Time for a new Garmin and I'm going with one of the new ones, either the 220 or 620. Just wondering who all else has researched these and which one you went with and why. There's basically $150 difference between the two and I'm not sure if the extra features on the 620 are worth it.
I've have used the garmin 310xt, and 610. Recently I upgraded to the 620 and I'm so happy with the watch. The bluetooth is really cool, once I finish my run it connects to my phone with the garmin connect app and loads my activities automatically. You have to have the HRM to use all of the features of the 620. I would recommend it of sure!
Went with the 220 because I'd rather have physical buttons than a tough screen while I'm running and I don't need all the wacky coaching features on the 620
Not necessarily a fan of touch screens myself. What features are touch screen while running, switching from one screen to another? Also, does anybody know if a HR monitor from another model Garmin will pair with the 220? I know you need the specific one for the 620 if you want to be able to use some of the features of that watch, but I'm wondering if you can pair another Garmin HR monitor with the 220. For example, I was able to pair the HR monitor I got with my 405 with the 310XT with no problems and my friend's 210 picked up my HR monitor one day, so I know it pairs with multiple other Garmin models.
^same, i went with the 220. i really dont need the touchscreen. i had the 610 and then the 210 and i was happy with the 210. so i upgraded to the 220 and its been great. i dont use any of the features, if i do workouts on the track i just stop and start it manually. so unless you really think you need all the "fancy" stuff and want a touchscreen, then i would stay at the 220. its a great watch. but if you want the extra stuff then the 620 looks really good as well and both watches will last a long time
I had the 210 and got the 620. The extra features are just extra. I don't use the HR monitor regularly. I prefer the touch screen when I navigate through data after a run. I only use one screen when running. The predictor is supposed to be accurate so some may find it an additional tool.
As always, dcrainmaker.com has the ultimate review. There's a table at the end that has a feature comparison and he replies to a lot of the comments.
620 is the ultimate option in my opinion. I use all the new feature and its definitely useful. Make sure you get the heart rate monitor with it or you wont be able to use the extra features.
620 is worthless. I've talked to a prominent exercise physiologist who said that the VO2 max predictor is a joke. There is no way in his opinion a watch could accurately predict that. I have the 220 and it is everything that the 620 is except for the stupid touchscreen that only serves to increase the price and make a person mad. What are you going to do with the metrics anyways? Vertical oscillation? seriously? Now I'm going to try to bounce less and run like Rupp? If you want to increase your run metrics you will do so secondary to calistenics and increased fitness. Get a life. Cadence is about the only feature that you can walk away with, and the 220 has that.
Not to mention that Garmin removed the GPS coordinates that the 610 had. A GPS watch without lon/lat display? What were they thinking of removing that? That was so useful. What if you got lost and didn't have GPS on your phone? Or wanted to navigate to certain places?
dfdffvd wrote:
Went with the 220 because I'd rather have physical buttons than a tough screen while I'm running and I don't need all the wacky coaching features on the 620
This is why I got my spouse the 220, he prefers the physical button versus the "touch" screen. (Not sure about a 'tough' screen..;)
How many data fields can you get on one screen on the 220? I think the 620 has up to 4 like the 310XT but I believe the 220 can only have up to 3 per screen. I like 4 because I can have time, distance, pace, and HR all on one screen. Reduces the need to try to switch a screen when running hard.