Can't decide! Garmin 830 or Wahoo Roam

530 sounds excellent if you don't need the touch screen of the 830.

In depth review: https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2019/04/garmin-edge-530-cycling-gps-in-depth-review.html

You can get it for €245 without sensors.

https://www.alltricks.com/F-11915-compteurs-velo/P-811948-garmin_edge_530_gps_computer?bvstate=pg:2/ct:r

I know people who've had four garmin's through repeat RMAs, never heard of that with wahoo (accepted, much smaller sample size). Have a BOLT, would buy again.

The Wahoo is easier to read in the daylight compared to the 830 (which I had). Also Wahoo will support Varia radar like the Garmin but will not support ANT+ Lights yet. It is easier to setup than Garmin in my opinion too as you use the app rather then messing with buttons on the device. If you go for the Roam you also get gorilla glass, and a colour screen though it's only the maps that are in colour. There is also a set of horizontal and vertical leds on the Roam which you can program to be used for power, heart rate, speed, varia radar etc.. The Wahoo also uploads directly to Strava, the Gamin does it through the Garmin app on your phone which it synchs with. In practice no real observable difference.

Regarding the 830 it will allow you create routes or courses on the fly with the touchscreen while with the 530 you need to use your phone or pc. The 830 also allows you to enter a street destination while with the 530 you have to put the cross hairs over the street. Finally the 830 also allows you to search for points of interest. Personally I found the screen on the 830 too small for effective map use but that's my eyes. And while the 1030 Plus would be fine, it's just too big for a GPS. All Garmin's support ConnectIQ apps.

If ConnectIQ apps, maps and routing matters I'd go Garmin. And if touch screen matters and the touchscreen on the 830 is very good, then I'd go for the 830.
However if you prefer ease of use and readability in daylight then the Wahoo all the way.

crosstownk wrote: »

FWIW, I recently changed from a Garmin 520 to a Wahoo ELEMNT BOLT. I much prefer the BOLT for almost everything although the Garmin is better at mapping. Not sure how much better the ROAM is at mapping.

ROAM is up there. The only minus is the cpu is a good bit slower than the 830 and 530 so re-rerouting on the fly takes longer. The ROAM also has better build quality than the previous Wahoo's and is more of a matt finish compared to the Garmin's gloss. Also the screen on the ROAM is glass and not reflective like the Garmins plastic screen.

fat bloke wrote: »

That is a great deal. Where are alltricks based or where do they ship out of? I've never used them, are they reliable?

Alltricks were a cycling components website that Decathlon bought a 75% share in a couple of years ago. Decathlon use them as a supplier to push out accessories etc to from their main website.

Prime example, they sell a single speed bicycle, but refer you to alltricks for the fixie conversion kit iirc.

Long story short, there should be no issues ordering from the alltricks website

Ì have the Garmin 530 and its excellent. Previously, had the 520 but it was slow and glitchy. The Garmin 530 can be bought from Cycle Superstore with Cycling Ireland voucher for €250 but I think it may be out of stock at the moment.

Check out Deporvillage and bikediscounts.De for the sensors. They're under €60 on both. Not sure what postage is like though.

There's a list of reliable euro shops on a sticky thread, might be worth checking a few of to see if they're cheaper there. Alternatively post in the adverts thread, someone might have one they're looking to offload.

Another thumbs up for all tricks here too. First order was painless as long as you can avoid the urgent/need it now scenario. Also noticed very competitive on price. The way it should be

fat bloke wrote: »

What voucher is this?

CI voucher for €20 when you renew your license

I have a bolt, but if I was buying now it would be the 530 or 830 over the Roam. Partly because I have a Garmin watch, but also Wahoo are slow to add support for things like Radar, and Lights etc.

I had the 520, the buttons worked , but they were tedious. I tried wahoo for a day, it seemed slow , from what I understand, they are slow to update the firmware. I also didn’t like the look of it- it looks clumsy. I wanted the mapping options, so went with the 830, I thought I’d hate the touchscreen, boy was I wrong. The touchscreen makes everything easy to set up, the new processor is extremely fast. The screen and mapping is easy to read (although I do need to wear my glasses) it’s easy to set up profiles and screens, it uploads very fast , turn by turn navigation is excellent. I really cannot fault it, they have upped their game, they have also made it so it can take more upgrades down the line, plus I have lots of apps on it. 830 all the way, €20 voucher and 12.5% off at cycle superstore with your Ci licence- I paid about 330, they have €15 off fir being a loyalty customer or something.

[QUOTE=Macy0161;115994928
I accept the calorie burn thing is a personal thing (a consequence of tracking), but Wahoo continues to way over estimate compared to my Garmin watch, despite the same weight, height and heart rate zones. Before they finally just went with kj = calories when using a power meter, it could be over 1000 difference between kj and calories on my Saturday spin. People working to a weekly deficit, which I was, that's a serious dent. It took a few weeks of not seeing expected results for me to cop the difference. My Garmin watch has always been pretty similar to kj, but I trust the Garmin calculation after using the figures (across a few watches) as part of a weight loss strategy.[/QUOTE]

Last weekends road spins for have 2000 kcal & 2500kj approx. for each, same power meter & Wahoo headunit.

In terms of a deficit for weight loss which figure is more applicable? It's a huge forrence & i'm using kcl on MFP.

Macy0161 wrote: »

I thought one of the updates the wahoo defaulted to calories = kj? My bolt does anyway. I use kj when I have a power meter (it's what I use from the turbo too), but part of me always wants to take a lower number!

If you are in a weight loss mode probably always a better idea to go with the lower number.
Fitness trackers and calorie burn are always going to be pure estimates and will never be accurate. But as long as they are consistently inaccurate they can give you a good metric for how much you are burning.

I have a spreadsheet that I use where I put in my MFP calories eaten every day, and weight every morning. Overtime as your weight changes it will give you a pretty accurate TDEE. I added in a column for what my apple watch was saying I burnt. If I had a lazy day it was pretty accurate but as you exercise more it rewards you a bit too much. It was roughly 15-20% high.

But at the end of the day I only used it as a metric for showing a consistent level of effort. I already knew from tracking calories and weight that my TDEE was approx 2700cal. So if I ate 2000-2200 average per day I should be in a good place to drop half a kg a week.


I liked the tracking and data aspect of it, but it does not lead to the healthiest relationship with food!

Macy0161 wrote: »

Thanks, but I've fairly good handle on it at this stage having gone from 120kg+ to 70kg-ish! But that was pretty much the method I used, and what I somewhat use in maintenance. Only I only updated TDEE weekly.

Having done it for so long is why I trust the Garmin calories, and not the Wahoo. But I'd still say kj = calorie is better than anything heart rate based, when you have a power meter*. There's efficiency rabbit holes you could go down, but it's as good as you're going to get, for cycling at least.

*a proper power meter or smart turbo, there's no way some of the spin bike "watts" are close to accurate in my experience.

That is an unreal result. Congrats.