is it with Garmins that people want old outdated tech so badly?
Is it cyclists?
Like no touch screen on the 520?
Errr, I said get an 820 :roll:
As I also said, the 5 series and 8 series are not really comparable anyway.
I was referring to you calling people for wanting outdated technology. The 520 has reverted to outdated technology by going to buttons rather than an improved touch screen. Double :roll: :roll:
Not quite sure you can call a 520 outdated technology because it does not 'choose' to use touchscreen.
Live starva segments and Group Track capabilities (group trackable) seem pretty bang up to fcuking date to me, and just the type of thing old tech buyers poo poo.............. until its old tech :roll: :roll: :roll:
Garmin have their reasons for not having touchscreen on the 520 I guess, but you could have got a 1000 and now an 820 if you want touchscreen that bad.
Was the 510 touchscreen?
Anyone know why they dropped it on the 520 if it was?
People love the 500, yet moan about no touchscreen on the 520 lol
Still see the 500 on the bars of pro riders today. 510 was touchscreen but very laggy and not very precise especially while riding0 -
Maglia Rosa wrote:
Still see the 500 on the bars of pro riders today
Which means what exactly?0 -
Carbonator wrote:Maglia Rosa wrote:
Still see the 500 on the bars of pro riders today
Which means what exactly?
Which means it still does the job of what it was built for despite supposed 'better' tech being available.0 -
810 is perfectly fine. Does everything I need, power metrics, mapping, Bluetooth sync etc and has a decent battery life. All garmins have issues. I've had warranty replacements on every garmin model I've owned which has been a few.0
-
LeeDa wrote:810 is perfectly fine. Does everything I need, power metrics, mapping, Bluetooth sync etc and has a decent battery life. All garmins have issues. I've had warranty replacements on every garmin model I've owned which has been a few.
Just for balance. We have had about 9 and only had one (warranty) issue, which was a battery I think.
Lots of things are 'perfectly fine' and do what people 'need' lol
Who said it wasn't/doesn't?
Why do people take it as some sort of personal insult that there are better (because they 100% are) Garmins out there, and people want/talk about them?
The same scenario simply does not exist with other tech.
I use an edge 25 a lot (and love it) despite having a 1000.
My Fenix 2 was chosen over a 3, and the even newer one is plain stupid IMO, so its not like I just want the newest/best.0 -
Maglia Rosa wrote:Carbonator wrote:Maglia Rosa wrote:
Still see the 500 on the bars of pro riders today
Which means what exactly?
Which means it still does the job of what it was built for despite supposed 'better' tech being available.
Who said it didn't?
An old Nokia does the job it was built for but who uses one of those?
There is 100% no supposing lol. Its better tech.
Pro's have their reason for doing what they do, become a pro before you copy them
I have a 500, 25, 520 and 1000.
Only the 500 is on ebay though.0
