PDA

View Full Version : Which running watch?



USGILT
06-23-10, 15:17
Need some input from those runners out there.

I am looking for a watch for running that will measure basic speed/distance, easy-to-use, is comfortable and accurate, and possibly tracks workouts and progress. Any sugjestions - Garmin's Forerunner, Suunto T4, etc?

Thanks,

rudy99
06-23-10, 15:35
Not a watch, but I've had good success with the Nike+ for the iPod. Tracks all your data online, which is nice. The only downside is when the battery runs out on the chip you put in your shoe. Mine lasted about a year before it gave out. There is a way to rig it with a new battery, but it looks kinda messy. Could be a much cheaper option if you already have an iPod and are planning on getting a new pair of shoes anyway.

Sherman A. House
06-23-10, 16:09
I use the Garmin 405cx. It is pretty cool, and easy to use. When I arrive at the start point (I run at a track, in a hiking park, or around my neighborhood) you tap a button on the bezel and it picks up the GPS satellites. You press, "Start," and it starts tracking the time, minute miles, etc. It is programmed with your weight, height, age, so that it estimates the caloric expenditure as well as several other factors. It also has a heart rate monitor. After the run, it uploads the information to your computer via a jump drive, and tracks your results online. I highly recommend it.

rdbse
06-23-10, 23:18
Forget the gimmicks and save your money. All you need is a standard digital watch with some memory. If you start getting serious, maybe invest in a watch with a hear rate monitor. As a competitive runner, I suggest just getting out the door and log some time on the roads.

Do you think K. Bekele uses these things?

USGILT
06-24-10, 10:47
While I can understand the importance of just getting out there and running. I tend to run alot of trails which are hard to measure distance and I would like to know how far I am running and at what pace.

jasonhgross
06-24-10, 12:44
If you are running outside, The garmin 305 forerunner is awesome.

boomhower
09-10-10, 19:00
If you are running outside, The garmin 305 forerunner is awesome.

Agreed, I have one and love it. If you run inside from time to time they make a foot pod attachment that is pretty accurate when you can't get a GPS signal.

Naxet1959
09-10-10, 19:56
I have the Garmin 205 which is a 305 without the heart rate monitor. I love it and being able to see my pace really helps out. Before I got the Garmin, I used my Timex Ironman and www.mapmyrun.com to figure out the distance that I wanted to run. It worked but having a Garmin is sooo much better.

I'm about to pace my first full marathon and we have to use the Garmin's for our folks so we're on the nose time-wise. I used it to pace a marathon in May that was sponsored by Garmin (my hometown is their headquarters) but did I get a free or cut rate one? Nooooo.... so my endorsement is based on function, not because of a bribe....

HETZ1313
09-12-10, 23:27
I am using mapmyrun on my iphone even keeps a training log. free app

vaglocker
09-13-10, 12:04
Forget the gimmicks and save your money. All you need is a standard digital watch with some memory. If you start getting serious, maybe invest in a watch with a hear rate monitor. As a competitive runner, I suggest just getting out the door and log some time on the roads.

Do you think K. Bekele uses these things?

I've had good luck with the Garmin 110. GPS is hardly a gimmick especially with all the data it can give you. Who the F' is K. Bekele?

rdbse
09-13-10, 13:09
I will use the advice often seen on this forum: save your money, buy some ammo, and take a good carbine course. You would be better served getting a simple heart rate monitor and just get out the door for an hour a day. You need to learn to run buy feel and that only comes with time on the roads. I can run several miles with a stop watch and tell you how far I went to the nearest quarter mile just by feel. On certified race courses, I have seen GPS watches off by more than that.

I am only trying to help, so if you want to argue with me and spend your money go right ahead. Too many people think GPS watches and other fancy gear will make them better runners (just like weapons and shooting).

trappernana
09-13-10, 13:53
I must be a total dork but I was thinking Casio G-Shock-ish:jester:

pete10
09-13-10, 16:26
I have had good luck with the Garmin 305. My wife has the 405 (the 305 was hers before mine). The 405 is smaller, but it has an auto turn off feature that has proven annoying.

Whether or not to use one, good opinions on both sides of that argument. Here is my argument for:

I am training for a full marathon right now. I am not good enough with pace at this point to not hurt myself by knocking off 6 miles in the middle of an 14-20 mile run 30-45 seconds faster per mile than I should. I don't know how many times during a run I look down, see the pace and correct. I know "good" runners don't need this auto correction, but I do. I also have more experienced friends use heart rate alone for training. But for me, the pace feedback works best.

It doesn't make me better, it helps me make myself better.

rdbse
09-13-10, 18:46
It doesn't make me better, it helps me make myself better.


Pete, I agree it can be a useful tool. Too many people just get wrapped up in the technology and forget running is a simple activity.

Regardless, I respect anyone's efforts to improve.

Good luck in your marathon!

pete10
09-13-10, 18:53
rdbse,

Yep, I agree. Most shorter runs, or tempo runs, I just go. I definitely need it on the longer runs right now. It can be a crutch if you overuse the tech.

Thanks for the wishes on the marathon. Gonna need it.

Naxet1959
09-13-10, 22:05
I am not good enough with pace at this point to not hurt myself by knocking off 6 miles in the middle of an 14-20 mile run 30-45 seconds faster per mile than I should. I don't know how many times during a run I look down, see the pace and correct. I know "good" runners don't need this auto correction, but I do.
This is dead on. Unless you are a professional, you have to be very specific and intentional about what you're doing on long runs both for training and the actual event. Especially for one of your first long races. There's nothing worse than having the perfect day right there,you're feeling great and ready to chew nails and then before you know it, you're adrenaline is gone and you have 10.5 miles left to go and no juice left because "you just felt good". Running longer distances takes some tools, just like shooting more than just plinking takes tools.

scubadds
09-14-10, 07:29
One major thing that hasn't been brought up that I discovered.

The garmin "watches" like the forerunners with GPS only go around about 1/2 a day before they need to be charged.
So to me they aren't really watches. The are running specific tools.

Make sure you look into battery time if you are expecting a watch that you can wear 24/7 and then hop off and run with GPS, be carefull what you get.

I have the Garmin 310 xt now (I use it for triathlons) It measure more than you can imagine (HR, Pace and any function of pace averages such as lap pace, and even my watts on my bike, etc,etc) and its waterproof.
I had the forerunner 405, the early ones were not water proof. The touch bezel was so sensitive that if you were sweaty it became useless. So I sold it.

The battery life of the 310xt is listed at 20 hours, I use it a few times in hour chunks of time and it will be dead if you are not diligent about charging.
I think some of the footpod linked versions may have longer battery life as I think the GPS is the power hog....

Back to the gun analogy; What's your purpose for the tool? If its just to get out and get going with running and try to improve that different than if you aspire to break certain speed or distance goals....the GPS watches are nice. I didn't have one and ran a marathon without it years ago. Fast forward many years, Now I have been using mine and can pretty much run on feel. If I forget or have battery down; I usually can tell within a few seconds if I am running a 6:20 mile or an 8:20 mile.
One thing is nice is HR monitor. If you start running more miles in a week you will want to know that your easy runs are easy and your hard runs are hard. You can establish this with HR zones, I did mine on a bike and know what my max HR or Theshold is. There are formulas to use to make zone (usually a % of MAX HR). You may want to stay in "Zone 2" for a long run and hit Zone 3-4 for interval work.
This may be more than you were wanting to hear.
If you want a watch, get a watch. (and you may find some with some GPS abilities that have better battery life)
If you want a running only tool then I the Garmins are nice.
It tracks your runs on GPS and you can see your progress on a map and stores the info for future reviews....pretty neat

pete10
09-14-10, 16:51
Another option to think about if you have a smart phone is the apps that are available for run tracking. I have used Cardiotrainer on my Android phone. It isn't as elaborate or sensitive as the Garmin, but it does work. Your data set is fuzzed out a bit as the pace isn't dead nuts on any time you look at it (nor is it on the watches, but they are much better), but you can get a great idea over a 15 second period or so. Most of these are free. you do have to lug your phone with you though.

BattleDrill3
09-16-10, 02:20
It's been said already, but having a watch that paces you can help very much in training, particularly if you've only been running for a short time, or as you get more serious and become a data nazi. If you pay the rent by running 26.2's, that's a different story: you have a coach. Otherwise, just starting out or at an elite level, unless you have distances marked off on the road, a pace watch can mean the difference between an ineffective or effective training session, or winning or losing a race.

Garmin Forerunners are great, but the short battery life is a downside. Look for an old-fashioned Forerunner 101. Like all FR models, it has customizable views (a big plus). Unlike the rest (201, 405, etc) it uses AAA batteries...while the battery life is about the same (15-ish hours), there's no recharge time. The downside to these is that the GPS is pretty useless in any big city (with skyscrapers). I used to live in DC, and the force field, for lack of a better term, around the Pentagon, Capital Building, and White House (the best places to run) made the GPS useless as well. Further, the later models have auto-shutoff features, as someone else mentioned. Annoying. As well, none of these can be worn all day (too big, too short battery life).

The FR 310xt is the most feature-laden model. Good for tri's, links wirelessly directly to Garmin's site, measures watts, etc. 20 hour battery life, but requires a recharge. If you have $400 you just can't stand keeping, give it a hard look. Other than the recharge bit, it's the best GPS-based watch they have. (As far as features are concerned.) Too much to list. A good review here:

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2009/09/garmin-forerunner-310xt-in-depth-review.html

However, for a non-GPS based model, it's tough to beat a Garmin FR60. It has a great battery life (a year, son), and is a normal-sized watch that can be worn all day. (It uses a foot pod.) Maybe the best option I'm aware of, particularly when it comes to price. About $170 with foot pod and heart rate monitor, and it's compact.

It can link with certain digital scales and workout equipment, easily interfaces with a computer with a wireless USB stick, and has a convenient "auto-pause" feature. (It stops recording when you stop at a stoplight, tie your shoe, etc.) Many more features await. A great review here:

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2010/02/garmin-fr60-review-in-depth.html

Because I rarely if ever use many of the features of a FR60, my first pick would be the Suunto T3c. Interface is easy to read, the whole thing looks dead sexy, relatively inexpensive, and the battery life is great. It uses a non-GPS foot pod as well. It's heart-rate monitor compatible, but I just use the ol' "finger to the carotid" trick.

The T3c and the running pack (HRM and foot pod) are just under $200. Make sure to get a newer running pack for the improved non-GPS pod. (The new one is a small rectangular bar, where the old one is a monster that looks like an alien spaceship, and calibration issues have been ironed out.)

The drawback with non-GPS based footpods is that they are calibrated based off the length of your stride. It requires your running form to be pretty consistent. However, that should be your goal, regardless.

The difference, if you're curious, between the T3d and c is just that the d model HRM can interface with some treadmills. Get the T3c here:

http://www.campmor.com/outdoor/gear/Product___81394

Caveat about the T3c: the crystal (the "glass" part of the watch) sticks out above the bezel (the "border"). It gets scratched fairly easily. A company called Zagg makes the invisibleSHIELD specifically for that model, however. It's great, guaranteed for life, and has been sold to over 10 million people. Worth the cash. If you get the Suunto, rock that mother****er as well, or the screen will get scratched somethin' terrible.

The later models have a "virtual coach," "training effect," etc. I don't bother, but that's just me. I use measurable drills to track progress: mile or 1/2 repeats or other interval runs. Also, running on a track, while boring, is the best way to get a feel for pace without using a watch. Take notes after each run to compare. Distances, how it felt in your lungs and legs, daily weight, what you ate before and after. (What? Actual notes on real paper? That's crazy talk!)

If you don't live in a big city and want a running specific watch, the easiest and most convenient is the Garmin FR 101. In a city, if you desire recording data on your computer, use the FR60. If you don't use a lot of those features, get the Suunto T3c.

For the sake of full disclosure, my T3c just sits in my closet these days...I kick it old school for the most part - I use a timing bezel on a dive watch, run barefoot (I started a thread about it on the site), run on a track sometimes, or do a lot of fartlek runs.

More on the types of training runs here:

http://www.momentumsports.co.uk/TtRunning.asp

And Kenenisa Bekele, by the way, may just be the best distance runner in the world right now...won the 5K and 10K golds at last years World Championships.

If you're an uber-nerd, such as myself, great info on the science of energy and running, such as aerobic and anaerobic glycolysis can be found here:

http://glycolysis.co.uk/

Krebs cycle, ATP synthesis, etc, is available here. Search around the site for nerdy goodness.

http://rpi.edu/dept/bcbp/molbiochem/MBWeb/mb1/part2/krebs.htm

Be safe.

spd707
02-20-11, 19:26
I use a Casio G7700.

superr.stu
02-20-11, 20:02
A lot of my running buddies that go the high tech route are using Garmin now. Some have tried Nike+ and had some accuracy and battery issues. We did have one Suunto t6, but it got replaced by a Garmin. 99% of the time almost everyone is wearing either a Nike watch or ironman. Something with basic Chrono, Big numbers, at least 50 lap memory, and usually something of an interval timer for fartlek runs.

About the only time we see widespread use of the "fancy" watches, is when we go to a state or county park for a long timed run, and we want to know our distance at the end. Sometimes we see a heart rate monitor if someone is feeling sick, or we're doing threshold work. Though mostly we can all judge our pace over distance within 5-10sec per mile. Learning pace is just a part of maturing as a runner. A lot of people I see and talk to short-cut it with technology and never really learn to read what their body is telling them. They get wrapped up in a certain number or chart of progress plan, and can miss running just because it is fun.

ballistic
02-20-11, 20:34
I'd recommend one of the Garmin fitness watches with ANT+ such as the FR60 that can use a HRM and a foot pod for measuring distance, then using Garmin Connect to track your workouts. No worries about privacy (posting when & where you run) even though you can make your activities private. The foot pods are accurate enough for tracking milage and average pace, and the batteries in the watch last much longer than in the GPS watch units.

Heartbreaker
02-24-11, 01:16
I run on a track so I don't need anything to measure distance or pace, but a heart rate monitor is essential if you are serious about running. I use a cheapo Reebok watch with a chest mounted sender, it's accurate and comfortable. I've seen some Suuntos with the chest mounted HRM if you need something more high speed/stylish. Whatever you get try it on at a store if you can, a watch may be rugged and loaded with features but if it's heavy and has an uncomfortable strap you aren't going to want to run with it.

Hizzie
02-24-11, 11:52
The wife uses the Timex GPS/HR Monitor. She is quite happy with it other than it is huge on her little wrist.

dookie1481
02-24-11, 20:55
I will use the advice often seen on this forum: save your money, buy some ammo, and take a good carbine course. You would be better served getting a simple heart rate monitor and just get out the door for an hour a day. You need to learn to run buy feel and that only comes with time on the roads. I can run several miles with a stop watch and tell you how far I went to the nearest quarter mile just by feel. On certified race courses, I have seen GPS watches off by more than that.

I am only trying to help, so if you want to argue with me and spend your money go right ahead. Too many people think GPS watches and other fancy gear will make them better runners (just like weapons and shooting).

One of the most commonly recommended purchases for a shooter is a shot timer, as it allows you to quantify your shooting, instead of going by feel. As many have noted, a string of fire that feels fast may be slow, and vice versa. The only way to KNOW is to objectively measure your performance.

I assume the analogy between a shot timer and a running watch/GPS is obvious.

rdbse
02-25-11, 20:20
A heart rate monitor is a much better training tool than GPS watch.

If you don't understand that, you have little or no concept of proper training of a distance runner.

Some buddies use a Garmin Forerunner 110. They seem happy with the watches, but between two of them they could be off by 3 to 4% on a given run. To me that accuracy isn't worth the money. I would rather run intervals on a proper track or race the local 10k to "measure my performance."

goalie
02-26-11, 09:42
I used a Garmin to train both running and on the bike for an ironman triathlon.

I found the data helpful, but usually only use the GPS now for runs that are going to be > 1 hour or bike rides > 3 hours. I have a simple HR monitor I use for the short stuff.

The 305 is a good bargain for what you get, and the battery will last about 12 hours.

90slow50
03-15-11, 14:28
If you are running outside, The garmin 305 forerunner is awesome.

+2, I have the same watch, and it works great for my training.

hatidua
03-16-11, 17:33
The lightest weight Casio with a stopwatch you can find.