Garmin 110

stmochtas · 25-05-2010 9:23am #1

I am currently using a Garmin 305 for the last few years and have always managed to resist upgrading to the 405. I was chatting with the lads from sub4.ie at a recent race and they were showing me the Garmin 110. Anyone on here purchase this watch yet? Any early user reports on how it compares to the earlier versions. The design looks simple and Garmin have returned to the push button for operation.

http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/03/29/garmin-releases-the-110-gps-watch-matt-wants-the-pink-one/

RacoonQueen · 25-05-2010 10:15am

Why do they put pink and flowers on it just beause it's for girls? :rolleyes: I'm tempted to get one purely because of the push buttons, the bloody bezel does my nut in.

stmochtas · 25-05-2010 10:18am

RacoonQueen wrote: »

Why do they put pink and flowers on it just beause it's for girls? :rolleyes: I'm tempted to get one purely because of the push buttons, the bloody bezel does my nut in.

Ya I know... It is not on their web site but I think the lads said €180-€190 for one without HM. I am just wondering do you lose any function when moving to this simpler watch.

RacoonQueen · 25-05-2010 10:21am

There should be a thread on it on page 2 or 3 we were talking about the 110 a couple of days ago. From what I can gather from reading about the 110 it's the same as the 405 only you can't set up advanced workouts, upload routes to the watch with the 110

Krusty_Clown · 25-05-2010 12:00pm

It should in theory have better GPS (quicker acquire / more accurate), as it used SIRF IV chipset instead of SIRF III. Haven't seen any reviews though.

Functionality/feature-wise it would definitely be a down-grade from a 305 or 405, but from a usability perspective, it would be a big improvement. Also be aware that the support for accessories is greatly reduced.

Brianderunner · 25-05-2010 2:24pm

Its slated on the amazon reviews, apparantly it doesnt give you your current pace just the overall average pace at the end.

Krusty_Clown · 25-05-2010 6:19pm

Hmm... While it's good and useful to read the reviews on Amazon, I would temper their comments with a bit of common sense. If you polled all the users on this forum and asked them how many of them use 'current pace' I would expect that number to be really low. I would imagine (some guess-work involved here!) that almost everyone would use some form of average lap pace, or interval pace (which are both averaged).

The reason being that the way GPS works, current pace isn't particularly useful. Most of these watches record a data point approximately every 1-4 seconds, so any data at a particular point in time is relatively useless. The only way Garmin (or any other company) can make a more reliable stab at current pace is to average your data ponts over a fixed/finite distance or period of time. This is called 'average pace'.

If you want to get a view on 'current pace' then edit the lap-pace distance, and set it to the smallest possible value. Maybe someone who owns a 110 can let us know how small you can make the lap distance?

Also worth noting, most of the review are from people who don't actually own the watch, but have jumped on the 'current pace' bandwagon.

<As always, though it may seem like I work for Garmin, really, I don't. I just read manuals for fun. I'm really sad. I know this.>

neilc · 25-05-2010 8:06pm

Hi guys,
I'm actually planning to get a garmin also but can't decide what to get. Having used the search function and gone through online reviews I'm no closer to coming to a decision. At the moment I use Runkeeper on my iphone but even though it's pretty good it's a lot of hassle carrying it around.
As for the garmins here's the conclusions I've come to:-
405 - Good functions but bezel major drawback
305 - Good functions but very large
310 - Excellent functions, multi sport but expensive
110 - Lite

Any recommendations would be greatly received from those who used more than one model or are really happy with what they have.
Neil
PS Sorry, don't mean to hijack this thread.

gerard65 · 25-05-2010 8:20pm

My vote goes to the 305. Its not 'very' large, lets say biggish but I've never found it awkward. Its light on your wrist. The 405 is the worst thing since bulmers pear*
*May not be true as I believe they change the recipe for the pear cider.

Krusty_Clown · 25-05-2010 8:48pm

Go with the 405. You really don't need to use the bezel while running (which is when it doesn't work). If you have extra cash, get the 310xt. 20 hour battery, versus the 405's 6-8 hours.

runrabbit · 25-05-2010 9:13pm

I have a 110!

It's a very recent purchase, I've only used it 3 times so far but here are my thoughts:

Positives:
- It's really simple to use, basically no configuration at all, just charged it up, pressed start, and away I went
- It's very accurate (it even catches me cutting corners on my runs!)
- I've set the autolap function to record at every mile. It beeps at me after a mile and shows me my pace for the mile etc. Personnally that's enough for me, if doing intervals I will set the autolap for shorter distances (very simple to do). I sometimes take a peek at it between miles and if I see my average pace dropping a bit I will pick it up!
- It's small and light. I just couldn't wear a 405 as I have a tiny wrist and the 110 is still big on my wrist but wearable and comfortable

Negatives:
- You have to connect to garmin connect via USB (not wireless). I don't mind as I log onto my laptop most evenings anyway so it's not too much hassle but wireless would be handier than finding the cable (cable also used for charging)

That's it for now, but I've only had it a week so it's still early days! I didn't get the HRM as I hate wearing the strap and I decided that if I really wanted it in the future I could just buy it as an add-on.

gerard65 · 25-05-2010 9:35pm

runrabbit wrote: »

I have a 110! It's a very recent purchase, I've only used it 3 times so far but here are my thoughts:

Positives:
- It's really simple to use, basically no configuration at all, just charged it up, pressed start, and away I went
- It's very accurate (it even catches me cutting corners on my runs!)
- I've set the autolap function to record at every mile. It beeps at me after a mile and shows me my pace for the mile etc. Personnally that's enough for me, if doing intervals I will set the autolap for shorter distances (very simple to do). I sometimes take a peek at it between miles and if I see my average pace dropping a bit I will pick it up!
- It's small and light. I just couldn't wear a 405 as I have a tiny wrist and the 110 is still big on my wrist but wearable and comfortable

Negatives:
- You have to connect to garmin connect via USB (not wireless). I don't mind as I log onto my laptop most evenings anyway so it's not too much hassle but wireless would be handier than finding the cable (cable also used for charging)

That's it for now, but I've only had it a week so it's still early days! I didn't get the HRM as I hate wearing the strap and I decided that if I really wanted it in the future I could just buy it as an add-on.

Sounds good, I never use any of the other functions anyway. Can I ask how much you paid for it?

Krusty_Clown · 25-05-2010 9:39pm

runrabbit wrote: »

- You have to connect to garmin connect via USB (not wireless). I don't mind as I log onto my laptop most evenings anyway so it's not too much hassle but wireless would be handier than finding the cable (cable also used for charging)

Thanks for the feedback. What's the smallest increment you can set the lap distance to? Also, on the subject of wireless, the ANT+ is really messy on the 405 and you have to install drivers when going from computer to computer. You also have to connect it via a cable to a USB port/power socket to recharge it anyway, so it still ends up wired. I'f be much happier with the way the 110 works for transferring routes.

runrabbit · 25-05-2010 9:44pm

gerard65 wrote: »

Sounds good, I never use any of the other functions anyway. Can I ask how much you paid for it?

I got it in the US for $160

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

What's the smallest increment you can set the lap distance to?

Just checked - 400m or 0.25miles.

Thanks for the clarification on the wireless versus wired, doesn't seem like much of a negative so!

Krusty_Clown · 25-05-2010 10:15pm

$160 = €130, which seems like good value for money, if you can find someone to ship it to, or get someone to pick it up for you.

psychozeb · 25-05-2010 10:17pm

as runrabbit said 400m or .25miles are the lowest settings.you can set the format to pace or speed.pace is for end of lap time and i'd imagine the speed is your running pace open to correction there.i leave mine on the pace setting.and as runrabbit also said easy to change the settings when varying workouts.i like it so far anyway,no problems.touch wood!

Krusty_Clown · 25-05-2010 11:31pm

Pace is how long it takes you to cover a mile or Kilometer (e.g. 8 minute/mile). Speed is how many miles or Kilometers you can cover in an hour (e.g. 12 kms/hour).

copacetic · 26-05-2010 12:03am

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Hmm... While it's good and useful to read the reviews on Amazon, I would temper their comments with a bit of common sense. If you polled all the users on this forum and asked them how many of them use 'current pace' I would expect that number to be really low. I would imagine (some guess-work involved here!) that almost everyone would use some form of average lap pace, or interval pace (which are both averaged).

The reason being that the way GPS works, current pace isn't particularly useful. Most of these watches record a data point approximately every 1-4 seconds, so any data at a particular point in time is relatively useless. The only way Garmin (or any other company) can make a more reliable stab at current pace is to average your data ponts over a fixed/finite distance or period of time. This is called 'average pace'.

If you want to get a view on 'current pace' then edit the lap-pace distance, and set it to the smallest possible value. Maybe someone who owns a 110 can let us know how small you can make the lap distance?

Also worth noting, most of the review are from people who don't actually own the watch, but have jumped on the 'current pace' bandwagon.

<As always, though it may seem like I work for Garmin, really, I don't. I just read manuals for fun. I'm really sad. I know this.>

I noted the current pace thing in our last thread here on it, I use it all the time on the 405 and it's very useful imo and appears to be accurate enough to be useful. Unless going through tree cover etc. Basically it confirms for you are you going at the pace you expect before it's too late. I'd imagine quite a number of people use it.

I wouldn't go for a 110 because of it missing the feature and the auto pause also. I'd go for a 405 in the 110 form factor in a hearbeat though.

Krusty_Clown · 26-05-2010 9:48am

copacetic wrote: »

I noted the current pace thing in our last thread here on it, I use it all the time on the 405 and it's very useful imo and appears to be accurate enough to be useful. Unless going through tree cover etc. Basically it confirms for you are you going at the pace you expect before it's too late. I'd imagine quite a number of people use it.

I wouldn't go for a 110 because of it missing the feature and the auto pause also. I'd go for a 405 in the 110 form factor in a hearbeat though.

Ok, I may stand corrected, though I reckon you're probably in the minority. Then again, my bias is towards endurance events, where small changes in pace are not as relevant as training for other distances.

I wonder how interval training works on the 405? When it displays your pace during an interval is it averaging your pace over the interval or showing you a point in time? I reckon it's averaged.

RayCun · 26-05-2010 10:18am

copacetic wrote: »

I noted the current pace thing in our last thread here on it, I use it all the time on the 405 and it's very useful imo and appears to be accurate enough to be useful.

I use it all the time on the 305. Experienced runners may know when they're running at 8.30, 9.00, 9.30, but I need the feedback.
It's part of the standard display setup on the 305, so I'd guess a lot of people use it.

Krusty_Clown · 26-05-2010 11:11am

RayCun wrote: »

I use it all the time on the 305. Experienced runners may know when they're running at 8.30, 9.00, 9.30, but I need the feedback.
It's part of the standard display setup on the 305, so I'd guess a lot of people use it.

That's exactly why I use lap pace, because I too need the feedback. Because I don't want to know what pace I'm doing on a 2 meter incline, versus the pace I'm doing two seconds later on a flat, versus the pace I'm doing as I round a corner, pace while I'm stepping around a dog on a lead, etc. etc. I want to know what pace I'm doing over a pro-longed distance so it averages out all these little upward and downward 'bumps'. Think of a 10k race. What use is it to a runner to look at the watch and see their current pace, at a specific point in time? Perhaps you might hit 6 min/mile on the three instances when you actually look at your watch, but then slow to 7 min/mile while you're not checking out your watch. I want to know my average pace, so I can tell if I'm running all of the race at the correct pace, not just those specific points in time.

Anyway this conversation is going way off-topic. What people who are interested in buying the 110 need to know is that:
1) It does not show current pace (pace at a specific point in time).
2) It does show lap pace, which is your pace averaged out over the course of a lap. A lap is a user-definable distance, from 400m/0.25miles upwards.

scaryfairy · 26-05-2010 9:18pm

if anyone interested, there are some unisex ones going now on ebay, in the UK, from UK official retailer, on auction, so might be able to get a decent price (like I did

... although I really really wanted the pink one...)

I felt a bit silly as I read all the comments on pace, current lap time, etc after I already paid for the watch. But there is some good feedback too, and spparently some of these issues could be resolved by some software/firmware (??) upgrades - let's see, maybe due to popular demand, they might actually do it?

neilc · 26-05-2010 9:24pm

Thanks for the advice, gives me more to think about. Think you could be right about the bulmers pear Gerard

Neil

NEDDURC · 01-06-2010 12:22pm

I see these are for sale now on the sub4.ie website now - €195 without HRM and €225 with it.

What other websites would usually be good value? Wonder if this is about as good as you'll get now?

Someone mentioned there is a Garmin distribution in Bray - anyone any more information on this? Is it much cheaper? Where exactly is it? Anyone have a contact for them to see if they have the 110 in stock now?

Krusty_Clown · 01-06-2010 3:23pm

Not sure of any distributor in Bray, but I know Amphibian King sells Garmin products (if that's what you mean). contact info here. I noticed that Wheelworx are also selling them, but marginally more expensive than sub4 (if my memory serves me correctly).

lipi · 23-07-2010 11:58am

Wheelworx €259
Runways €229
Sub4.ie €225
Amphibian King €199

All the above with HRM. Mad difference in price or what:rolleyes:

TFBubendorfer · 23-07-2010 4:27pm

Ray Maker has a very detailed review on his blog. And by very detailed I mean VERY detailed.

Personally I think they have taken too many useful functions off the watch compared to a 305. I use plenty of them (including current pace, Krusty) and my 305 was a good bit cheaper than the 110!

Krusty_Clown · 23-07-2010 4:32pm

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

. I use plenty of them (including current pace, Krusty) and my 305 was a good bit cheaper than the 110!

..and you call me a weirdo?

mloc123 · 23-07-2010 4:34pm

I would kinda like a 110 to go with my 310xt, I like the form factor of the 110 and think it would be good for races alone.

TFBubendorfer · 23-07-2010 4:35pm

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

..and you call me a weirdo?

No, I called you a pervert.

InTheTrees · 23-07-2010 5:25pm

gerard65 wrote: »

My vote goes to the 305. Its not 'very' large, lets say biggish but I've never found it awkward. Its light on your wrist

Exactly. Its light enough that you really dont notice it.

Garmin 110

Comments