Can anyone recommend a GPS watch?

ncmc

Hi all, I am hoping to run the Dublin Marathon is October and have just started a training program. I am looking for a GPS watch to measure the distance I am running. There are loads on the Garmin website, but they seem to vary in price quite a bit. All I really want is to measure distance and speed, so not sure how fancy I need to go. I would like to keep the cost below €250 if possible.

Also, during the summer, I hope to be doing most of my running in my local forest, do GPS systems work in wooded areas, i.e. do they still pick up a signal?

Thanks in advance

RobAMerc

do you have a smart phone ? have you looked at mapmyrun or mapmyride apps ?

The Davestator

the garmin one's are the best in my opinion. You'll pick up a second hand one fairly easy too which will save you big time. if they do drop a signal, they will do an estimate based on your average speed at that time so it will still be an accurate distance. Only really loses signal in city areas with high buildings. You wont regret getting one - really will help your training IMO

paddyh117

there's loads of different Garmin models available -in a range of prices depending on how many bells and whistles you want.

I use the Garmin 110 - it's tracks time/pace and distance, which is really all i need - battery is good and can't fault it.

I'm sure you can get it locally but Amazon have it for £100
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Garmin-Forerunner-Enabled-Unisex-Sports/dp/B003EG83LK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1330014853&sr=8-1

ncmc

Thanks for the replies guys, RobAMerc, no I don’t have a smart phone. To be honest, I think I would prefer something more rugged, that is physically attached to me, I can imagine a smart phone getting destroyed while I jog!

paddyh117 wrote: »

there's loads of different Garmin models available -in a range of prices depending on how many bells and whistles you want.

I use the Garmin 110 - it's tracks time/pace and distance, which is really all i need - battery is good and can't fault it.

I'm sure you can get it locally but Amazon have it for £100
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Garmin-Forerunner-Enabled-Unisex-Sports/dp/B003EG83LK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1330014853&sr=8-1

That’s exactly what I am looking for Paddyh, I don’t want anything too complicated or with a load of extra stuff that I won’t use. Sounds like it’s nice and simple to use too. Have you ever used yours in a forested area? That would be my main concern, that I’ll fork out for one and it won’t work where I will be doing the majority of my jogging.

InTheTrees

I have a Garmin Forerunner 305.

They've since come out with smaller more expensive versions.

It feels a little clunky at first but the size isnt really an issue, you'll be used to it in about a minute.

I'd certainly recommend it, it was really easy to use. It can take a couple of minutes for the initial acquisition of a signal but then you're good to go.

I was probably using it to about 25% of its capabilities, I only used the basic mapping and distance functions, so I'd connect it to the computer after a run and it downloads the data into its own software (comes on CD) and it maps your run. really nice. The software will record and log every kind of statistic you can imagine, needless to say I didnt use those features...

What I found was I only really use two or three different routes for running and after I'd mapped them once I didnt really need the gadget anymore. I knew how far I was going. To be honest I havent used it in a couple of years.

But they are cool gadgets to log your runs, especially if they're random routes and distances.

InTheTrees

RobAMerc wrote: »

do you have a smart phone ? have you looked at mapmyrun or mapmyride apps ?

The problem i had with that is that you have to have the phone on, and in a position to receive a signal. And the gps drains the battery even faster than usual.

Plus I just dont want to strap my iphone to me while I run.

InTheTrees

ncmc wrote: »

Have you ever used yours in a forested area? That would be my main concern, that I’ll fork out for one and it won’t work where I will be doing the majority of my jogging.

Heavily wooded was okay, not sure about deep forest though.

Its better than a phone gps because it uses multiple satellites so it takes a lot of overhead cover to block all the signals.

(You do most of your running in the woods?)

ncmc

InTheTrees wrote: »

Heavily wooded was okay, not sure about deep forest though.

Its better than a phone gps because it uses multiple satellites so it takes a lot of overhead cover to block all the signals.

(You do most of your running in the woods?)

Thanks for the replies, yes I do most of my jogging in my local forest, there is a nice walking path that goes for miles and is soft to run on. i wouldn't describe it as deeply wooded, there is some tree cover, but not very heavy so by the sounds of it a gps watch should work quite well.

RobAMerc

InTheTrees wrote: »

The problem i had with that is that you have to have the phone on, and in a position to receive a signal. And the gps drains the battery even faster than usual.

Plus I just dont want to strap my iphone to me while I run.

Fair enough, I use mine for cycling, have it in my pocket and it works fine, I see plenty of folks jogging with it strapped to their biceps. It's also my music/radio and er.. my phone. battry life is not an issue I have. you must be using an iPhone

paddyh117

ncmc wrote: »

Thanks for the replies guys, RobAMerc, no I don’t have a smart phone. To be honest, I think I would prefer something more rugged, that is physically attached to me, I can imagine a smart phone getting destroyed while I jog!




That’s exactly what I am looking for Paddyh, I don’t want anything too complicated or with a load of extra stuff that I won’t use. Sounds like it’s nice and simple to use too. Have you ever used yours in a forested area? That would be my main concern, that I’ll fork out for one and it won’t work where I will be doing the majority of my jogging.

no idea about coverage in forested areas - there are some trees overhead on some of the routes i run and it's never been an issue. it does take a couple of minutes initially to get a signal, which is frustrating sometimes - but i use it to stretch.
i understand people using their phones while running for the GPS, but to be honest my (iPhone) is too big and bulky and i couldn't be bothered strapping it to my arm - i used to strap an ipod to my arm and that was annoying - i think a watch is best, but it's personal preference really

ncmc

I think I have decided on the Garmin 205, it is actually cheaper than the 110 on Amazon and seems to have extra features and a more sensitive gps receiver. It is more bulky than the 110, but that doesn't really bother me, I am only going to wear it while running and not wanting to make a fashion statement!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B000F5HZHQ/

paddyh117

ncmc wrote: »

I think I have decided on the Garmin 205, it is actually cheaper than the 110 on Amazon and seems to have extra features and a more sensitive gps receiver. It is more bulky than the 110, but that doesn't really bother me, I am only going to wear it while running and not wanting to make a fashion statement!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B000F5HZHQ/

it's all down to personal preference, and if it's got the features you want go for it - i wouldn't get one of those - they are very big and bulky, whereas the 110 is like a normal watch - but like i said - your choice - enjoy the forest running!

InTheTrees

ncmc wrote: »

I think I have decided on the Garmin 205, it is actually cheaper than the 110 on Amazon and seems to have extra features and a more sensitive gps receiver. It is more bulky than the 110, but that doesn't really bother me, I am only going to wear it while running and not wanting to make a fashion statement!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B000F5HZHQ/

Yup. Its a tad bulky but you'll only notice it for about a minute. Its light so it really doesnt make any difference. I found it far less intrusive than having something strapped to my arm.

Be prepared for the "aquiring satellites" wait. It can take five minutes. But because it uses multiple satellites its much more reliable.

I have the 305 which I think has an extra heart rate monitor which i've never used. I think thats the only difference.

robinph

Can't give you a link to the relevant threads right now as I'm on the mobile site, but head over to the athletics /running /triathlon forum and you'll find more information than you know what to do with about gps watches for running.