The Garmin Debate

pconn062

So there was a bit of talk on some of the logs about the plus and minus points of owning/using a Garmin so I thought I'd try and get a bit of discussion going.

So what's your opinion? Good, bad, used sparingly, can't run a step without it?!

My own take, I own a Garmin. I generally use it on about half of my runs, mainly my sessions and long runs as I don't usually plan out a route so it's handy for measuring distance. All easy runs are done with just a stopwatch and I run by feel. Personally I like the Garmin for sessions but don't like to over rely on it and I think being able to run by feel is important.

Is it a good thing to use in a race or a hindrance?

Any thoughts?

copacetic

I wear mine for every run, but don't 'use' it at all really. I turn it on, do the run, come back and put it down. About once a week I sync it up to record runs. Great tool for keeping track of things without thinking about it or worrying too much about things.

Otherwise in a race or a quick run I keep an eye on current pace to see if I am overdoing it, especially in first couple of miles, or if I start overtaking a lot of people. Often it just helps reassure you that your pace is ok, everyone else is going too hard or slowing down etc.

They are just a modern watch...

ASIMON0V

I have a love / hate relationship with mine. I have had it for four years now and at the start I used it all of the time. now i wear it about half the time; only for sessions and or on any run where I need to be precise on pace such as a progression run. I ran a marathon in April without it and it was the best run I have ever had (mind you there were clocks every 5k) - I felt more in control and less like my watch was controlling my race. When I get tired I get quite compulsive about looking at time / pace and this annoys me, leaving the garmin in the hotel room helped free me from that.

When I do run I run with lap time / lap pace on show and manually lap it every 15 minutes..I am getting a HRM off Santa so am going to try that for a few months...garmin HRM is just unusable.

pconn062

ASIMON0V wrote: »

I have a love / hate relationship with mine. I have had it for four years now and at the start I used it all of the time. now i wear it about half the time; only for sessions and or on any run where I need to be precise on pace such as a progression run. I ran a marathon in April without it and it was the best run I have ever had (mind you there were clocks every 5k) - I felt more in control and less like my watch was controlling my race. When I get tired I get quite compulsive about looking at time / pace and this annoys me, leaving the garmin in the hotel room helped free me from that.

When I do run I run with lap time / lap pace on show and manually lap it every 15 minutes..I am getting a HRM off Santa so am going to try that for a few months...garmin HRM is just unusable.

This is a big thing for me as well. Recently I've done a fair few cross country races where the watch is left at home and I've run purely by feel, I would adjust the pace at times depending on how I felt, something I would be cautious of doing in a road race if I could see the pace figures on the Garmin dropping!

Murph_D

Well I am just an over-50 plodder but the last two runs I did without the watch (5k parkruns in Malahide) were my fastest 5ks. Of course I had no idea of this at the time and had to wait a few hours for the time. So food for thought alright!

wrstan

I've had to train myself not to be a slave to my Garmin, especially when racing.

I quickly found in races that I was looking at the watch all the time and getting stressed either because I was behind target pace and felt like I couldn't increase it, or because I was ahead of target pace and was afraid I was going to blow up. In races now I use the overall time and the course markers as my primary feedback.

I wear mine all the time, but in non sessions it is primarily a recording device.

rom

Personally could not live without it but I am not a slave to it. Could get by with a cheap HR monitor/ stopwatch tbh but I like the stats.

statss

I used my new 610 for the first time today. Did a six mile and came back and uploaded my results. Was great to see splits, HR and pace analysis. I must say, this was suppose to be an easy recovery run, so I went with a slow tempo of 9.30, (based on macmillans tempo's calculated on my HM time) put in a heart rate warning at over 175bpm, and was surprised to see that I went over that BPM amount a few times and struggled to maintain the pace at times. So not so easy afterall. I need to slow down on these runs.

So at the moment I can't see much downside to using one. The more info the better. It's pretty slick on the wrist too.

Ososlo

I'll admit that I am a slave to my garmin. Own it almost year and have done every single run with it in the last year. Went out today for a run and for the first time ever, it wasn't charged up and battery went after a minute. I came home straight away to charge it and rescheduled my run as I though what's the point in running if I don't have a log of my run.
I am very dependent on it. I only took up running October 2011 and got the garmin for xmas last year. I really believe that I stuck to running because of my garmin. I had just given up the fags and used my smoking time for analysing my stats in the evenings and comparing and contrasting stats to my other stats and other people's stats, made me stick with it long-term. I think it does add to my obsessivness when it comes to running though. But maybe that's a good thing
Works for me anyhow;)
I'm running by hr now and don't know how I could do this without the garmin. Effort levels are very hard to determine on your own imo

b.harte

I use mine on every run.
On long runs I only ever have total time, avg pace and distance on the main screen. I set alarms for every 15mins to remind me to drink. (Long runs only) I rarely actually look at the screen.
On shorter / faster runs I have been putting in pace bands and intervals, using it as a
training tool rather than a recording device.
On other non-specific runs I also set it to vibrate every KM so I can check my splits on the fly if I want to, probably do this 50/50, don't look at the watch otherwise.
I've also used the virtual partner to encourage me to push on a bit, especially on courses I run a lot, a great training aid but not perfect.
Recently had a run with my training buddy and used the watch to set warm-up, tempo and cool-down, made the run enjoyable and testing enough for us and we were free to concentrate on the run without doing any maths, finished well inside the target pace because the alternative vibrations for going outside the limits were too annoying.
For me at the minute the pacing functions are the best feature, the recent upgrade to firmware (310xt) seems to have smoothed out the reactivity of the pace bands, it used to be really annoying, not a problem any more.

RedRunner

I use mine all the time. I got it initially to help me control my pacing as I was really bad at keeping even paces. I still use it for this reason but hope to be less reliant on it in the future as I get more experienced at running. I really like the way you can analyse the statistics of splits,HR etc after the runs so you can see where you are making improvements.Because it records distances too it saves a lot of time and don't have to map my run to find exact distance I ran. I'd be a little lost without it now to be honest.
Just got a new 410 (previously had forerunner 110)too so still getting used to new functions that are available on it.

robinph

Use mine for every run to record the stats, but don't use it anywhere near how you could for training. In a race I'd be looking at the pace to make sure I don't go off too fast, but my best result was a last month in a 5 mile race where I wasn't wearing the contacts so couldn't do anything other than start and stop the watch. Smashed my 5 miles pb by a minute, so now have to try and ignore the pace as "too fast" is obviously not actually fast enough and the Harming was slowing me down.

Murph_D

robinph wrote: »

Use mine for every run to record the stats, but don't use it anywhere near how you could for training. In a race I'd be looking at the pace to make sure I don't go off too fast, but my best result was a last month in a 5 mile race where I wasn't wearing the contacts so couldn't do anything other than start and stop the watch. Smashed my 5 miles pb by a minute, so now have to try and ignore the pace as "too fast" is obviously not actually fast enough and the Harming was slowing me down.

+1
My three fastest races have been the three where I didn't wear the watch.

geld

Like a lot of the posters so far I have ran PB's (4 & 5 miles) without any watch. I was running as fast as I could and felt that this helped rather than relying on the pace that the watch was telling me.

In saying that I felt my recent PB's in the Half and full marathon the Garmin was helpful over these longer distances. I also wear it for most runs as the stats it provides are invaluable.

One disappointment is the HR monitor. Having previously used a polar the Garmin HR monitor is a huge letdown.

It's good to see competition to the Garmin which can only help to improve standards.

Ososlo

geld wrote: »

Like a lot of the posters so far I have ran PB's (4 & 5 miles) without any watch. I was running as fast as I could and felt that this helped rather than relying on the pace that the watch was telling me.

In saying that I felt my recent PB's in the Half and full marathon the Garmin was helpful over these longer distances. I also wear it for most runs as the stats it provides are invaluable.

One disappointment is the HR monitor. Having previously used a polar the Garmin HR monitor is a huge letdown.

It's good to see competition to the Garmin which can only help to improve standards.

What's so bad about Garmin HR monitor? I hear people complaining about it all the time. I wear mine every day (from the 305 model) but have nothing to compare it to. Just wondering about other people's reservations??? Is it the accuracy or what? Thanks

Cartman78

murphd77 wrote: »

+1
My three fastest races have been the three where I didn't wear the watch.

But but but but....what about the glorious stats from those races???? Lost in the ether

Like a few previous posters I wear it for every run but not necessarily a slave to it.

Wear it in races too but don't use it for pacing during them....only use the pacing details retrospectively. Handy for figuring out areas for improvement.

geld

Ososlo wrote: »

What's so bad about Garmin HR monitor? I hear people complaining about it all the time. I wear mine every day (from the 305 model) but have nothing to compare it to. Just wondering about other people's reservations??? Is it the accuracy or what? Thanks

Ososlo, inconsistency is my main gripe. I have had runs where the avg HR is between 140 to 150 for the first few miles and then jumps to an avg greater than 200. Maybe I have a dicky strap but I have tried changing the battery, cleaning it etc to no avail.

rom

geld wrote: »

Ososlo, inconsistency is my main gripe. I have had runs where the avg HR is between 140 to 150 for the first few miles and then jumps to an avg greater than 200. Maybe I have a dicky strap but I have tried changing the battery, cleaning it etc to no avail.

I tried all that too and just bought a new HRM as I tried my wife's one an it was fine. Ososlo: Garmin HRM's and watches are very poor. The first 10-15 mins when the HR is through the roof etc. polar is much better but they then have other problems like the RC3 then can't do interval training (according to DC rainmaker) and up until recently you had to wear a separate footpod for GPS. In respect to HR polar do it best but gps garmin seems to be much better.

Murph_D

Cartman78 wrote: »

But but but but....what about the glorious stats from those races???? Lost in the ether

Well yes, that is a pity alright... but then again I have the "overall stat" i.e. the total time and distance! In all of these cases I did not intend to run "naked" but either malfunction or forgetfulness was the culprit. The fast times may or may not have been a coincidence - they were all short races (2x5k and 1x4 miler so I'm not fooling myself that I could have kept up the pace in a longer race). Interesting though that the times were fast - including one where I deliberately tried to go slow and the whole run felt slow until the final stages.

martyboy48

rom wrote: »

I tried all that too and just bought a new HRM as I tried my wife's one an it was fine. Ososlo: Garmin HRM's and watches are very poor. The first 10-15 mins when the HR is through the roof etc. polar is much better but they then have other problems like the RC3 then can't do interval training (according to DC rainmaker) and up until recently you had to wear a separate footpod for GPS. In respect to HR polar do it best but gps garmin seems to be much better.

I thought It was just the Garmin HRM that were poor? Watches I thought were good?? Just curious.....

Personally, I have a garmin 305. I bought it when I started out. As I love gadgets I had to get it I use it on all my runs to keep track of mileage and for motivation I'll keep it for as long as It works but when it dies I'll probably get something more basic as I don't use half the features I have now

AntiVirus

My Garmin is my personal trainer. I noticed that whenever I run without it I slack off.

How can you not love the VM partner, I love trying to beat myself

PS: Nothing wrong my with Garmin HRM

AntiVirus

rom wrote: »

Garmin HRM's and watches are very poor

:rolleyes:

Rubbish, if you've read DC Rainmakers posts and reviews you'll see he rates Garmin watches very highly, he doesn't use any other watches when he's training. He uses the FR610 for running and the the Garmin FR910XT for triathlons. He's tested every single watch there is!

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2012/09/the-2012-swimbikerun-gear-i-use-list.html

sconhome

rom wrote: »

the RC3 then can't do interval training (according to DC rainmaker) and up until recently you had to wear a separate footpod for GPS. In respect to HR polar do it best but gps garmin seems to be much better.

Polar have recently updated their PolarPersonalTrainer website an you can now create and download training programs to the RC3 GPS and RCX3 watches. This is a real benefit as it ties in with the training load guide where your workouts are tracked and based on HRM data the advice is to rest or you are recovered ready for the next session.

Just to clarify the footpod is the old system of measuring distance and cadence (same as Garmin) the GPS sensor was carried in an arm pouch or in a pocket. This means the watch could be used as a watch and not just a training computer.

Polar GPS is just as accurate as Garmin, I've tested them side by side. The main difference is that Garmin Connect is a far 'prettier' website and easier to work through. Polar are catching up on the website stuff with updates.

sconhome

AntiVirus wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Rubbish, if you've read DC Rainmakers posts and reviews you'll see he rates Garmin watches very highly, he doesn't use any other watches when he's training. He uses the FR610 for running and the the Garmin FR910XT for triathlons. He's tested every single watch there is!

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2012/09/the-2012-swimbikerun-gear-i-use-list.html

If you go through his reviews you will also find that he is aware that Garmin HR is not always accurate and he features a regular workaround where people use a Polar strap with the Garmin transmitter to increase data accuracy.

Polar HR data is highly accurate and using the RS800 and ProTrainer 5 it is possible to get, per beat data with the same level of information as an ECG machine (why you would need to is beyond me, but still is a measure of the quality of the machine).

AntiVirus

amphkingwest wrote: »

If you go through his reviews you will also find that he is aware that Garmin HR is not always accurate and he features a regular workaround where people use a Polar strap with the Garmin transmitter to increase data accuracy.

Polar HR data is highly accurate and using the RS800 and ProTrainer 5 it is possible to get, per beat data with the same level of information as an ECG machine (why you would need to is beyond me, but still is a measure of the quality of the machine).

I'm not disputing that the Polar HR is better, I'm disputing the comment that Garmin watch is crap.

sconhome

I think that 'Garmin' has become synonymous with GPS device in the same way that 'Hoover' is the standard for vacumn cleaner.

Most people seem to look for a GPS watch and completely overlook the other training functions of a sports watch.

boodiebhoy

Must say I love my garmin 610 even if I don't use a lot of the functions but great way to keep track of runs. My one gripe is people complaining about mile markers in races not exactly as per their garmin.

Timmaay

Bought one a year or so ago, 1st few outings with it it was fun to have, like all new toys ha, but I never really saw the massive benefit of one. I ended up misplacing it afew weeks later (annoyingly from the point of view of how much its worth), but I didn't see any need to buy another one!

By now I've been at this game long enough to know the difference in pace between a 6/6.30/7min mile, and if my heartrate about to go through the roof etc! All I use is a trusty old casio stopwatch, most my sessions are on the track, or generally repetitions on a hill etc, where you just need to compare each rep to the last, nothing else.

For races, 99% of the time I do club races which I know will be accurately marked, and have km markers etc, so I'll have my splits done out for each km, no need to have a garmin telling me what pace I should be doing.

One final point to add, I always train as part of a group, and most of the time I'd know people around me in the races I'm doing, I'd much more prefer to be gauging myself off my training partners and competition than just a fancy watch! You can't be all smug and sarcastic etc to a watch at the end of a race/training session when you are doing well ha :P

tunguska

I find myself using the garmin less and less. I only wear it in races at this stage but this year Im gonna ditch it altogether and race by feel, see how I get on.

ThePiedPiper

I was running for 5 years before I got myself a Garmin. In those years, I scuppered a lot of races with poor pacing, running too fast early on and badly suffering later. In training, I used to try to estimate the distance for intervals on the road, but was probably making a balls of that too. Most of my running was based on feel, but I wasn't achieving the times I felt I was capable of. My default setting was becoming crappy positive splits and blowing up.

Since I got the Garmin 2 years ago, my training is a lot more accurate and better. It's most useful when I'm doing interval sessions, or doing marathon-paced miles, but also very very good at making me run slowly when I know I should be. It's taken away the guesswork.

However, it's in the races that I feel I've made the most use of it. I've only really messed up one race out of about thirty with bad pacing in the last two years and a lot of that is down to the info I get from the watch. Yes, my training has probably become a bit more clever in the past couple of years also, but the Garmin has been vital to that too. I wouldn't call myself a slave to the watch, but it's definitely a part of the reason why I've been getting better results over the last two years.

Krusty_Clown

RunForestRun wrote: »

I've only really messed up one race out of about thirty with bad pacing in the last two years and a lot of that is down to the info I get from the watch.

It's an interesting point, but there is a counter-argument, that you would be more finely in tune with how you are performing if you didn't have the additional distraction/reliance on an object telling you how you are performing.

I am clearly of the 'Garmin brigade', however, I have over the last year been moving further and further away from having the Garmin dictate what I should be doing or how I am currently doing. Sure, I wear it on every run for tracking purposes, however, for most of my runs, I no longer display fields that determine what pace I am running at, or what distance I am covering. For most easy runs, the watch just displays how long I have been running for. For tempo or race pace sessions (long distance and away from a track) I find it invaluable. For short sessions, or sessions on a track I find it as useful as a €10 stopwatch. My best performances over the last year have come from races where I didn't have a predetermined pace or target and as a consequence, I reckon I ran a little closer to my max potential. Still, I'm glad I had the watch on and recording at the time, as I too am a data-geek and like having the records of all of these training runs and races available.

ThePiedPiper

I'm a self-confessed marathon slut, and in my opinion, this is where the Garmin really is the most useful. In my first 10 marathons (without Garmin), I was relying on feel and listening to my body. In my case at least, I always felt very comfortable at 10-15 seconds a mile faster than goal pace in those races for the first 17-20 miles. However, it almost invariably came back to bite me in the ass in the later miles. Boston 2009 was the most fool-hardy example where I was going along nice and comfortable for the first 15 miles at around 3:05 pace, ended up in 3:33 or something shocking. In my four marathons with Garmin, I've ran exactly as planned in two of them, underperformed by 7 minutes due to lack of training in another, and made a total balls of losing 12 minutes in DCM 2011 for not listening to my body or pacing properly.

It's definitely brought me closer to my capabilities than listening to my body.

Krusty_Clown

RunForestRun wrote: »

It's definitely brought me closer to my capabilities than listening to my body.

In my case, the opposite is true. The best marathon I ever ran was Barcelona, where I largely disregarded the watch (and associated pace) for the entire race and ran an extremely comfortable 2:55.

This year I ran Dublin marathon, and stuck to target pace (though it felt too hard) for the first half of the race and suffered in the second half because of my adherence to my planned pace. I reckon if I had listened to my body and taken the first half easier, I'd have finished a little closer to my 2:41 target.

ThePiedPiper

Look at Mary Keitany's performance in the NYC marathon in 2011. IIRC, she was at world record pace in what everyone in their right mind knows is a difficult course. She said afterwards that she was running on feel, but she blowed up in spectacular fashion. This same goes for loads of elite marathoners, Tadese's debut or even Geb's first couple of marathons being good examples.

I know, for every performance like this, there is a Paula Radcliffe-type performance where she is running solely on pace, despite how she is feeling, with similar blow-ups.

If even the very top level marathoners can get it badly, badly wrong running based solely on either pace or feel, then all us lesser mortals will be no different. The optimum, I believe, must be somewhere in the middle. Especially in marathons, there must be a bit of flexability. My best races have been running by the pace, but with a little bit of flexability +- 15 seconds per mile.

displaced dub

As mentioned previously I'm new to this section and new to Garmin.

I got a 410 off the misses for Christmas and i love it. i thought id be looking at it all the time, but surprisingly I'm not.

The only time i have looked at it is when my body tells me im going to fast and it just confirms what my body is telling me so i slow down.

But i do like to look at my runs on the screen for all of a minute when i get home.

geld

In essence what people are saying is that it is a great piece of kit and a great tool of info and stats. It can help as part of a strategy in a race but should not become the dictate and people should listen to what their body is saying to them. The garmin is there to help not to be wholly obeyed?

ultmc

I use my garmin for all runs, have it about six months, 410. Check pace distance a lot while running, don't use training partner or set training targets on it.
At present logging distance and having an idea of pace is main thing I need it for.
One gripe I do have, don't know if anyone else has found this, but this evening for the third or fourth time, I turned on garmin before run, checked battery, 46%, thought grand that'll do and the watch died after about 23mins. Anyone else had this problem?
Thanks

RedRunner

ultmc wrote: »

I use my garmin for all runs, have it about six months, 410. Check pace distance a lot while running, don't use training partner or set training targets on it.
At present logging distance and having an idea of pace is main thing I need it for.
One gripe I do have, don't know if anyone else has found this, but this evening for the third or fourth time, I turned on garmin before run, checked battery, 46%, thought grand that'll do and the watch died after about 23mins. Anyone else had this problem?
Thanks

I just bought a 410 recently. The other day went out for 7 mile run, checked beforehand and battery level was at 30%, reckoned that should be enough to last run but it died after 4 miles. Very annoying. 23 mins to eat up 46% is a bit worrying!

Cartman78

Just another point on the pro-Garmin side....very handy in races where the mile/km marker aren't there or aren't clearly visible.

Did a few 10k's last year so the Garmin was crucial in the timing of starting my kick for home........whether the kick was actually there or not is another matter

iancairns

I bought a Garmin 610 over Christmas and i've started to run with it.

The only issue is whenever i start a run as in just press start on outside it immediately says run for 5 mins and rest for one minute like i am in a workout. I have gone into workouts to try and stop this but nothing changes?

What am i doing wrong?

Thanks!

Ian

Cartman78

iancairns wrote: »

I bought a Garmin 610 over Christmas and i've started to run with it.

The only issue is whenever i start a run as in just press start on outside it immediately says run for 5 mins and rest for one minute like i am in a workout. I have gone into workouts to try and stop this but nothing changes?

What am i doing wrong?

Thanks!

Ian

There used to be a Garmin Megathread on here I think so the guys on there should be able to help you out.

Sounds like you're on the Interval Training mode alright

RayCun

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055987516

ciaranmac

Is anyone else using a phone app instead of a Garmin? I've never used a GPS watch but I find the feedback from the phone really useful - how do people find it compared with a watch? Although I've tried a few different apps and none of them is perfect. The best I've come up with is Endomondo.

AntiVirus

ciaranmac wrote: »

Is anyone else using a phone app instead of a Garmin? I've never used a GPS watch but I find the feedback from the phone really useful - how do people find it compared with a watch? Although I've tried a few different apps and none of them is perfect. The best I've come up with is Endomondo.

I used to use the Endomondo app but now I use the Garmin 610. If you find the feedback from the Endomondo app good you'll love the Garmin. There's a lot more info you can get instantly.

One of my favourite features is the virtual partner. You can download a previous run and race against yourself and at anytime you can see if you are ahead or not. :pac:

I still you the Endomondo website to upload my runs. The Endomondo website can read directly from the garmin watch to upload your runs which is very handy. I find it much better than the Garmin website.

wrstan

Garmin Fit is a nice little app too.

I don't usually run with my phone, but at 79c it does pretty much the same as a garmin watch - well the most commonly used functionality anyway.

I find it handy a back up for those days when you go to put your watch on and find it is all out of charge! It's also a nice way to be able to check your Garmin connect log from your phone.

iancairns

AntiVirus wrote: »

I used to use the Endomondo app but now I use the Garmin 610. If you find the feedback from the Endomondo app good you'll love the Garmin. There's a lot more info you can get instantly.

One of my favourite features is the virtual partner. You can download a previous run and race against yourself and at anytime you can see if you are ahead or not. :pac:

I still you the Endomondo website to upload my runs. The Endomondo website can read directly from the garmin watch to upload your runs which is very handy. I find it much better than the Garmin website.

What's it got that's better than Garmin Connect, just curious?

Does anyone else use Endomondo?

AntiVirus

iancairns wrote: »

What's it got that's better than Garmin Connect, just curious?

Does anyone else use Endomondo?

First off its a lot faster loading and switching between runs than Garmin Connect. The layout on Endomondo is designed far better. Garmin tries to cram everything on the one page, for example Garmin displays 3 charts for pace, elevation and heart rate. Endomondo uses one, when you move the mouse on to any position on the chart it displays the pace, elevation, heart rate and also shows you the exact position on the map.

There's loads of nice little touches but its mainly how much faster it is compared to Garmin Connect.

Just type uploading a few runs onto it and mess about with it, see what you think.

displaced dub

ciaranmac wrote: »

Is anyone else using a phone app instead of a Garmin? I've never used a GPS watch but I find the feedback from the phone really useful - how do people find it compared with a watch? Although I've tried a few different apps and none of them is perfect. The best I've come up with is Endomondo.

i used to use Nike+ on my iphone but have the forerunner 410 and a nano now.

was getting a pain in me hole with phone calls. texts and mails coming in during runs.

Murph_D

Here's my latest Garmin story. Sometimes they are more trouble than they are worth. And if you don't know what you are doing, you should read the manual

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=82724878&postcount=1720

fmoran

ciaranmac wrote: »

Is anyone else using a phone app instead of a Garmin? I've never used a GPS watch but I find the feedback from the phone really useful - how do people find it compared with a watch? Although I've tried a few different apps and none of them is perfect. The best I've come up with is Endomondo.

Firstly, on the Garmin, I admit to being a bit of a stat freak, so love recording my runs on my Garmin and seeing the stats at the end of the week/month. Happy if I've done more than last week, and more determined to change if not.

In relation to phone apps - I spent 2 months in Australia and didn't bring my garmin. I had been using the Strava app, but tried out the Nike+ app on iPhone. It's excellent. Really like the update on time/pace each km (so I rarely even look at the phone during the run) and the integrated music. It gives a lot of stats too which is good. The "attaboys" are quite fun too (American Olympians saying well done after you beat your best 5k for instance).
Someone else mentioned about getting calls/texts during their runs as a negative; you can turn this option off, but I guess I amn't popular enough to have it bother me :-)

uvox

Noob question, but can you exchange data from the Garmin to runkeeper.com?

Additionally - I see there's a Garmin 10 available - but it seems to be locale specific (e.g., Europe)

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?pID=107143&pvID=107391

Does this mean if I travel to the US I can't use the GPS, etc?