Best GPS Watch

I would recommend the Garmin 220. It is the most recent upgrade to the 210. Price is $250.

I use the forerunner 10. Why anyone would want, or need more data that what it provides is beyond me.

Maybe the others have longer batter life, but that may be it.

The 10 give you av. pace, a real time pace, etc..

It depends what you want out of it. I wanted only distance, time, and pace so I use a Garmin Forerunner 10, which you can get for $100. I borrowed one from a co-worker and it works fine for what I wanted out of it so I asked for one for Christmas.

I have found it to be pretty accurate. Measured 26.5 miles in my marathon (certified course) earlier this month. Most of that difference was from me weaving in and out of people in the first 2 miles. Like with most watches, it could take a few minutes to pick up a signal on a very cloudy day, but I have never waited longer than 3-5 minutes.

I asked on another thread but I'll add it here.

How do these GPS devices track you if you are running on a moving object-running laps on a cruise ship?

faint praise honors due wrote:

I asked on another thread but I'll add it here.

How do these GPS devices track you if you are running on a moving object-running laps on a cruise ship?

They don't. Wont be accurate.

faint praise honors due wrote:

I asked on another thread but I'll add it here.

How do these GPS devices track you if you are running on a moving object-running laps on a cruise ship?

Some Garmin models let you use a sensor ("foot pod") on your shoe that detects movement so that you can still track distance/pace etc on a treadmill or a cruise ship. It isn't quite as accurate as GPS but it's good enough for most purposes. Costs about $50.

aquafina wrote:

I use the forerunner 10. Why anyone would want, or need more data that what it provides is beyond me.

Maybe the others have longer batter life, but that may be it.

The 10 give you av. pace, a real time pace, etc..

+1

I have no interest in slicing and dicing data while it's on my wrist, heart rate, elevation, barometric pressure, loading training plans, other sports, etc.

For me, time, current pace, distance, and simple controls are all that I want and that's all you get with the Forerunner 10. You can then upload the data to your computer or an online site if you want to do anything with it.

It's also the same size as a normal digital watch, which is nice.

The new tom tom runner is pretty dope. It uses gps and an accelerometer so it is accurate on a cruise ship or a treadmill.

I find that my Forerunner 10 can be particularly terrible if I'm not out under open sky. Last summer I was out for a long run doing marathon pace on a flat, paved path that occasionally had stretches of tree cover. I started out in an area with tree branches over the path, and what the Garmin claimed was my marathon pace felt a lot harder than it should have. Shortly after crossing out of the trees into open space the Garmin said I was running almost 30 seconds faster than it had shown under the trees, without having changed how I was running. Anyone else using the 10 notice anything like that? I don't think I had it on a wrong setting. I used a Forerunner 201 for years and when on this same paved path, I don't recall seeing such a big discrepancy. I run a lot on wooded trails; the 201 would generally under-report distance on those, but the 10 is even worse there -- it is often not even consistent with itself on same paths. Can't even correlate its inconsistency with weather/cloud cover, so I don't know what all is affecting it there.

If I'm out where nothing is between me and the sky, e.g., open roads or on a track, the 10 is just fine. No tall buildings and no tree branches overhead, otherwise odds are good it will misreport pace and distance. I did a half-marathon in Philadelphia last fall but according to the 10, I didn't even run 13 miles. I ran multiple races in cities and with tree-lined streets with the 201 and never once did it try to tell me I ran less than the race distance. I like the size and the simplicity of the 10, but it frustrates me that I am not always sure I can trust what it tells me. (I guess it's a plus that it never tells me I've run MORE than I really have.)

I've had a Garmin 305 for a few years that I got pretty cheap (under $150). It's a nice watch and it does more than I'd ever need. It is pretty huge, though.

Forerunner 220.

I'll disagree with what other's say about too much info. The HUGE advantage of the 220 is the ability for workouts. I can program in fartleks and whatnot which is a huge help in training.

crusher wrote:I find that my Forerunner 10 can be particularly terrible if I'm not out under open sky.

I use mine for trail running and haven't had that problem and it's also close for certified race distances on the roads. I wonder if you have a bad one. If you haven't updated the software using the Garmin connect software I'd try that also.

The Garmin Forerunner 10 blows big time. If you have any trees or buildings around, it wont be accurate. I live in a rural area and dont recommend this watch.

I love my FR 10. It is just a basic GPS that lets you know how far you have gone and how fast. I keep mine on lap pace and distance and then have it on auto lap so I get each mile split. I have to wait to upload to get the total time and total average but it works for me. Has everything that I could want. I run in the country with it and it seems to be pretty accurate for me.