Garmin 520 plus or Woohoo bolt

trevrobwhite

Hi bikeradar,
I'm loving road cycling and found it's doing wonders for my lungs which has meant I've managed to get off antibiotics I've been on for years (recommend to anyone with bronchiectasis)

I did an unsigned sportive the other week and found navigating with the smart phone a nightmare because of battery issues and not really trusting the mount so I want to invest in a GPS computer with turn by turn navigation but I also want something that is going to push me on with Strava live segments preferably without me having to star all my routes as I like taking different tracks locally.

To me it seems to be down to the Garmin 520 plus or the Wahoo bolt, however I did also look at the Lezyne Mega C/XL

I do have a cadence sensor and myzone belt which does ant+ and I'm happy to take my phone with me but don't want the cycle computer killing the battery on it

I will probably keep the unit for a long while so wanted something fairly recent that can be updated over time.

What are your experiences of these units as to which is the best?

I did look around the site and reviews before asking and the review say the 520 and Wahoo bolt come nearly level but I couldn't find an updated compare with the 520 plus.

I also notice the 520 plus is now only £25 more expensive.

Many thanks.

StillGoing

Try the search engine as there are umpteen different posts on the subject.

Spatulala

A big fan of my Bolt but if your primary need is for mapping and navigation, my feeling is that the Garmin will be a better fit. Although I've never owned a Garmin! The maps aren't the clearest on the Bolt.

trevrobwhite

Spatulala wrote:

A big fan of my Bolt but if your primary need is for mapping and navigation, my feeling is that the Garmin will be a better fit. Although I've never owned a Garmin! The maps aren't the clearest on the Bolt.

Thanks.
If you exclude the mapping are there any other big plus for the bolt other than the better battery life?

sloppyschleckonds

trevrobwhite wrote:

Spatulala wrote:

A big fan of my Bolt but if your primary need is for mapping and navigation, my feeling is that the Garmin will be a better fit. Although I've never owned a Garmin! The maps aren't the clearest on the Bolt.

Thanks.
If you exclude the mapping are there any other big plus for the bolt other than the better battery life?

Do a search, the Wahoo exceeds Garmin performance and functionality in every way

Spatulala

trevrobwhite wrote:

Thanks.
If you exclude the mapping are there any other big plus for the bolt other than the better battery life?

As I say never owned a Garmin so these only comparisons against what other people say about their Garmins.

I bought the Bolt at launch, and since then the updates and improvements have been frequent and useful. The usability (setup via phone app) is brilliant, it stays connected to my sensors (cadence/speed/heart), it lasts forever, you never need to swap mapping sections, screen's very readable in bright sunlight.

paulbnix

I've had a Garmin 520 and now have an Elemnt Bolt.

Both provide similar navigation with routes that you define elsewhere and download to the device.
I've never bothered with turn by turn as you can keep the nav screen on display if you need to and both will warn you if you venture away from the defined route.

Both only allow limited panning / zooming of maps as your current position is fixed at the bottom of the display.

The big difference is battery life - the Bolt seems to use about 8% per hour whatever you do - the 520 varied between 7/8% and 25% per hour.

Additional pros and cons are -

520 pros
- apps - I used one that gave a visual gear display

520 cons
- map size is limited so you have to create and download a new map if you cycle somewhere else

Bolt pros
- you can use your phone to create a route e.g. get me home, and send it to the device
- comes with world wide maps

Bolt cons - none that I've come across but I don't use a lot of the functionality such as power, hrm or cadence.

londoncommuter

paulbnix wrote:

520 cons
- map size is limited so you have to create and download a new map if you cycle somewhere else

Bolt pros
- you can use your phone to create a route e.g. get me home, and send it to the device
- comes with world wide maps

Not defending Garmin but the OP is asking about the Plus which has a much bigger memory so the days of swapping maps are gone.

Worldwide maps can be downloaded for free so that's not really an issue either.

Battery life obviously still an issue.

My huge bug bear seems to have been fixed in a roundabout way. The barometric altimeter on the 520 (and I'm 99% sure it must be the same one on the Plus) is rubbish in the damp/wet and leaves you with a Norfolk like flat elevation graph in Garmin Connect. Turning on Elevation Corrections would change the total but wouldn't re-plot the graph (I think Strava did?) but Garmin seemed to have updated Connect so it now does.

paulbnix

londoncommuter wrote:

Not defending Garmin but the OP is asking about the Plus which has a much bigger memory so the days of swapping maps are gone.

That's good then - I didn't replace the map a couple of times and was presented with the traditional breadcrumb trail.

londoncommuter wrote:

My huge bug bear seems to have been fixed in a roundabout way. The barometric altimeter on the 520 (and I'm 99% sure it must be the same one on the Plus) is rubbish in the damp/wet and leaves you with a Norfolk like flat elevation graph in Garmin Connect. Turning on Elevation Corrections would change the total but wouldn't re-plot the graph (I think Strava did?) but Garmin seemed to have updated Connect so it now does.

I'd forgotten that "feature". Wet rides with gradients and climb rates all screwed up.

StillGoing

paulbnix wrote:

I've had a Garmin 520 and now have an Elemnt Bolt.

Both provide similar navigation with routes that you define elsewhere and download to the device.
I've never bothered with turn by turn as you can keep the nav screen on display if you need to and both will warn you if you venture away from the defined route.

Both only allow limited panning / zooming of maps as your current position is fixed at the bottom of the display.

The big difference is battery life - the Bolt seems to use about 8% per hour whatever you do - the 520 varied between 7/8% and 25% per hour.

Additional pros and cons are -

520 pros
- apps - I used one that gave a visual gear display

520 cons
- map size is limited so you have to create and download a new map if you cycle somewhere else

Bolt pros
- you can use your phone to create a route e.g. get me home, and send it to the device
- comes with world wide maps

Bolt cons - none that I've come across but I don't use a lot of the functionality such as power, hrm or cadence.

The Wahoo will do gear display if you have Di2 sandlike the Garmin, will connect to the hidden buttons of Di2 shifters to be able to change screens from the hoods.

surfercyclist

I own a Bolt so basically it means it's the best. On a more serious note, Bolts are great, there have been display issues (I'm on my 3rd). However, for the price they are a great bit of kit and recommend.

trevrobwhite

Can I ask with the bolt to get Strava segments do you need to plan the route in advance? Also how big is the map it can hold?

surfercyclist

I've not got premium Strava but it uploads ride to Strava immediately after completing ride and so shows all pertinent info such as distance, time, speed, average speed, elevation etc etc. If you have premium you get live segments etc. As for maps, the Bolt has preloaded world wide maps but you can also add more if required.

trevrobwhite

SurferCyclist wrote:

I've not got premium Strava but it uploads ride to Strava immediately after completing ride and so shows all pertinent info such as distance, time, speed, average speed, elevation etc etc. If you have premium you get live segments etc. As for maps, the Bolt has preloaded world wide maps but you can also add more if required.

Awesome thanks. I've just downloaded the apps for garmin and Wahoo and it looks like the segments have to starred on both devices so they are equal there.

mamil314

I has the same dilemma. Went for 520 Plus, it works well. It's decent with premade routes, and it will auto plot route to your bookmarks, like 'Home' or "Ambleside Hotel'

turbotommy

I’ve had both. I definitely prefer the bolt. Amongst many things I particularly like the way you set it up via your phone. It makes the garmin seem somewhat dated.

cattytown

OK, my experience is with different models, but this is the internet so why not?

I have a garmin 810 and a wahoo elemnt. I have not made a great deal of use of the elemnt yet, but I do like the phone app for setup/. It feels less cumbersome than trying to use a few buttons.

I find the display of the elemnt clearer - caveat - I am comparing to an 810 so not totally fair.

The garmin lets me set up different profiles for different bikes, and different sets of displays for race/train etc. The elemnt is simpler. MUCH simpler. I do think that was one of their aims when designing it though.

Never really used either for navigation.

PinarelloPrince

SurferCyclist wrote:

I own a Bolt so basically it means it's the best. On a more serious note, Bolts are great, there have been display issues (I'm on my 3rd). However, for the price they are a great bit of kit and recommend.

I love this. The Bolt is the best. It's so good two units have failed and I'm hoping number three is OK. Priceless.

surfercyclist

Yep, display probs all well documented on this forum. But yes, seems counter-intuitive BUT I do think the Bolt is excellent. Both previous times display went I had back light on continually on turbo(may be nothing to do with fault) but this current one been perfect so far for last 6 months or so. And I think it goes to show that even after 2 failures I'm still impressed with them. Most bits of kit if a couple fail then I'd be moving on sharpish.

PinarelloPrince

SurferCyclist wrote:

Yep, display probs all well documented on this forum. But yes, seems counter-intuitive BUT I do think the Bolt is excellent. Both previous times display went I had back light on continually on turbo(may be nothing to do with fault) but this current one been perfect so far for last 6 months or so. And I think it goes to show that even after 2 failures I'm still impressed with them. Most bits of kit if a couple fail then I'd be moving on sharpish.

Well documented or not, your experience of this device is:
No 1 failed
No 2 failed
No 3 still giving sterling service after a whole six months.

But you're happy to give it a ringing endorsement. How strange.

surfercyclist

Whatever.

w00dster

Quite a long review of a few devices, but not the 520 plus....
I guess for both Wahoo and Garmin, they sell a lot of electrical devices that are used in all weathers, so some of these will fail.
I've used Garmin's for years, all sorts of type, for cycling, running, hill walking and general navigation. For road cycling I've had a Garmin 810 and a 520. For mountain biking, bike packing and hill walking I use a Garmin eTrex. I really wanted the 810 and the 520 to be as good as the eTrex as its a cracking little device, but in my experience they haven't been.
The 810 was a bit of a nightmare, when using the map feature the device would periodically power down, not every ride but enough to be a problem. Updated firmware, sent back to Garmin, next device was the same. I then got the 520 and this was as buggy as heck. Ride's would only be partially recorded (the straight line travelling at 165 mph thing going on), it would power down when following routes and would decide when it wanted to connect to my iPhone.
I only lasted about 3 weeks with the 520 before I switched out to a Lezyne Super Enhanced GPS. Great bit of kit for the price, the device itself works really well and is worth having a read of what reviews say about it. The only down side I found was that I swap between bikes regularly, getting it in and out of its out front mount was difficult and I broke two.
So swapped out to a Bolt. So far no problems. It is easy to set up. I don't think the mapping is any where near as good as the 810 (when it worked). But for the majority of my road rides it works really well.
I was tempted to move to a Garmin Edge 1030, bigger screen than the 810, but my experience with the 520 put me off going with Garmin. I've read that the later devices are now more stable, hope that is the case as in my opinion they do offer the best mapping / route guidance experience.
If I was on a budget (circa £100) and didn't mind the stem mounted device, then I'd opt for the Lezyne. Might be ugly but it just works. Connectivity to my devices was fine, power, cadence, watt bike and phone. Easy to set up and just works.
Just to add for balance, I ride with a group of riders who the majority are on Garmin devices and only one over rider had the same problems with the 520 as me. He went down the Garmin Edge 820 path and is happy.
(Search DC Rain Maker for the different devices if you haven't done so already)

StillGoing

PinarelloPrince wrote:

SurferCyclist wrote:

Yep, display probs all well documented on this forum. But yes, seems counter-intuitive BUT I do think the Bolt is excellent. Both previous times display went I had back light on continually on turbo(may be nothing to do with fault) but this current one been perfect so far for last 6 months or so. And I think it goes to show that even after 2 failures I'm still impressed with them. Most bits of kit if a couple fail then I'd be moving on sharpish.

Well documented or not, your experience of this device is:
No 1 failed
No 2 failed
No 3 still giving sterling service after a whole six months.

But you're happy to give it a ringing endorsement. How strange.

They aren't you. It's a subjective opinion. How many people have had countless Garmin's that fail to do what they're supposed to do and still continue with the brand? I'd argue a lot more than the Wahoo users, simply because they're too indoctrinated with the "Ooh Garmin is best" dogma. I went 705, 810 and the goddam awful 820 before I came to my senses and switched to an Elemnt that has never failed me.

bobones

I bought an Edge 820 back in June, and I am very happy with it. I considered a Wahoo, but they're not very good if you want to load them with custom workouts to do out on the road. I looked at the Edge 520+, but coming from a 510, I wanted to stick with the touch screen interface. I also use Xert and the Connect IQ apps are something I couldn't live without. If you're serious about training then Garmins have more to offer IMO.

lostboysaint

philthy3 wrote:

PinarelloPrince wrote:

SurferCyclist wrote:

Yep, display probs all well documented on this forum. But yes, seems counter-intuitive BUT I do think the Bolt is excellent. Both previous times display went I had back light on continually on turbo(may be nothing to do with fault) but this current one been perfect so far for last 6 months or so. And I think it goes to show that even after 2 failures I'm still impressed with them. Most bits of kit if a couple fail then I'd be moving on sharpish.

Well documented or not, your experience of this device is:
No 1 failed
No 2 failed
No 3 still giving sterling service after a whole six months.

But you're happy to give it a ringing endorsement. How strange.

They aren't you. It's a subjective opinion. How many people have had countless Garmin's that fail to do what they're supposed to do and still continue with the brand? I'd argue a lot more than the Wahoo users, simply because they're too indoctrinated with the "Ooh Garmin is best" dogma. I went 705, 810 and the goddam awful 820 before I came to my senses and switched to an Elemnt that has never failed me.

How many people (like me) have had two Garmins (for the bike - I have a load of their other products) which have been completely reliable and done exactly what's been asked of them? (205 and 800 just so that you know) It's nothing to do with indoctrination - that's very clearly demonstrated by the "new and shiny so must be best" Wahoo brigade on here - but everything to do with experience. Yours was poor, plenty of others (significantly more than Wahoo given the volume of product that both companies sell) will have been fine. Get over it.

APIII

bobones wrote:

I bought an Edge 820 back in June, and I am very happy with it. I considered a Wahoo, but they're not very good if you want to load them with custom workouts to do out on the road. I looked at the Edge 520+, but coming from a 510, I wanted to stick with the touch screen interface. I also use Xert and the Connect IQ apps are something I couldn't live without. If you're serious about training then Garmins have more to offer IMO.

I'm not sure I understand this. As a long time Garmin user, the switch to Wahoo was a breath of fresh air with my workouts created on trainingpeaks syncing perfectly. I still use a garmin fenix 3 for running but i found it a far more seamless experience with the Wahoo. For me, Garmins have always seemed a bit underpowered, but the Wahoo seems much quicker, both in operation and in syncing data to 3rd party apps like Trainingpeaks

StillGoing

lostboysaint wrote:

philthy3 wrote:

PinarelloPrince wrote:

SurferCyclist wrote:

Yep, display probs all well documented on this forum. But yes, seems counter-intuitive BUT I do think the Bolt is excellent. Both previous times display went I had back light on continually on turbo(may be nothing to do with fault) but this current one been perfect so far for last 6 months or so. And I think it goes to show that even after 2 failures I'm still impressed with them. Most bits of kit if a couple fail then I'd be moving on sharpish.

Well documented or not, your experience of this device is:
No 1 failed
No 2 failed
No 3 still giving sterling service after a whole six months.

But you're happy to give it a ringing endorsement. How strange.

They aren't you. It's a subjective opinion. How many people have had countless Garmin's that fail to do what they're supposed to do and still continue with the brand? I'd argue a lot more than the Wahoo users, simply because they're too indoctrinated with the "Ooh Garmin is best" dogma. I went 705, 810 and the goddam awful 820 before I came to my senses and switched to an Elemnt that has never failed me.

How many people (like me) have had two Garmins (for the bike - I have a load of their other products) which have been completely reliable and done exactly what's been asked of them? (205 and 800 just so that you know) It's nothing to do with indoctrination - that's very clearly demonstrated by the "new and shiny so must be best" Wahoo brigade on here - but everything to do with experience. Yours was poor, plenty of others (significantly more than Wahoo given the volume of product that both companies sell) will have been fine. Get over it.

Try reading it without the Garmin indoctrination. It was a response to someone questioning another's sticking with a Wahoo product after faults. There are countless Garmin owners that have had faulty units or firmware issues, yet stick with the manufacturer. Now you get over it. :roll:

bobones

APIII wrote:

bobones wrote:

I bought an Edge 820 back in June, and I am very happy with it. I considered a Wahoo, but they're not very good if you want to load them with custom workouts to do out on the road. I looked at the Edge 520+, but coming from a 510, I wanted to stick with the touch screen interface. I also use Xert and the Connect IQ apps are something I couldn't live without. If you're serious about training then Garmins have more to offer IMO.

I'm not sure I understand this. As a long time Garmin user, the switch to Wahoo was a breath of fresh air with my workouts created on trainingpeaks syncing perfectly. I still use a garmin fenix 3 for running but i found it a far more seamless experience with the Wahoo. For me, Garmins have always seemed a bit underpowered, but the Wahoo seems much quicker, both in operation and in syncing data to 3rd party apps like Trainingpeaks

The main problem is that you need a premium Training Peaks subscription to effectively use the Wahoo for workouts. With Garmins, you can create and execute workouts without any subscription or need to schedule them in a calendar.

Also, there is nothing equivalent to Connect IQ in the Wahoo universe, which means that you're restricted from using 3rd party apps like those produced by Xert, some of which are fundamental to using their programme.

StillGoing

bobones wrote:

APIII wrote:

bobones wrote:

I bought an Edge 820 back in June, and I am very happy with it. I considered a Wahoo, but they're not very good if you want to load them with custom workouts to do out on the road. I looked at the Edge 520+, but coming from a 510, I wanted to stick with the touch screen interface. I also use Xert and the Connect IQ apps are something I couldn't live without. If you're serious about training then Garmins have more to offer IMO.

I'm not sure I understand this. As a long time Garmin user, the switch to Wahoo was a breath of fresh air with my workouts created on trainingpeaks syncing perfectly. I still use a garmin fenix 3 for running but i found it a far more seamless experience with the Wahoo. For me, Garmins have always seemed a bit underpowered, but the Wahoo seems much quicker, both in operation and in syncing data to 3rd party apps like Trainingpeaks

The main problem is that you need a premium Training Peaks subscription to effectively use the Wahoo for workouts. With Garmins, you can create and execute workouts without any subscription or need to schedule them in a calendar.

Also, there is nothing equivalent to Connect IQ in the Wahoo universe, which means that you're restricted from using 3rd party apps like those produced by Xert, some of which are fundamental to using their programme.

The Wahoo has built in training programs or you can use 3rd party applications to create your own. Given the majority will have a smart or dumb trainer for indoor work, most will be using some 3rd party application like Zwift, TrainerRoad, Full Gaz, Sufferfest etc for their structured workouts. There are free programs out there that let you send your own created plan to the device.

The Wahoo doesn't need IQ Connect apps to function correctly, which on the whole are just a gimmick. How can you accurately assess your fat burning, stress levels etc without blood tests? They're just an average estimate based on your profile.

Garmin are the major player in the cycle computer market, but they have gotten overcomplicated and as a result, been inundated with failures and faults. Owners hankered after the simplicity and reliability of the old 705 and 500. Wahoo saw that and came up with the Elemnt. Its simple to set up and operate and other than a small minority of failures, proven to be reliable for the vast majority of users.

bobones

I'm talking about using a bike computer for structured intervals out on the road where the Garmin is undoubtedly easier and cheaper to use because you don't require 3rd party apps, premium subscriptions or scheduled calendar events to create and use them. I don't even switch on my bike computer when training indoors with Zwift, Sufferfest or the like as I prefer to use my tablet or laptop so I don't see how mentioning them is relevant. If you don't take your structured training out on the road, or you already have a Training Peaks/Today's plan subscription then you may well be happy with the Bolt's capabilities in this area, but it's not for me.

Some of the Connect IQ apps are no doubt gimmicky as you say, but others offer valuable extensions in functionality not available on any device out of the box. The Xert forums and FB page are full of Wahoo users asking when Xert will make its apps available on the Bolt, to which the answer is "ask Wahoo when they will provide a developer API with the capabilities of Connect IQ". They shouldn't hold their breath.

There is a lot of information to be gleaned from a power meter that you don't seem to understand. If you've got the time, read up on Xert and try out the gimmicky, but surprisingly accurate, "What is My FTP?" app, along with others that are far more useful for training or racing with a power meter (Xert Workout App, MPA and Power data fields) or just have fun hunting for fitness breakthroughs or Strava segments with the new Segment Hunter app.

No doubt many Garmin users have problems, but the Bolt doesn't have a perfect reliability record either. I have owned Edge 500, 510 and 820 computers as well as Vector 3 power meter pedals, and I haven't had any serious issues that couldn't be resolved with a call to support or a simple workaround. (Most serious problem being water ingress with 510 causing charging problems which was resolved with a free refurbished replacement). And my 820 and Vector 3s seem to perform flawlessly despite the horror stories you can read here and elsewhere.

StillGoing

bobones wrote:

There is a lot of information to be gleaned from a power meter that you don't seem to understand. If you've got the time, read up on Xert and try out the gimmicky, but surprisingly accurate, "What is My FTP?" app, along with others that are far more useful for training or racing with a power meter (Xert Workout App, MPA and Power data fields) or just have fun hunting for fitness breakthroughs or Strava segments with the new Segment Hunter app.

No doubt many Garmin users have problems, but the Bolt doesn't have a perfect reliability record either. I have owned Edge 500, 510 and 820 computers as well as Vector 3 power meter pedals, and I haven't had any serious issues that couldn't be resolved with a call to support or a simple workaround. (Most serious problem being water ingress with 510 causing charging problems which was resolved with a free refurbished replacement). And my 820 and Vector 3s seem to perform flawlessly despite the horror stories you can read here and elsewhere.

What? Where have I said anything about power meters? I've used a P2M ever since I suffered a stroke and my tests for FTP are done by two indoor mediums where outside interference is avoided; a ramp test using TrainerRoad and a 4DP test on Sufferfest. The Wahoo allows me to use various view options for data views around power just like a Garmin. But, in all honesty, I just need the 3s average on view rather than a cluttered screen of umpteen bits of information or busy graphics. Simplicity of the 500 remember.

We differ with the 820 as mine was useless and I was glad to see the back of it. The straw that broke the proverbial camel's back for me. My Wahoo ELEMNT (not Bolt) has been perfect from day one.