Best model of Garmin for runner?

Options
vespiquenn
vespiquenn Posts: 1,455 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
So let me preface this with that I have never had a Garmin - only Fitbits. I currently have the Fitbit Blaze, but I am starting to become interested in a Garmin for running. Is their any model that you really recommend?

I do not mind if it has built in GPS because I bring my phone with me anyways on runs. Also, how do Garmin's measure up on accuracy on treadmills? Wisconsin winters can be pretty brutal, and I'm too much of a clutz to run in snow/icy conditions.
«1

Replies

  • kxbrown27
    kxbrown27 Posts: 769 Member
    Options
    I have the vivosmart hr+. I like the GPS feature because I can put my phone in a running belt instead of holding it. As far as accuracy on a treadmill goes, meh. It really varies depending on speed. I've found it to be pretty accurate around the 6 mph mark but that's it. There is a feature however that allows you to set a custom stride length that can lead to better accuracy, but it will take some trial and error.

    Overall I've been pretty happy with mine. The Connect app has some pretty useful features, but I don't know how it compares to fitbit.
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    Options
    I dumped my VivoSmart as it had software issues that double up the calorie burns. Went with a Vivoactive HR. On the treadmill I use a Polar chest strap. The VAHR is much closer to the chest strap than the VSHR ever was (ignoring the double counting from activities). With it connected to MFP, the calories it give MFP are about 20% higher than what the Polar give me, which is about as close as any of the wrist based ones come.

    The VAHR is also a lot more flexible in it's features that the VS.

    I don't have a dedicated running watch if that is what you are after. But I know the Garmins are good for that as well, I just wanted more of an activity watch than a straight running watch (I can download golf courses to this one).

    The Fitbit community is better than the Garmin one from a social perspective. Not something I care about but you might.
  • festerw
    festerw Posts: 233 Member
    Options
    I've got a Forerunner 230 that I like on the treadmill it's within a tenth of a mile for me from 5-7mph. Some treadmills are closer than others, my at home $250 Weslo seems to be far off but the Precors at work are pretty close. If you wanted to get closer Garmin offers a foot pod for indoor running.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    You didn't say what your budget is. "The best" is never the most affordable, and how the $$$ compares to the features and size and looks is an individual thing.

    Any Garmin running watch will have GPS. You'll appreciate it when the spring thaw comes.

    Until then, get a cheap foot pod for treadmill running. They don't cost much, go in your shoelaces, and provide drastically better accuracy than any wrist-based motion sensor. The accelerometer in the watch is probably good enough for most people but you asked how the accuracy is indoors, and if it really matters to you, that's how you make it almost perfect.

    Also, the chest strap HRM-Run (or HRM-Tri) can provide some additional insight into how you run: do you favor either leg, how much energy do you spend bouncing up and down vs going forward, how does your stride length affect your pace, etc.

    Here's what running data looks like from a Fenix 3 and HRM-Run strap: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1164644001
  • pomegranatecloud
    pomegranatecloud Posts: 812 Member
    edited January 2017
    Options
    I love my 235. I don't run on the treadmill, but you can manually enter or edit your distance and time on Garmin Connect. The gps is more accurate than using my phone outside. Check out D.C. Rainmakers reviews before making many purchase and carefully consider what features are important to you.
  • rks581
    rks581 Posts: 99 Member
    edited January 2017
    Options
    I use a Vivoactive HR, I love it. I would recommend that model as a base line as I've heard the Vivosmart and lower end models have some limitations (I would go with Fitbit if your budget is below the Vivoactive HR price, and be sure to get heart rate).

    A runner friend of mine (great guy, he helps with my running a lot) wears a Fenix -- he's a serious runner with a team and some great results. The main disadvantage with the Vivoactive HR is it doesn't support workouts. Garmin has training plans including heart rate based ones but you can't load them on the watch with the Vivoactive. With Garmin all the software features are included, there is no premium mode. I like that, it makes me feel like I got good value for the watch because there's no costs beyond original purchase price.

    Any recommendations on a cheap foot pod? I have found some on Amazon but they don't ship to Canada. I do a lot of treadmill running and would really like a foot pod.
  • deannalfisher
    deannalfisher Posts: 5,600 Member
    Options
    dont' restrict your considerations to only garmin - there are other brands out there that have similar technology - polar/tomtom

    dcrainmaker is a good website to review products for lengthy reviews - has more a triathlon focus - but he reviews lots of technology products
  • festerw
    festerw Posts: 233 Member
    Options
    rks581 wrote: »
    I use a Vivoactive HR, I love it. I would recommend that model as a base line as I've heard the Vivosmart and lower end models have some limitations (I would go with Fitbit if your budget is below the Vivoactive HR price, and be sure to get heart rate).

    A runner friend of mine (great guy, he helps with my running a lot) wears a Fenix -- he's a serious runner with a team and some great results. The main disadvantage with the Vivoactive HR is it doesn't support workouts. Garmin has training plans including heart rate based ones but you can't load them on the watch with the Vivoactive. With Garmin all the software features are included, there is no premium mode. I like that, it makes me feel like I got good value for the watch because there's no costs beyond original purchase price.

    Any recommendations on a cheap foot pod? I have found some on Amazon but they don't ship to Canada. I do a lot of treadmill running and would really like a foot pod.

    Garmin uses an ANT+ connection, all the cheaper sensors I've seen are Bluetooth. I haven't seen any cheaper priced ANT+ sensors.
  • deannalfisher
    deannalfisher Posts: 5,600 Member
    edited January 2017
    Options
    garmin should use ANT+ and Bluetooth - I think my polar does - that is the industry standard for most GPS'
  • hapa11
    hapa11 Posts: 182 Member
    Options
    What do you want the Garmin to do? If you take your phone on your run anyway, why not just use a running app like Map My Run? It will calculate the distance, calories, pace, etc. It also syncs to My Fitness Pal. I run about 100 miles a month and my husband keeps trying to buy me a Garmin but the app does what I want it to, for free.
  • powered85
    powered85 Posts: 297 Member
    Options
    Forerunner 230, 630 or Fenix3. Fenix3 is great and they will be cheaper soon (or perhaps now) as the Fenix5 is coming out.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    edited January 2017
    Options
    vespiquenn wrote: »
    Is their any model that you really recommend?

    Material questions would be, what price point are you aiming at, and how much running do you do. I'd also ask whether you also cycle or swim.

    There are lots of answers to the question. I'd echo the suggestion to look at the DCRainmaker reviews.

    Personally I use a, now obsolescent, Forerunner 310XT Tri watch. They remain popular in the ultra running world because of the 20 hour battery life. For dreadmilling you'd need to add a footpod.

    Of the current range, the Forerunner 230 or 235 will do on board cadence, so support your need for indoor use.

    Noting the criticisms of VivoSmart upthread, that's not a sports device it's an activity tracker. Complaining it doesn't do sports tracking is a bit like saying an apple doesn't taste like carrot cake.

    The direct comparator to the Blaze is the VivoActiveHR, but if you're moving away from the Blaze I'd go up the range. The VivoActiveHR is a superior GPS, but it lacks the same richness in the social platform.

    In short, the Forerunner 230/235 is probably in the sweet spot, as long as it meets your budget. As you're asking the question here, and you're satisfied to use a phone anyway, I'd be surprised if you need anything further up the range.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    deannalfisher wrote: »
    garmin should use ANT+ and Bluetooth - I think my polar does - that is the industry standard for most GPS'

    The newest Garmin supports both ANT+ and Bluetooth. Polar and Suunto only support BT I think. Older Garmin units only do ANT+ which is the most common standard. It's a little like Canon vs Nikon, where you choose a body and lock yourself in with lenses.
    hapa11 wrote: »
    What do you want the Garmin to do? If you take your phone on your run anyway, why not just use a running app like Map My Run? It will calculate the distance, calories, pace, etc. It also syncs to My Fitness Pal. I run about 100 miles a month and my husband keeps trying to buy me a Garmin but the app does what I want it to, for free.

    It's very convenient to see your pace or whatever else you care about with your hands free. I broke my last phone running with it in a non zippered pocket. Some races don't allow phones to be carried. Garmin licenses a calories burned formula that's better than anything in any phone app.
  • scorpio516
    scorpio516 Posts: 955 Member
    Options
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    deannalfisher wrote: »
    garmin should use ANT+ and Bluetooth - I think my polar does - that is the industry standard for most GPS'

    The newest Garmin supports both ANT+ and Bluetooth. Polar and Suunto only support BT I think. Older Garmin units only do ANT+ which is the most common standard. It's a little like Canon vs Nikon, where you choose a body and lock yourself in with lenses.

    Garmin watches only support BT for transfer of data to and from a phone or PC. The DO NOT support BT sensors.
  • scorpio516
    scorpio516 Posts: 955 Member
    Options
    Best Garmin for runners? Easy, Forerunner 630.

    Naturally, it's probably about 75% more than you need...

    The Forerunner 25 might be best for you. The 630 could be best for you. The Fenix 5 might be best for you, when it comes out this spring. There are lots of variables.
  • vespiquenn
    vespiquenn Posts: 1,455 Member
    Options
    Thanks everyone!

    So far, I haven't quite chosen a price point because I didn't want to restrict myself yet. However, I will admit that I do like the cadence feature some of you have mentioned. I have been working a lot with improving mine to better my form, and that would be an awesome piece of data.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    The 230/235 have got the running dynamics features that'll help your self coaching.

    The 630 doesn't add a great deal in that respect.
  • powered85
    powered85 Posts: 297 Member
    Options
    The 630 deterred me because it's a touch screen. When running I need tactile buttons not a touch screen.
  • owieprone
    owieprone Posts: 217 Member
    Options
    I love my garmin 920xt, it's on the pricey side, but due to a nike sportsband (non-gps) and a £80 garmin-gps giving less than accurate results or taking forever to pick up a signal i decided to fork out. It also allows husband to track me when I go running alone, in case i fall into a ditch and get washed away. HR monitor is a chest band which i've never got on with with previous watches so didn't buy that even more expensive version, don't really give a hoot about hr tbh. It has loads of features on it, most of which have good youtube vids explaining how to set up, but I just need to know accurate distance and time, and a rough calorie count for eating purposes (i don't calorie count or weight food, i probably should, but arsed). It has loads of options and does biking and swimming too. The biking feature is great for tracking your trails at Bike Park Wales, as well as on road. It also has a tri function so you don't have to manually swap between activity. All in all worth the money for me. I've had it at least a year, not had any problems with it.
  • MichaelJSwann
    MichaelJSwann Posts: 35 Member
    Options
    I have a Garmin Forerunner 230 myself. The Forerunner 235 would also be good if you want heart rate at the wrist. I didn't so I went with the Forerunner 230 and use a chest strap - been using one for years with Polar, so I see no need to change. Optical HR is not as accurate as a chest strap, especially at the wrist for certain activities.

    The Forerunners will also allow you to program workouts whereas the Vivoactive HR will not. I didn't think I'd use that, but starting Couch to 5k I'm glad I have that ability. You also get activity tracking and smartphone notifications, which I'm finding quite handy.

    I use an Edge 520 for cycling.

Categories