Garmin Megathread-Ask your questions here-See post 1 on how to search thread

Krusty_Clown

Great stuff Colostomy bag. Great to run a decent negative split and next time you should take a chunk of time off your marathon time (particularly if you get your long runs done!).

With the 405/cx/410 best thing to do is exactly as you did and lock the bezel and keep it locked for the duration of the race. It may be that you shifted data screens before you locked the bezel. If it's beeping (non-splits) when the bezel is locked, you may have a different problem.

grimbergen

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

I wouldn't think so, no. Unless you decide at a later date to do advanced workouts, like intervals etc, and don't have access to a track or fixed distance.

The FR 10 can do this do also krusty, at least that's my understanding?

Krusty_Clown

grimbergen wrote: »

The FR 10 can do this do also krusty, at least that's my understanding?

You mean the FR10 can be pre-programmed for intervals and/or advanced workouts? I wouldn't have thought so (as it's an entry level product), but happy to be corrected if this is the case.

grimbergen

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

You mean the FR10 can be pre-programmed for intervals and/or advanced workouts? I wouldn't have thought so (as it's an entry level product), but happy to be corrected if this is the case.

Assuming we're talking about the same thing, it has both an autolap function and a repeat run/walk function i.e. 3 mins run/1 min rest - both of which are suitable for intervals I would have thought

Krusty_Clown

grimbergen wrote: »

Assuming we're talking about the same thing, it has both an autolap function and a repeat run/walk function i.e. 3 mins run/1 min rest - both of which are suitable for intervals I would have thought

Hey grimbergen, it does sound like you could construct some kind of simple interval session from the functionality provided, particularly with the run/walk feature, but you'd still be missing out on much of the functionality of a typical interval session on more feature rich-watches, such as:
1) Establishing the number of repeats (after a couple of 400s I always lose count!)
2) Distance or time-based warm-up and warm-down
3) Goal-specific intervals (i.e. keep your pace between x and y, or your HR between y and z; alert when out of zone).
4) Intervals based on goals other than distance.

Advanced workouts (it's an actual feature, rather than a generic term) wouldn't be covered by auto-lap or run/walk features of the FR10.

grimbergen

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Hey grimbergen, it does sound like you could construct some kind of simple interval session from the functionality provided, particularly with the run/walk feature, but you'd still be missing out on much of the functionality of a typical interval session on more feature rich-watches, such as:
1) Establishing the number of repeats (after a couple of 400s I always lose count!)
2) Distance or time-based warm-up and warm-down
3) Goal-specific intervals (i.e. keep your pace between x and y, or your HR between y and z; alert when out of zone).
4) Intervals based on goals other than distance.

Advanced workouts (it's an actual feature, rather than a generic term) wouldn't be covered by auto-lap or run/walk features of the FR10.

Well spotted, I think we're seeing why you're a 2.40-ish marathon runner and I'm eh much slower... ! The only one of the above features I think it does have is keeping your pace between x and y but you're right about the rest.

Krusty_Clown

grimbergen wrote: »

Well spotted, I think we're seeing why you're a 2.40-ish marathon runner and I'm eh much slower... ! The only one of the above features I think it does have is keeping your pace between x and y but you're right about the rest.

Nah, I just run more miles. If it does have that feature (i.e. keeping your pace between two limits) then there's a lot more you can do with it. How do you find it?

grimbergen

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Nah, I just run more miles. If it does have that feature (i.e. keeping your pace between two limits) then there's a lot more you can do with it. How do you find it?

Actually now that I think about it, the feature is that you put in your desired pace and it reminds you if you're over or under it. It gets annoying though so I've turned it off. Overall I find the watch great as it offers pretty much the functionality I need for the price. Nice small size as well. I had a garmin years ago and it was like carrying a satellite dish on my wrist... Only downside is that the display is a bit restricted so I find myself playing with buttons on the run which can be a bit distracting but I expect I'll get over that novelty! Overall though for 120e it represents great value for money.

tony stark

Could someone help- have a 310 xt and it won't connect to my dashboard. Im not tech savvie but I've downloaded the drivers and have USB key. It just shows no devices found. Please help!!!!

tony stark

Got it sorted cheers

PaulieC

qq - i am going to get a 910XT with HRM. Can this be used to track HR/Calories/Distance on an indoor exercise bike ?

Krusty_Clown

cambo_gueno wrote: »

qq - i am going to get a 910XT with HRM. Can this be used to track HR/Calories/Distance on an indoor exercise bike ?

If it's a standard exercise bike in a gym, then no. In fact, if it's an exercise bike at all, I would imagine that getting it to recover distance covered data would be difficult. However, if it's your own normal bike fitted to a trainer, you should be able to invest in a speed/cadence bike sensor. Best to ask Tunney or some of the other tri-cyclists, who know more about how these things function.

I have used my GPS watch on a treadmill before, where it tracks heart rate plotted against time, but needless to say, you don't get any distance information. You can read it off the treadmill and edit your workout to add the information for posterity.

PaulieC

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

If it's a standard exercise bike in a gym, then no. In fact, if it's an exercise bike at all, I would imagine that getting it to recover distance covered data would be difficult. However, if it's your own normal bike fitted to a trainer, you should be able to invest in a speed/cadence bike sensor. Best to ask Tunney or some of the other tri-cyclists, who know more about how these things function.

I have used my GPS watch on a treadmill before, where it tracks heart rate plotted against time, but needless to say, you don't get any distance information. You can read it off the treadmill and edit your workout to add the information for posterity.

Thank you K_C. I suspected as much, from what I read last night, but nowhere did it specifically say it would not work. I reckon HR and time on the garmin + distance on the bike (it's a spinning bike apparently) would suffice. Actually, the bike has a calorie counter, but I can't see how that would be accurate in any way as it's not actually linked to the resistance setting, so it's basically just counting wheel rotations.
At least now I will be able to do the "cross" part of my training without leaving the house and I'm sure a few sessions on the bike will do absolutely no harm in terms of hill training

Krusty_Clown

cambo_gueno wrote: »

Thank you K_C. I suspected as much, from what I read last night, but nowhere did it specifically say it would not work. I reckon HR and time on the garmin + distance on the bike (it's a spinning bike apparently) would suffice. Actually, the bike has a calorie counter, but I can't see how that would be accurate in any way as it's not actually linked to the resistance setting, so it's basically just counting wheel rotations.
At least now I will be able to do the "cross" part of my training without leaving the house and I'm sure a few sessions on the bike will do absolutely no harm in terms of hill training

This is what a treadmill session looks like. You can see the HR plotted against time. I would have entered the distance covered based on the reading on the treadmill.

PaulieC

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

This is what a treadmill session looks like. You can see the HR plotted against time. I would have entered the distance covered based on the reading on the treadmill.

Right, gotcha. Does the time and HR measured not give you a calories-used value ? I would've thought that that would be calculable (although thinking about it, it could be any activity that you are doing from walking to running to cycling) ? Either way, not a big deal for me, more interesting to the missus who actually bought the thing!

Thanks again

rom

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

This is what a treadmill session looks like. You can see the HR plotted against time. I would have entered the distance covered based on the reading on the treadmill.

Looks like you enjoyed it

Krusty_Clown

cambo_gueno wrote: »

Right, gotcha. Does the time and HR measured not give you a calories-used value ? I would've thought that that would be calculable (although thinking about it, it could be any activity that you are doing from walking to running to cycling) ? Either way, not a big deal for me, more interesting to the missus who actually bought the thing!

Thanks again

Hmm.. Strangely not. It really should, given that Polar HRM watches (with no GPS functionality) give you a calorie figure, but I guess the folks in Garmin don't think that people will use the watches too often without either GPS or cadence sensors. But you're right, any calorie-type information would have to be taken with a pinch of salt, given that there just isn't enough data available.

I find that calorie information is one of those 'nice-to-know' pieces of information, that you never really use (or notice) after a short while of using the watch. I still quote them to my mum after a marathon, for wow factor, but that's about it.

rom wrote:

Looks like you enjoyed it

I really freakin' hate dreadmills! On this occasion, I was stuck in icy, snowy Sofia, in Bulgaria and running on the streets was nearly impossible (though I still managed it on two early mornings, before the big snow came). The fact that the treadmills barely worked only added to my ire!

PaulieC

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

I still quote them to my mum after a marathon, for wow factor, but that's about it. !

One of her reasons for buying the thing - "my friend posts on Facebook after the gym each day with the number of calories she lost". Sometimes you just know not to argue . Hope she's not reading this...

Krusty_Clown

cambo_gueno wrote: »

One of her reasons for buying the thing - "my friend posts on Facebook after the gym each day with the number of calories she lost". Sometimes you just know not to argue . Hope she's not reading this...

So who is the watch for? Only one of you will get to enter your age, height, gender, weight, etc. which are used to calculate calories.

PaulieC

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

So who is the watch for? Only one of you will get to enter your age, height, gender, weight, etc. which are used to calculate calories.

The watch is for me. I was unaware that there is only one profile allowed, so I guess that means I won't have to share it

Krusty_Clown

cambo_gueno wrote: »

The watch is for me. I was unaware that there is only one profile allowed, so I guess that means I won't have to share it

You could have different Garmin Connect profiles and upload to a specific profile, based on who carried out the activity. You'd need to switch to manual uploading rater than automatic, or else use more than once computer. The problem is that something like calories is calculated and stored on the watch, so it wouldn't reflect the information in the Garmin Connect user profile. For example: if I were to set up my sport as 'running' on the watch and then upload a workout to Garmin Connect, it will recognize it as a running activity and the calories are based on that activity. If I change the activity type in GC to 'Cycling' then the calorie count is not adjusted based on the alternative activity. The data has already been collected. Same with using different profiles in Garmin Connect. Calorie count is based on the information stored on the watch at the time, and is not re-calculated post-workout or upload.

statss

Guys, looking at buying a Garmin, is there a reason why the Forerunner 410 is so cheap on Amazon @ €200 odd ? Is it being phased out or something? Its €400 odd in Great Outdoors.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0046BTK14/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE

Krusty_Clown

statss wrote: »

Guys, looking at buying a Garmin, is there a reason why the Forerunner 410 is so cheap on Amazon @ €200 odd ? Is it being phased out or something? Its €400 odd in Great Outdoors.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0046BTK14/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE

No. Amazon.co.uk periodically drops the price to £135-£160. It represents good value for money. Even if Garmin stopped manufacturing them (which is what I guess you mean by phased-out) it wouldn't affect the functionality or change the fact that it's good value for money. I picked up my 405 in 2008 and used it consistently until recently, when I sold it on. It's still just as good a watch as it was back in 2008. If you're wondering about the price difference with Irish shops, AmphibianKingWest posted a very good explanation of why this price difference exists. IIRC, it was down to having to use the UK supplier, VAT rates etc. Also, Amazon.co.uk doesn't have the same overheads as a bricks and mortar shop so can afford to sell things at tighter profit margins and benefit from B2B deals and bulk purchases.

statss

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

No. Amazon.co.uk periodically drops the price to £135-£160. It represents good value for money. Even if Garmin stopped manufacturing them (which is what I guess you mean by phased-out) it wouldn't affect the functionality or change the fact that it's good value for money. I picked up my 405 in 2008 and used it consistently until recently, when I sold it on. It's still just as good a watch as it was back in 2008. If you're wondering about the price difference with Irish shops, AmphibianKingWest posted a very good explanation of why this price difference exists. IIRC, it was down to having to use the UK supplier, VAT rates etc. Also, Amazon.co.uk doesn't have the same overheads as a bricks and mortar shop so can afford to sell things at tighter profit margins and benefit from B2B deals and bulk purchases.

Thanks for the reply. I'd like to give my business to the Great Outdoors but the price swing is far too much. I was thinking it was "too good to be true", and what I meant by phased out, was that some companies drop the price of an existing product before the launch of a new, better one. You are saying this is not the case so looks like I will go ahead and order this :-)

Krusty_Clown

statss wrote: »

I was thinking it was "too good to be true", and what I meant by phased out, was that some companies drop the price of an existing product before the launch of a new, better one. You are saying this is not the case so looks like I will go ahead and order this :-)

Actually, I'm saying nothing of the sort! They may bring in a new model, but that doesn't change the value for money aspect of this product at this price. Also, if they were to release a new model, it would not be for sale for €200. It would be significantly more expensive, so you have to ask yourself, would you pay a chunk more money if Garmin released a newer model?

statss

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Actually, I'm saying nothing of the sort! They may bring in a new model, but that doesn't change the value for money aspect of this product at this price. Also, if they were to release a new model, it would not be for sale for €200. It would be significantly more expensive, so you have to ask yourself, would you pay a chunk more money if Garmin released a newer model?

Yes, sorry, I get what you are saying. I think @ €200 I'm happy to go with it being my first one. I have run 10k's up to now, doing my first HM in December, and thinking about DCM 2013. If new and improved versions come out I can gauge how badly I want the extra features they may have. Which model do you use yourself, out of interest?

Krusty_Clown

statss wrote: »

Yes, sorry, I get what you are saying. I think @ €200 I'm happy to go with it being my first one. I have run 10k's up to now, doing my first HM in December, and thinking about DCM 2013. If new and improved versions come out I can gauge how badly I want the extra features they may have. Which model do you use yourself, out of interest?

I bought my first 405 in 2008 and clocked up 8,000+ miles on it. I accidentally left it in South Africa in 2011, so purchased another 405. When the original 405 miraculously made its way back to me, I sold the replacement 405. In February, I got a present of a Forerunner 910xt (big birthday!) so recently sold on my other 405.

The 410 supports advanced workouts, so you can make your workouts as complex as they need to be, so the watch will essentially grow with you as your training becomes more demanding. Newer watches like the 610 and the 910 support things like vibration alerts (handy) built-in barometric altimeter (sh1te), swim-mode (910-only) and other features, but they all support the same core level of functionality.

One annoyance of the 410, is the use of the bezel to manipulate menus. This is quite difficult to do while running/working out, so most people just lock the bezel and just use the hard-buttons during a workout or race.

statss

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

I bought my first 405 in 2008 and clocked up 8,000+ miles on it. I accidentally left it in South Africa in 2011, so purchased another 405. When the original 405 miraculously made its way back to me, I sold the replacement 405. In February, I got a present of a Forerunner 910xt (big birthday!) so recently sold on my other 405.

The 410 supports advanced workouts, so you can make your workouts as complex as they need to be, so the watch will essentially grow with you as your training becomes more demanding. Newer watches like the 610 and the 910 support things like vibration alerts (handy) built-in barometric altimeter (sh1te), swim-mode (910-only) and other features, but they all support the same core level of functionality.

One annoyance of the 410, is the use of the bezel to manipulate menus. This is quite difficult to do while running/working out, so most people just lock the bezel and just use the hard-buttons during a workout or race.

Thanks for sharing....that's great you got your original 405 back....half tempted to go for the 610 now!

Krusty_Clown

statss wrote: »

Thanks for sharing....that's great you got your original 405 back....half tempted to go for the 610 now!

Make 'rom' an offer. He's always complaining about his!

RacoonQueen

RacoonQueen wrote: »

I'll take down details of recent runs and reset the watch before I do anything too drastic.

Annoying as fudge, same problem keeps arising and there's no chance I'm upgrading to a 910 with all the problems people on here are reporting with them at the mo. Gah.

AAAAGGGHHH! :mad: