best running GPS watch?

I don't use the function much, but I have a Polar M400 (love it) that has GPS and lets you easily customize the main screen you see while exercising, along with up 8 or so additional screens you can add and configure however you want. You can pick how many statistics each screen shows (from 4 small slices down to a single stat that fills the entire screen. If you link it up to a Bluetooth Stride Sensor, you can get information on your stride and cadence too. I never realized how important cadence was to running until I started paying attention to it. As for syncing to a PC, you don't have to do this unless you want to customize things (so figure you do it at least once and when updates are needed). Otherwise you can sync it to your phone or just review everything on the watch.

dc rainmakers web site is your friend here.

yes, FR 220 with HRM

generally it connects pretty fast, bad days where I lost GPS while running or had to wait a couple of minutes were only a few

decent amount of options, you can watch lap stats or total stats, it has got everything I need for both long and fast runs

garmin connect is pretty decent too

be aware of HRM strap, had to replace mine after 1 year and apparently it's someone common even if you treat it as per instructions

I don't recommend a touch one, it will be hard to control it/change option in my view

pearshapedmum wrote: »

am leaning towards garmin FR 220, does anybody here use this?

SueInAz wrote: »

I have a Garmin 220 that I bought in March to replace my old 410. It literally takes no time at all to connect (I'd stand around and wait for the 410 to connect). You can customize the screens to show the stats you want while you're running including current pace, current cadence (step count per minute), current heart rate, distance, etc. I know it shows average pace at the end of the run but am not entirely certain it will display it during the run, but I'd be surprised if it doesn't... there are about a hundred different options. It does interval timing (beeps and vibrates when it's time to switch), if that interests you. It actually doesn't sync via the computer unless you plug it in, instead it uses bluetooth to sync with your phone and upload your stats.

A FR220 or FR610 are both good choices and should be cheaper given they are older models.

You might rethink your lack of interest in heart rate monitoring - it can be a useful training tool even for plodders like me. The two screens I use on my watch the most are HR + Pace and HR + Cadence.

mwyvr wrote: »

A FR220 or FR610 are both good choices and should be cheaper given they are older models.

You might rethink your lack of interest in heart rate monitoring - it can be a useful training tool even for plodders like me. The two screens I use on my watch the most are HR + Pace and HR + Cadence.

Especially in the heat I find watching my HR very useful. I know when it gets close to 175 that I need to slow down a bit. The cadence is one of the reasons I chose the FR220. I was very happy to find that I naturally run at about 180 SPM, which is the target, but when I get tired it'll slip a bit and seeing that happen I know to take smaller steps.

Now that I'm looking at the FR225 I want one and I just got the FR220 a few months ago.

Garmin FR610

Morgaath wrote: »

Fellrnr does ultramarathons, and lots of product reviews, because he can...
http://fellrnr.com/wiki/Best_Running_Watch

He covers price, causal vs marathon vs ultramarathon use, features they have, accuracy, etc.
He even retest them after they get software updates.

Personally, I just use my phone. 95% of the time it works well, occasionally... Wow, I did a 3.5min mile?

Fellrnr is an *amazing* site, but his GPS watch reviews come from a *very* narrow and high-end-use standpoint. (His idea of a good running watch for the average weekend warrior: Polar V800 and Garmin Forerunner 920xt. What?)

DC Rainmaker gives, IMHO, better reviews within the target audience of each level of watch.

OP, I use a FR220 as an upgrade from the FR10. The FR220 picks up the GPS connection much more quickly. Additionally, it has an internal accelerometer so it can even start recording your run before it finds the connection, which the FR10 can't. That is its biggest advantage. The 220 can display three data fields per screen. You mentioned four, so you would have to be toggling between two different screens to keep tabs on all of them (which is fine). You'll figure out what is most helpful to you during your run.

It does charge via USB cable, so you'd either be plugging it into your computer or a socket adapter every few runs to recharge it. The Garmin Connect website is a bit buggy but surprisingly useful for seeing progression in distance and pace over the months.

If price is a factor, look into getting a used or refurbished model off eBay for around US$150-160. I got mine for 140 and it's perfect!