Garmin FR620 Experience?

cole_ashleyy

Does anyone have a Garmin Forerunner 620?
Do you need the HR monitor if you want the estimated times for 5K and 10K and all of that?

Originally I just wanted something that tracked time, distance, calories, and GPS if possible. Then I saw the Garmin FR620 had the auto-pause which is something I was hoping I would be able to find but not sure if it existed so I kind of fell in love with it.
Then I saw the estimated times which is AWESOME but I’m not sure I’m gonna like wearing the HR monitor.

Any input? Do I need the HR monitor for that? Are there other options with similar features I could look into?

mwyvr

The 620 is a great device for runners; ok for cyclists; and not useful for anything else. I don't have a problem with that because I bought it for running and some cycling cross training and not for any other purpose.

If I were to do it again, I might have gone for the 920XT or 910XT even as I've found I'm running in the mountains more and more and some GPS/direction/altimeter features would be useful to me. That said, I'm quite satisfied with my 620. The FR220 I think I could also be quite satisfied with too, and have spent less.

Estimated times? I would not buy the watch for that. There are sites where you can do similar extrapolations. I can't say I've ever looked at that screen more than a couple of times and in both cases I found myself chuckling at the fairly optimistic looking times... but who knows.

Auto-pause? Used it once, turned it off. Pausing manually is dirt-simple and less annoying to me.

What I use most is a screen showing only two values:
- HR
- Cadence, especially in the first 5km to ensure I'm dialed in

And later I may switch to:
- HR
- Pace

I like the stats Garmin collects via the Garmin Connect website. I do find that training based on my HR helps me dial in a program that works for me and I can test periodically at a specific HR and see progress in pace.

When doing speed work I do use some the 620's other features.

A FR220 plus a foot pod will give you most all of the same capabilities that the 620 has, for less. That said if you have six pairs of shoes and don't want to keep moving a foot pod, it's kinda handy to have the HRM Run strap that can come bundled with the 620 (or buy it separately) as it provides cadence tracking.

If you aren't keen to wear a HR chest strap you might want to reconsider buying something like the 620 or FR220. HR info is useful in training if you make it so; if you don't think you will, a much simpler and cheaper device might be a better bet for you.

cole_ashleyy

Thanks for the input! Definitely helpful. The estimated times isn't necessary at all so I think the website to figure it out may make more sense anyway. Don't know why I didn't think if that.

I get a pretty accurate read of my HR on my phone so it's not necessary to me for it to have something for that. It just seems like it would be annoying to wear something around your chest.

I will be using this just for running. Maybe I'll look at the FR220 again.

mwyvr

Once I have the HR strap on I don't feel it at all. Really. Women may have other experiences, hopefully some will chime in.

Chest mounted HR monitors are the most accurate of all. Some of the arm mounted optical sensors promise to be nearly as good; maybe the wrist mounted optical sensors will get there one day but at this point the answer generally is "not yet".

As I mentioned earlier, HR info can be very useful for a runner serious about their training but it isn't useful if it's not very accurate; further more to be most useful HR info needs to be available in *real time* while you run. I would hate to look at my phone to find such stuff out but a glance at my running watch I do all the time.