GPS watch advice

Looking for an upgrade to my Polar Flow M400 which is now 6 years old and showing its age!
I am well out of the loop so looking for some advice - I quite like the look of the Garmin 245 (love the music integration) and am going to be using it for cycling and running (70:30). Pros and cons? Any other suggestions?

Usually my budget wouldn’t be so high but I’ve got a free £100 amazon gift card so technically the budget is £150 (of my own cash) which is just about acceptable!

Suggestions welcomed.

Comments

  • lesfirth
    lesfirth Posts: 1,382
    My experience with my Garmin Vivoactive 3 will stop me buying anything made by Garmin again!
  • gethinceri
    gethinceri Posts: 1,535
    My experience with all of my Garmin devices encourages me to keep buying them when required.
    Edge 500 (screen graphics spazzed up, i swapped with a replacement myself, no biggie, £10)
    Edge 520
    Edge 520 Plus
    Forerunner 35
    Vivoactive
    Forerunner 935
  • lesfirth said:

    My experience with my Garmin Vivoactive 3 will stop me buying anything made by Garmin again!

    Why is that?
  • My experience with all of my Garmin devices encourages me to keep buying them when required.
    Edge 500 (screen graphics spazzed up, i swapped with a replacement myself, no biggie, £10)
    Edge 520
    Edge 520 Plus
    Forerunner 35
    Vivoactive
    Forerunner 935

    You’re a fan then?! Any thoughts on the 245? Annoyingly has been hiked in price by £38 since I first looked.

    Garmin Forerunner 245 Music, GPS Running Smartwatch with Music and Advanced Dynamics, Black https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07QLVHBLF/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_glt_fabc_7F44BNV7VCE0XF468X05
  • grenw
    grenw Posts: 803
    I've a 245 which I bought for hiking/running. I wear it on the bike as I wear it all the time but still use my Wahoo to measure/map rides etc.

    The 245 is more used as a 'total exercise' watch and hrm. It's no good for while you're actually on the bike apart from very quick glances.
  • Generally their running specific watches won't link to bike power meters if that's a concern when using it for cycling. The higher end ones more aimed at the tri market (745 and 945) will connect to power meters.

    Otherwise it looks like a good watch. I've got a 230 that I've really liked and is still going strong. The offline Spotify thing on the 245 looks really good.
  • pangolin
    pangolin Posts: 6,362
    I have a 45 so no music. Wear it all the time. For exercise it's clearly aimed at running and that is what it's best at. For cycling you can have it on if you want to look at strava or whatever later on, but it won't be much help during the ride.
    - Genesis Croix de Fer
    - Dolan Tuono
  • gethinceri
    gethinceri Posts: 1,535
    dawesie01 said:


    You’re a fan then?! Any thoughts on the 245? Annoyingly has been hiked in price by £38 since I first looked.

    Garmin Forerunner 245 Music, GPS Running Smartwatch with Music and Advanced Dynamics, Black https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07QLVHBLF/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_glt_fabc_7F44BNV7VCE0XF468X05

    I don't have 1st hand experience of the 245 Music, so I can't advise, but...

    One of my running buddies has one and thinks it's the Dad's Dumplings. He recommended I get one but I got a 935 which is more suited to triathlon.

  • elbowloh
    elbowloh Posts: 7,078
    pangolin said:

    I have a 45 so no music. Wear it all the time. For exercise it's clearly aimed at running and that is what it's best at. For cycling you can have it on if you want to look at strava or whatever later on, but it won't be much help during the ride.

    Same. Wear the 45 as my everyday watch. Also have an 820 for routes.
    Felt F1 2014
    Felt Z6 2012
    Red Arthur Caygill steel frame
    Tall....
    www.seewildlife.co.uk
  • I have a Garmin vivoactive 4 and I love it. It's really light weight and lasts a good 3 days if I'm out cycling (~1hr/day) 2 of those days. For the price, it's excellent value with a reliable data feed for phone related things as well. It's pretty basic in terms of the interface but I tried Samsung and it had the functionality but not thr practicality I needed. HI haven't tried the music with the Garmin.

    I have only tried a Samsung as an alternative but that was too heavy and battery life was daily charge.
  • thistle_
    thistle_ Posts: 7,182

    Generally their running specific watches won't link to bike power meters if that's a concern when using it for cycling. The higher end ones more aimed at the tri market (745 and 945) will connect to power meters.

    The Vivoactive 3 is one that won't connect to power meters (it reads cadence from a crank PM but not power). Not sure if it's enabled in the newer models.
    It also disables the GPS and HRM if you are swimming, even though both will work while swimming if you choose another activity type.

    I think the moral of the story is work out what you want from the watch and check the one you are thinking about buying does what you want.

  • mully79
    mully79 Posts: 904
    I dont like cheaper Garmin glued straps. They've all failed on me. My 235 has been excellent but as noted earlier in thread, good for strava recording but not much functionality while riding.
  • JimD666
    JimD666 Posts: 1,994
    It may be worth checking out DC Rainmaker's product comparison part of his website. https://www.dcrainmaker.com/product-comparison-calculator

    Should give you a decent idea of your other options plus a link to his reviews.

    It tends to be my first stop when looking for new tech, mainly because he still does a full written write up of his reviews rather than just video (also available, I just prefer to read rather than watch)
  • grenw said:

    I've a 245 which I bought for hiking/running. I wear it on the bike as I wear it all the time but still use my Wahoo to measure/map rides etc.

    The 245 is more used as a 'total exercise' watch and hrm. It's no good for while you're actually on the bike apart from very quick glances.

    Your last quote is interesting, why no good other than for quick glances?
  • pangolin
    pangolin Posts: 6,362
    dawesie01 said:

    grenw said:

    I've a 245 which I bought for hiking/running. I wear it on the bike as I wear it all the time but still use my Wahoo to measure/map rides etc.

    The 245 is more used as a 'total exercise' watch and hrm. It's no good for while you're actually on the bike apart from very quick glances.

    Your last quote is interesting, why no good other than for quick glances?
    Not who you asked but, for me, it's not in the right position compared to a dedicated GPS unit, there is less info on the screen, and it is smaller/harder to read.
    - Genesis Croix de Fer
    - Dolan Tuono
  • Gramin 245 at £199

    Or if you went for the 935 (older model) it has a bike quick mount designed for triathlon
  • I’ve just bought a garmin forerunner 45, having come from a polar m400. Both very good but much prefer the garmin, much more slick, better interface, seamless uploading etc., although I’m less than impressed with the battery. Heart rate monitor seems to be pretty accurate (have tested it manually whilst at rest and matches what the watch says, at least) and can be useful to have phone notifications pop up but can be highly annoying in equal measures! I would recommend it, but if going on long (3-4+ hour) cycles I’d advise taking a small battery pack and the power lead as it has a poor battery life (thought I’d bought an apple product at first!!)
  • pangolin said:

    I have a 45 so no music. Wear it all the time. For exercise it's clearly aimed at running and that is what it's best at. For cycling you can have it on if you want to look at strava or whatever later on, but it won't be much help during the ride.

    I like it. All I want it to do during a ride is tell me distance, pace, average pace and the time, and if ticks those boxes. HR is a nice addition, too. Battery though, well….
  • andyrr
    andyrr Posts: 1,819
    dawesie01 said:

    I’ve just bought a garmin forerunner 45, having come from a polar m400. Both very good but much prefer the garmin, much more slick, better interface, seamless uploading etc., although I’m less than impressed with the battery. Heart rate monitor seems to be pretty accurate (have tested it manually whilst at rest and matches what the watch says, at least) and can be useful to have phone notifications pop up but can be highly annoying in equal measures! I would recommend it, but if going on long (3-4+ hour) cycles I’d advise taking a small battery pack and the power lead as it has a poor battery life (thought I’d bought an apple product at first!!)

    This may be relevant to your Garmin - I’ve a TomTom Runner2 watch (obsolete now) and the battery life was known to be significantly impacted by having the phone notifications on. Personally I’ve never really cared too much about having that set on so I always had that switched off and so far my watch (a recent’ish s/h purchase) lasts for the longest rides I have and probably will do - 3 hours or so.
  • navrig2
    navrig2 Posts: 1,849
    lesfirth said:

    My experience with my Garmin Vivoactive 3 will stop me buying anything made by Garmin again!

    I second, third and fourth this. I won't touch any Garmin device again. Utter rubbish.
  • lpd2
    lpd2 Posts: 10
    edited October 2021
    I've had a 45s (just a smaller version of the 45) for a few months. It's good for running, and good for recording rides. The thing I like best about it is the style; it is very discrete and simple - it just looks like a watch rather than a sports watch. I've found the battery OK, I did some 6 hour walks on holiday and it lasted the day. In a normal week I charge it about 3 times.