Techs-Mechs: Product Review, Garmin Forerunner 305

by Mr Van P on Aug 22, 2010 8:07 PM EDT in Techs-Mechs & Gear

A couple weeks ago I sought the advice of the wise members of the PdC for a new HRM/Bike computer. I had a few specific functions that I wanted, and I also had a few models of interest. The overwhelming majority of the responders suggested a Garmin. Wanting something for multi sport use that could be worn on the wrist I opted for the Forerunner. Being on a tight budget, I chose the Forerunner 305 (over the 310). After a week+ of use here are my thoughts (on the flip).

It arrived on a Thursday when I got home fairly late (and needing to pack for a weekend away) however I really wanted to get my new toy hooked up so I set it up in haste. My first ride was a bit of trial and error but then I spent some time with the owners manual which was quite helpful. After getting to know the unit I gave it another go. Here's my take.

Stuff I like:

First of all I'm always pleased when a company gives you a few extra things like a watch band or watch pins, or electrical ties. I know that it's not too terribly hard to find this stuff after market, but when you really need something in a pinch it's nice to have it already. It's a small gesture that I appreciate.

I picked up the quick release bar mount and watch strap. the bar mount fastens to the pins of the watch and simply snaps into place with no need to wrap the band around the bars. When you want to put it back on your wrist, it just snaps onto the bracket on the band. Very convenient and makes for a nice neat set up.

The HRM picks up a signal much faster than my Polar ever did (even with the chest strap bone dry) and i don't seem to get as many spiky readings.

The monitor is fairly large and you can customize the display to view whatever data fields you want (up to 12 at a time out of maybe 50 to choose from). I wasn't surprised at much i liked this feature.

The true heart of the Garmin though is the data uploading functionality (yes Sui you were right). I am really enjoying seeing all my ride data on the screen and love that the graphs are customizable as well.

I'm just scratching the surface of what it can do for navigation, but so far I'm encouraged and love the maps.

Accuracy of the speed and cadence seems spot on. Like all wireless systems there is a bit of a speed-lag when watching the Garmin side by side with a wired bike computer, but it's no different than the Polar in this regard.

The buttons are large and easy to use while riding. No misfires and you can hear when you've changed screens. The Polar buttons were a bit fussy by comparison as were the Sigma Sport BC1200 that I was using to bridge the time between the dead Polar and the new Garmin.

Stuff I don't love:

I was warned about the lack of accuracy of satellite based altitude when not coupled with barometric altitude. I won't say that it is almost useless, but it is very jumpy and tends to overstate how much climbing I've done. On my first long ride while visiting Cape Cod it seemed to be fine, but at home I see constant swings in elevation that are incorrect. This impacts the gradient measurement quite a bit, but the altitude eventually settles in and most of the climbs seem to register readings that are fairly close. Regardless my next Garmin will have both.

The cadence and speed sensor are one compact unit which keeps the look clean, but it's not easy to set up. Plus the wheel magnet is rather bulky and you don't have a lot of room between the speed sensor and the magnet. It doesn't need to be that close either to pick up a signal but it's unavoidable. I swear today while riding out of the saddle i heard a couple clicks from the magnet making contact with the sensor as the rear wheel flexed laterally. I have some less bulky magnets, but the Garmin doesn't seem to like them. I suppose I don't need a speed sensor since it calculates the speed by satellite but it makes for a good backup in case you lose a satellite signal. Just wish it was designed a little better.

This may be a non issue, but the quick release relies on the watch band pins to lock it in place. Watch pins in general are not super strong and yesterday while riding on long sections of dirt roads I opted to wear the Garmin on my wrist all day in fear that it could be jarred loose. This wouldn't be a concern on the road, and overall I like the design, just not sure how much i trust watch band pins.

Verdict: Thumbs Up!

Ok, it's not really a weekend wrist watch like the Polar was. It's huge on your wrist, would be very prone to getting scratched and I'm not sure how long you could wear it as a watch before it needs recharging. I will wear it skiing and hiking, but i'm not entirely sure a Edge model thrown in a pocket wouldn't do roughly the same thing.

I may eventually upgrade to the Edge 500 however the Forerunner 305 it does make for a nice clean set up on the bars which I prefer over larger stem mounted units. A fun toy and/or serious training tool that has all the functions i really need (albeit rather fussy altitude/gradient measurements) and a near steal at $143.00.

Tweet Comment 16 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Agreed.

Your pros and cons are exactly mine especially: My Garmin 305 is honking HUGE on my wrist. Mounted on my bike, it’s perfect.

by Megabeth on Aug 22, 2010 7:12 PM EDT reply actions

I think I prefer

The velcro strap over the rubber one. Even on my large wrists it looks silly though.

I will say this, I wore it on my wrist for 7 hours yesterday on my ride and it wasn’t uncomfortable at all. For the bike mount, I used some of the rubber base tape from my old Polar stuff under the electrical ties. It makes the mount a little more snug plus it gives it more shock absorption.

by Mr Van P on Aug 22, 2010 7:40 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions

I've had my 305 for a couple of years now

And I love it.

I can switch to any bike and still get most of my ride details captured. Okay not cadence, but everything else.

It is a tough as nails. Mine has weathered several rides in single digit (f) temps, has been literally frozen under a sheet of ice on one ride and, before I settled on my current setup, survived bouncing across the road having fallen off the bars.

I tend to leave the “auto-sampling” sample rate as the default for most rides, and about my only complaint is that I wish it could store more data so that I could get it to sample at its most frequent rate on longer rides.

If I was still racing (and thus training seriously) I’d probably want to get power measurement (actual not derived) included into the picture, but as things stand I have more than enough data to keep me happy.

Oh and to second Mr Van P, the size if misleading, sure it looks massive on your wrist, but when I run with it on I barely notice the size or weight.

"Age and treachery will overcome youth and skill" - Fausto Coppi

by muk on Aug 22, 2010 11:58 PM EDT reply actions

How did it fall off?

was it the quick release bar mount?

by Mr Van P on Aug 23, 2010 7:19 AM EDT up reply actions

My ineptitude mostly

When the quick release bar mount first came out it did not get great (or even good) reviews, so I set out to construct my own set up.

Let’s just say that the set up I have now is much more reliable :-)

I ended up reusing an old Polar Bar mount, the type where you strap the watch onto the bars. This works very well and only has the inconvenience of having to strap the watch on and off. I can live with that since it means once it is on I am very confident that it is not going anywhere.

"Age and treachery will overcome youth and skill" - Fausto Coppi

by muk on Aug 23, 2010 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions

The quick release makes a very clean looking set up

and the clip feels fairly robust. It’s the watch pins that i don’t entirely trust. I don’t worry about them holding a watch band in place, but a band isn’t subjected to the type of shock that a hard plastic clip on your handlebars would cause. I’m probably just being a little paranoid here, but i think the rubber tape underneath the ties will provide a tiny bit of cushion. Garmin seems to make a bar mount system similar to the Polar one too, but it looks like it’s for 26mm bars (I could be wrong here) and mine are all 31.8mm.

I have three sets of watch band pins thanks to Garmin so regualr inspection and replacement is probably the prudent thing.

by Mr Van P on Aug 23, 2010 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions

Wouldn't worry too much.

I used Megabeth’s Forerunner for a good long while before I picked up an Edge, and the Forerunner stayed stuck to my bars through hundreds and hundreds of miles of rock gardens, gravel roads, and poorly chosen hucking. The sole time I lost it was because I didn’t bother making sure it was entirely clipped in.

by Sui Juris on Aug 23, 2010 9:23 PM EDT up reply actions

Good to know.

It certainly does feel pretty solid on there.

by Mr Van P on Aug 24, 2010 8:13 AM EDT up reply actions

I have the Edge 500

which has both GPS and barometric altitude sensors and I must say it’s still pretty useless. Initial height indication (by GPS, presumably) can be off by 20 or 30 m easily and systematic creep (from changing weather, presumably) over the course of a few hours can be in that range as well. Given that the max. elevation in riding distance is 60 m, that’s pretty significant for me. On the other hand, I guess Will wouldn’t blink from a puny 0.00001% error in his daily climbing.

The Garmin Connect website app has an “elevation correction” function (not sure if that is the exact name in English) which can be applied to uploaded tracks. What I think it does is just completely disregard all elevation data from the track and use Google Maps supplied data, but, annoyingly, they don’t explain the technical details. The result seems often perfect but sometimes there is an odd spike. It renders the altitude function of the device pretty useless, except for indications during the ride. Though perhaps the elevation data from GMaps in other areas of the world isn’t as good.

Ceci n'est pas une signature.

by tedvdw on Aug 23, 2010 7:46 AM EDT reply actions

(Editor: please rephrase double use of “pretty useless”)

Ceci n'est pas une signature.

by tedvdw on Aug 23, 2010 7:47 AM EDT up reply actions

Nice Review, well done

I have an Edge 305 and even with the barometer, the elevation data can be inaccurate – there is some auto-calibration that it does based on GPS-data (any barometric altimeter will need to be set based on a known altitude.) I believe the barometer is only intended to prevent wild-fluctuations you’d get from GPS-only elevation data. It’s basically the same story for the speed part of the speed-cadence unit – it makes real-time speed readings more consistent when under tree-cover (and like the barometer, it will auto-calculate your wheel/tire size if you let it.)

Ever how inaccurate the absolute elevation data may or may not be, it seems to provide very consistent relative elevation information (barring serious weather changes) and that’s all I really care about.

On the other hand, the real-time gradient information doesn’t seem particularly accurate unless you’re on a fairly steady grade moving at a fairly constant speed. A minor annoyance, but if you looked at it uncritically you might get fooled. Decent logging software should provide more accurate average grade information after-the-fact, if your interested in that data (and if you’re logging GPS data, you probably are.)

tedvdw, mentions an “elevation correction” function on Garmin Connect: I’m not sure what Garmin is doing, but the software I use for logging my data (Ascent – excellent product, btw) provides an elevation correction function that allows you to set a threshold of elevation change below which changes don’t get counted – it’s basically a “smoothing” function. I’m not sure how sophisticated it is, but it does seem to provide more accurate elevation gain/loss information (particularly over longer rides.)

Overall, I love my 305, particularly when paired with Ascent (Mac-only, sorry). No more spreadsheets to track my ride information and when I need to look for a ride that’s 2:23:34 hours long, Ascent makes it easy to find one. (Ascent also provides an equipment log – it’s not super-intuitive, but if set-up correctly you can track the mileage on any piece of gear on your bike – useful for assessing the durability of wear items like tires, chains and cassettes and helpful for managing maintenance.)

There is one additional thing I can attest to: Garmin has been fantastic in their warranty support. Twice I’ve had to send in my 305 because of problems that prevented it from working properly. Both times occurred after the warranty had expired and both times it’s been taken care of free-of-charge (with very fast turn around times, to boot.) It’s been very annoying that I’ve had to call on them at all, but they’ve done right by me when I have.

"The voluptuous pleasure that cycling can give you is delicate, intimate and ephemeral. It arrives, it takes hold of you, sweeps you up and then leaves you again. It is for you alone. It is a combination of speed and ease, force and grace. It is pure happiness." Jean Bobet - "Tommorow, We Ride"

by bonkeur on Aug 23, 2010 9:28 AM EDT reply actions

What Software ?

Seems like an appropriate spot to ask what software is being used at the Cafe to manage ride data. I use SportTracks but keep checking on Garmin Connect waiting for it to get better (it’s getting close).

What else do people use/have experience with?

"Age and treachery will overcome youth and skill" - Fausto Coppi

by muk on Aug 23, 2010 9:41 AM EDT reply actions

Ascent

from Montebello Software (see above.) Unfortunately, it’s Mac-only – but if your running a Mac, I cannot recommend it highly enough. Free trial available here. (I’m sure I sound like a shill, but I’m in no way connected – I just love the product and figure the more folks using it, the better for me.)

by bonkeur on Aug 23, 2010 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions

one other

TrainingPeaks WKO+: I’ve played around with it a bit, but that was awhile ago (3+ years ago.) It didn’t run natively on Mac (and still doesn’t), so I had to run it in a virtual machine – that pretty much ruled it out for me. I didn’t care for the interface, but it seemed like a serious bit of software and much more oriented toward power meter training (really quite a bit more than I need.) If/when power meters hit a point where I can get a decent system for $500-$600, I’ll probably reconsider WKO. Any one running it? Anyone running it in a VM?

by bonkeur on Aug 23, 2010 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions

Endorsed.

I’ve got three years of data logged in Ascent. Very very happy with it. The only time I wish there was more to it is when I feel like sharing a ride with others. That’s where MapMyRide.com or Garmin Connect wins. But only there.

by Sui Juris on Aug 23, 2010 9:26 PM EDT up reply actions