The new garmin edge 520plus - disappointing?

redvision

Anyone else disappointed with the new device?

https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2018/04/han ... pping.html

Updated mapping but from DCR experience this is still not reliable.

But apart from this there is very little different from the 520.

* full list of differences (taken from DCR)
- added full map set for display of roads/routing
– Added turn by turn navigation capabilities, also route recalculation
– Has Trendline popularity routing engine overlaid atop the new maps
– Added Rider to Rider messaging (introduced on Edge 1030 last summer)
– Added two mountain bike trail apps loaded by default (TrailForks & Yelp)
– Updated Strava Segments algorithm found in Edge 1030 that is more accurate for racing segments
– Added slight differences in data page/field layouts
– Added new Extended Display mode for Garmin FR935/Fenix 5 integration as a secondary display (Edge 820/1030 will get too)
– Beefs up by 2g more than the Edge 520 (63g vs 61g)

londoncommuter

Has it got the same lousy battery life and altimeter?

The memory must be bigger though if it can take full maps? Is that the extra 2g?

pblakeney

redvision wrote:

...
– Added turn by turn navigation capabilities, also route recalculation...

Strange. I used a 520 to navigate the Pyrenees quite successfully using turn by turn.
The battery also lasted from 09:00 to 19:00 with the correct settings while navigating.

redvision

Not sure about the battery but i cant imagine they would have changed the altimeter.

The mapping updates do appear good on paper but again whats the point of this if it is unreliable?

I would have been far more interested in this had they extended the text message capability to phone calls as well, thus negating the need to carry a phone in your pocket.

alex222

It is still called a 520 so it was never going to be that different.

redvision

Alex222 wrote:

It is still called a 520 so it was never going to be that different.

Perhaps. You would still expect to see more from it though.

From what i can see they have failed to address many of the complaints of the 520, focusing purely on just one (mapping)

jgsi

No, It is a data logger with features and old fashioned buttons to press , expecting it to perform for full route assistance etc etc is like expecting... well add your own metaphor.
If you feel ripped off by Garmin, buy another brand.

..what on earth are Strava racing segments anyway?

redvision

JGSI wrote:

No, It is a data logger with features and old fashioned buttons to press , expecting it to perform for full route assistance etc etc is like expecting... well add your own metaphor.
If you feel ripped off by Garmin, buy another brand.

..what on earth are Strava racing segments anyway?

I swear by the Elemnt Bolt, far superior to the 520 imo.
I'm just disappointed in this garmin release as i had hoped they would react to the bolt by launching a gps which sets (and raises) the bar.

thegreatdivide

redvision wrote:

I would have been far more interested in this had they extended the text message capability to phone calls as well, thus negating the need to carry a phone in your pocket.

Eh? Is that not called a phone?

kingdav

I've been ok with my original 520 tbh, I knew what the spec was when I bought it. I wish I'd known the 820 was coming out soon after but that's one of those things. My only real complaint is the small memory which means I'm shuffling maps from time to time. If they've added memory and some of the 800/1k mapping features (v1 520 has no routing/recalc, can just show you waypoints and turns you feed it really) it's a worthwhile improvement I'd say.

timothyw

thegreatdivide wrote:

redvision wrote:

I would have been far more interested in this had they extended the text message capability to phone calls as well, thus negating the need to carry a phone in your pocket.

Eh? Is that not called a phone?

I thought that - the text message feature depends on it being paired to a compatible phone.

Are you wanting to put an extra pay as you go SIM card in your Garmin? Or are you going to swap your sim around each time you go for a ride?

Either way, I'm out.

Problem is, I've got a Garmin 500, and to get a new bike computer that does things slightly better I need to spend £200, and those slightly better things are most definitely not worth £200.

If I killed it I'd probably get a Wahoo bolt.

redvision

thegreatdivide wrote:

redvision wrote:

I would have been far more interested in this had they extended the text message capability to phone calls as well, thus negating the need to carry a phone in your pocket.

Eh? Is that not called a phone?

You know, you're right.
But having experienced what happens to phones in rear jersey pockets when you have an off I am still hoping a gps will be made which has the ability to make calls, negating the need to carry a phone.

I know some companies are working on this, just hoped this would be the year.

noodleman

redvision wrote:

thegreatdivide wrote:

redvision wrote:

I would have been far more interested in this had they extended the text message capability to phone calls as well, thus negating the need to carry a phone in your pocket.

Eh? Is that not called a phone?

You know, you're right.
But having experienced what happens to phones in rear jersey pockets when you have an off I am still hoping a gps will be made which has the ability to make calls, negating the need to carry a phone.

I know some companies are working on this, just hoped this would be the year.

Can't see that ever happening.

redvision

noodleman wrote:

redvision wrote:

thegreatdivide wrote:

redvision wrote:

I would have been far more interested in this had they extended the text message capability to phone calls as well, thus negating the need to carry a phone in your pocket.

Eh? Is that not called a phone?

You know, you're right.
But having experienced what happens to phones in rear jersey pockets when you have an off I am still hoping a gps will be made which has the ability to make calls, negating the need to carry a phone.

I know some companies are working on this, just hoped this would be the year.

Can't see that ever happening.

Garmin themselves bought a company and it's satellites last year for this very capability.

Other gps makers are rumoured to also be researching this. So it is coming, just taking longer than hoped.

noodleman

But that will just mean it's a phone??? Except it'll be a crap phone compared to a smart phone. I'm struggling to see any market for such a device. To make a GPS with a built in phone would mean a much higher cost and a much larger device. A bit like a smart phone in fact but with fewer features. What's the point?

redvision

noodleman wrote:

But that will just mean it's a phone??? Except it'll be a crap phone compared to a smart phone. I'm struggling to see any market for such a device. To make a GPS with a built in phone would mean a much higher cost and a much larger device. A bit like a smart phone in fact but with fewer features. What's the point?

It wouldn't be a smart phone. Just a bike gps with calling ability. The point being you're not carrying two devices.

Try having any off in the middle of nowhere, needing to call for help but the phone which was in your back pocket was smashed during the off.

The gps is fixed on the bars in a position which is less likely to be damaged in an off.

That's why there is a market and why the likes of garmin, xplova, and reportedly lezyne are working on one.

Anyway, back to the 520 plus. It really does seem like a lazy update. Reportedly the battery life is identical to the original 520. So the main difference really is just the mapping.

pblakeney

You would have a point, if they had called it the 530.
Otherwise, meh.

pauly69

Not trying to troll, but I've had a 520, 820, both carp, both sold and I moved to Elemnt Bolt - it is the Ronseal of the gps computer world. At the end of the day it's just a bike computer but it's the closest I've come to 'it just works'.

I still have a 1000 which I use on the turbo, but got fed up with flaky this and that so almost exclusively use the Wahoo outside now.

520plus - meh, any new features should have been in the original, yet another Garmin chucked out there to fill every possible niche. Pass.

joey54321

redvision wrote:

noodleman wrote:

redvision wrote:

thegreatdivide wrote:

redvision wrote:

I would have been far more interested in this had they extended the text message capability to phone calls as well, thus negating the need to carry a phone in your pocket.

Eh? Is that not called a phone?

You know, you're right.
But having experienced what happens to phones in rear jersey pockets when you have an off I am still hoping a gps will be made which has the ability to make calls, negating the need to carry a phone.

I know some companies are working on this, just hoped this would be the year.

Can't see that ever happening.

Garmin themselves bought a company and it's satellites last year for this very capability.

Other gps makers are rumoured to also be researching this. So it is coming, just taking longer than hoped.

But then why would it take long at all? Calling with a simple card is pretty old technology now, and can be done incredibly cheap. If they wanted to it wouldn't take multiple years to research. I just don't believe this is commercially desired product by mainstream users.

philbar72

the 130 looks decent, for a casual cyclist looking to use ant+ or Bluetooth power/ other items. though again it competes with the Lezyne super GPS/ Bolt.

that 520+ looks average at best.

kingstongraham

joey54321 wrote:

But then why would it take long at all? Calling with a simple card is pretty old technology now, and can be done incredibly cheap. If they wanted to it wouldn't take multiple years to research. I just don't believe this is commercially desired product by mainstream users.

Who wants to swap a SIM card out of a phone and into the garmin every time they go for a ride? Just not something people would pay for.

redvision

KingstonGraham wrote:

joey54321 wrote:

But then why would it take long at all? Calling with a simple card is pretty old technology now, and can be done incredibly cheap. If they wanted to it wouldn't take multiple years to research. I just don't believe this is commercially desired product by mainstream users.

Who wants to swap a SIM card out of a phone and into the garmin every time they go for a ride? Just not something people would pay for.

You wouldn't.
From what I was told by a Garmin rep, they are working on a device which is capable of making emergency sat calls. So wouldn't need a phone network. Hence why they purchased the sat com company last year (or whenever it was).

And for those saying there isn't a market for it, remember that when you have an off, land on your back and shatter the phone you are carrying in your pocket.

It's the logical next step for bike gps. Apart from Bluetooth connectivity there has been no significant breakthrough for years now. Maps may be better, and some may use touchscreen, but these are not ground breaking new features. Granted the Wahoo elemnt bolt has transformed the middle market, but that isn't because of new features, it's because it just works.

It's only a matter of time before smartphones develop battery life etc and will genuinely be able to compete with the current crop of cycle gps devices, so the likes of garmin, Wahoo etc have to produce a device capable of maintaining their position in the market.

Hopefully the next couple of years the call making capability will come to fruition. Although saying that, this year garmin were supposed to release the successor to the 520, and that turns out to be the underwhelming 520 plus. So may be my hopes are years away

kingstongraham

I can see a market for a device that can make emergency satellite calls, but can't see it ever being mass market road bike computers. If I have an off, land on my back and smash my phone, I would hope that one of the people who pass by will call an ambulance for me.

Flâneur

apple watch 3

noodleman

Simply put your phone in a case. And people will still want to take their phones with them regardless of the ability to make emergency sat calls. People like to have Bluetooth connectivity to upload activities at the end of their rides (they may not be returning home to where they would have left their phone) People also like to take photos while they're out on rides and generally check their phones at coffee stops for any info they need to catch up on.
People just don't want to be without their phone nowadays and Garmin won't change that with the ability to make emergency sat calls. Total non starter.

redvision

noodleman wrote:

Garmin won't change that with the ability to make emergency sat calls. Total non starter.

Well the fact that garmin have acquired the necessary businesses/ infrastructure to deliver this, and the fact their rep told me at eurobike last year that they are working on such a device, suggests they believe there is a market.

Oh and phone cases don't make a difference when you hit the floor at speed.

Anyway, time will tell.

noodleman

Three crashes and no broken phones tells me phone cases certainly do make a difference thanks. Maybe you're right and the Garmin rep knows the market better than everyone else but if the responses on here are anything to go by then it doesn't look particularly viable.
Sounds like just another Garmin gimmick along with their useless touch screens and woeful collision detection that goes off every time you hit a pothole or go over a curb.

pblakeney

redvision wrote:

That's why there is a market and why the likes of garmin, xplova, and reportedly lezyne are working on one.

Can we expect a similar thread about Wahoo, Xplova and Lezyne?

redvision

On the other hand, maybe having a phone in the back pocket is the way to go....
http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/lates ... bus-377283

pilot_pete

redvision wrote:

On the other hand, maybe having a phone in the back pocket is the way to go....
<span class="skimlinks-unlinked">http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/cyclist-thanks-phone-in-back-pocket-for-preventing-serious-spinal-injury-in-crash-with-bus-377283</span&gt;

Don’t worry, when they get rid of the need for a phone they will invent a “lower spine protector” to cater for such an eventuality. It will be a small aluminium plate, pocket sized, that will protect the lower spine in the event of a ‘back meets road’ scenario. It will be available in three models - 6061 aluminium for the roughians, T700 carbon fibre for the ‘must have carbon bling weight weenie brigade’ and 6AL-4V titanium for the ultimate ‘sublime, classy ride’ cafe connoisseurs...

Mark Cavendish is in talks to be their brand ambassador (sorry, I meant crash test dummy...) Here he is in first phase testing to provide ‘proof of concept’ - https://youtu.be/wvsAeCg4n8I After the crash Mark commented “its great laa, me back’s mint!” He was however angered because he couldn’t work out how to call Peta on his Samsung Galaxy Plate...

PP

norvernrob

redvision wrote:

noodleman wrote:

But that will just mean it's a phone??? Except it'll be a crap phone compared to a smart phone. I'm struggling to see any market for such a device. To make a GPS with a built in phone would mean a much higher cost and a much larger device. A bit like a smart phone in fact but with fewer features. What's the point?

It wouldn't be a smart phone. Just a bike gps with calling ability. The point being you're not carrying two devices.

Try having any off in the middle of nowhere, needing to call for help but the phone which was in your back pocket was smashed during the off.

The gps is fixed on the bars in a position which is less likely to be damaged in an off.

That's why there is a market and why the likes of garmin, xplova, and reportedly lezyne are working on one.

Anyway, back to the 520 plus. It really does seem like a lazy update. Reportedly the battery life is identical to the original 520. So the main difference really is just the mapping.

You’re looking for a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. There are plenty of near-indestructible phone cases on the market, put your phone in one of those and that’s it. If the phone gets damaged beyond use through it then you’re not likely to be in any state to phone anyone anyway.

I zip mine into a gilet pocket, then wrap the gilet around it before tucking it into a pocket. It’s more so I don’t lose the phone than anything else, but it gives it extra protection too.