Which watch?

i had the Garmin forerunner 405 and now have Timex Ironman Gobal Trainer. Recommend both highly. Timex is a step up and bought it in the states cheap, not sure i would have otherwise, but its class and the training peaks sight that accompanies it is brilliant for tracking your training and diet

If size doesn't matter, the 310xt is basically a 910 without the swim features

BriBru wrote: »

With regards the 910, any issues? I've seen so many people complaining about fogging and software that it seems like it's almost 50/50 whether you are lucky or not. How rare/frequent are faults?

Oh if only it was 50/50

Most 910xts either ship with or develop serious problems. As a 910 owner i would say avoid all garmin products. Their manufacturing has gone to pot.

BriBru wrote: »

Are Polar still at the races? Haven't seen them mentioned much.

Don't get mentioned because they don't cause any problems.

The RC3 GPS is their first integrated GPS watch and is comparable with the Garmin 405/410 in terms of functionality.

Different set up to Garmin, and not ant+ compatible, Polar do their own WIND technology.

If you want more serious multisporter options then the bigger brother RCX5 is a different unit.

Really like the look of both polar watches., and have been using Polar hrm for years problem free, only thing I ever had to do was replace the battery.
The Global Trainer has all the functions as the Garmin 310xt with out the glitches.
So I suppose it comes down to what you want the watch for and what you want the watch to look at.
910 looks nice and neat, but has to may issue's for my liking and is expensive, 310 ugly as f*UK, and bit better on price but HR not reliable. Polar are the front runner when it comes to hr, and nice looking watch as well, and issue for me at the time was not ant+ and rcx5 has separate gps unit, and rcx3 is integrated but wasn't available at the time. I have been using a Timex watch ironman 100 lap for over 10 yrs, that speaks for itself, just replace battery and go again. I did find the Global Trainer a bit big at the start but once u start running you forget it's there, ant+ so I use Garmin cadence. Heart rate is bang on which for me was important. it comes with a bike mount so I less thing to buy. And at the price I paid for it, and it was well worth the money.

So my friend the choice is yours


You will probably go for the Garmin because, as well everyone else does :-)

tunney wrote: »

Unfortunately if you are serious, runner or multisport, then post do not have a offering for you. RS800 maybe but that's it.

Stress is on the word 'serious' too. As serious sportspeople may have a combination of different units for achieving different things its proving very hard to find one size fits all in the multisport watches.

The RS800 is a smashing unit. Just not as user friendly as the Garmin. Also because it is a few years old at this stage it is not as easy to use on the back end with Polar Personal Trainer etc.

On the other side a good coach / program and a simple heart rate monitor works for some.

tunney wrote: »

I'm actually coming around to the multiple units that do things right idea.

Garmin swim in the water.
SRM on the bike.

Question is what on the run?

If like me most people will know where they run and how far some loops are eg 6ml 7ml 8ml etc etc so i dont need to measure every run, And i train by time 50 min run 1h run etc, so dont need Garmin Global trainer etc for every run, i use hr for some runs, mostly for recovery runs, i do my speed work on marked roads or track so only need time as i do speed of time feel,
Ok Ok maybe not all train this way.

So answer is Polar HRM with record function RS400 maybe

The 910 is grand, for training. Some people just like to moan about every bit of new kit that comes out! To be honest I'd have kept the 310 if it had the swim features. Yes there are things I could improve about the 910 that I'm sure they will figure out and add to a newer model in time to come. For a triathlete though or an OW swimmer who does a little running or biking, its a great training tool. I try not to be a slave to it though and train to feel a lot as (LD aside) I'll abandon the watch for race day.

Like any Garmin, it would be nice if it picked up the GPS quicker. HR data for swimming would be cool too

Kurt Godel wrote: »

This is the reason I am looking at the 910xt. I'd love to get the Garmin Swim, but its only good for the pool, no OW capabilities. If it had GPS for sea swimming, I'd be all over it, but then if it had GPS it may as well support running and biking... and be the 910.

What'll you do for your OW data?

I don't really care about OW swimming to be honest. In a race its irrelevant, in training in OW all I care about is sighting and distance doesn't matter.

shotgunmcos wrote: »

The 910 is grand, for training. Some people just like to moan about every bit of new kit that comes out! To be honest I'd have kept the 310 if it had the swim features. Yes there are things I could improve about the 910 that I'm sure they will figure out and add to a newer model in time to come. For a triathlete though or an OW swimmer who does a little running or biking, its a great training tool. I try not to be a slave to it though and train to feel a lot as (LD aside) I'll abandon the watch for race day.

Like any Garmin, it would be nice if it picked up the GPS quicker. HR data for swimming would be cool too

Other than the fogging I am completely happy with the 910xt, I think the features are excellent.

amphkingwest wrote: »

Any GPS unit will track your OW swim.

Does the 910 give you your stroke count and SWOLF scores in OW?

@tunney - I'm guessing that a universal program like Training Peaks or WKO is probably the best base to collate the multiple training data strands rather than a little bit on Garmin Connect, some on PPT or Polar ProTrainer for example?

If I was going run specific, I'd probably go Garmin 610 or Polar RS800.

The RS400 while a good watch does not give any option of adding GPS tracking, whereas the G3 & G5 pods can be used with the RS800.

Sorry to OP for diverting the thread.

610 - is that even vaguely waterproof though?

I have used TrainingPeaks and WKO for about 5 years. All data in one place and I can get numbers on anything very very quickly

tunney wrote: »

610 - is that even vaguely waterproof though?

Was gonna do something like '910 - FYP' but enough Garmin bashing. Its a great watch just has basic fundamental faults that shouldnt be there.

The 610 I was suggesting as run specific, no water based activities.

Kurt Godel wrote: »

I take your point about pool metrics being most useful, but I'd also be interested in the sighting line info from OW swimming, to see how much off the straight line your garmin track goes. Distance/time info I find as useful as running distance/time, fun to look at.

This is a very useful thread, and its made up my mind to purchase a 910, versus a Garmin Swim/305 combo. The consensus seems to be the 910 is the best jack of all trades.

But the 910xts swim lines in OW won't be straight either. The lock loss and re-acquisition makes it a little inaccurate.

amphkingwest wrote: »

Was gonna do something like '910 - FYP' but enough Garmin bashing. Its a great watch just has basic fundamental faults that shouldnt be there.

The 610 I was suggesting as run specific, no water based activities.

But what if it rains an awful lot and it gets very very wet that way I meant!

tunney wrote: »

But the 910xts swim lines in OW won't be straight either. The lock loss and re-acquisition makes it a little inaccurate.



But what if it rains an awful lot and it gets very very wet that way I meant!

Ok, I tap out, go Polar RS800 instead. 2 year warranty & waterproof.