Garmin 225 vs. 230 vs. 235

Hello, I´ve bought 235 model recently (I´m waiting for delavery yet). You´re talking about better HR in 225 than 235. If that cuestion is important to you, you must forget 230 model.

Now, between that two models (with HR) I´d prefer 235: its HR sensor will be able to improve with the software updates, and probably you don´t need nothing about apps, but don´t know in the future... and with 235 you can personalize your time face.

Sorry for my bad english! ;)

Don't get the 225.

The GPS function of the 230 and 235 are both spot on, so tracking your run is fine. between the two I would get the 230. Less S*** to fail on you. better yet, save money, buy a Forerunner 220 (best running watch by Garmin currently in my opinion). but if you must have something newer I still would say get the 230. Trust me.

I just bought a 235 and I'm pretty happy with it.

I think the heart rate monitor is a little flakey at times, but for the most part, I get what I need out of it. It's a great watch.

I replaced my old 405 (about 4 or 5 years old), so, I suppose no matter what, I was going to see vast improvement, but my 235 has been great thus far.

I just got the 235 and love it. Had the 405 a few years back and then the Nike. I liked the 405 and did not like the Nike. The Nike was not very accurate (uses the Tom-Tom GPS chip). Really hated that watch from day one.

The 235 was easy to adapt to, especially if you've owned a garmin before. The new garmin website is confusing. The seemingly same information (height, weight, age, sex, etc) is stored on the watch when you set it up and then again multiple places on the website. Also, it's very difficult to get the updates to work. The website says there are updates available but the sync software on your computer says the watch is up to date. I fiddled around with it a bit and eventually got it to update. There was something on the watch I pressed which eventually allowed the software update.

The accuracy is great and it gets a signal in like 5 seconds. I enabled the GLONASS in addition to the GPS. The battery is not as bad as I read in the reviews. In fact, it seems quite good. The heart rate is spot on compared to the treadmill hand grips. The watch and band are very comfortable and can be worn all day long. It is not abnormally large, especially with todays trend toward large watch faces.

Some of the website features are neat, like grouping your run into heart rate zones, monitoring you V02Max an noting improvements, suggesting a recover time in hours and quantifying the training effect. The training effect attempts to show if your hitting the sweet spot or doing too much or too little. You can use the watch for other activities like biking, treadmill running or heart rate monitor. The treadmill running was surprisingly accurate. I have no idea how it does it but there is no foot pod involved.

I love the watch and think you'd be very happy with it.

235 in my experience is pretty accurate for steady runs, but way off when you're doing intervals, hills, or anything with extreme, rapid changes. It's also way off at measuring resting HR. Every time I check my resting HR, it has me at 110 or so, and then it slowly works its way down to something realistic. It's really at the point where I'd consider it a defective product.

I've had the 235 since Christmas and been very pleased with it. I'm in my 60s and am interested in my heart rate data from a health as well as training standpoint. Decades ago I trained for a couple of years with HRMs, but hated the chest straps and constant failure/breakage. The HR data from the 235 is generally pretty good, but I don't expect it to be perfect. Also, it clearly degrades if I put the strap on too loosely. The heart rate function does chew through battery life much faster than the 230. My son and daughter-in-law got 230s in November and really like them. The 230 will operate for weeks without a battery charge. My son has to travel quite a bit for his job and is regularly trying to squeeze in runs on trips. He really likes the notifications about calls and texts from his 230 and the data upload through his phone.

How's the 235 HRM when you sweat a lot? I've heard bad things about the optical HR sensors if you sweat a good amount on runs. I hate the chest strap, but if it stays accurate, even for sweaty people, I'd actually probably pick one up!

It's winter where I'm at so, I've not had the opportunity to test it ith excessive sweat yet. It has a water rating of 5ATM's. That's 150 feet deep, if that helps though they do not recommend it for scuba.

https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/catalog/product/compareResult.ep?compareProduct=529988&compareProduct=523893

http://www.garmin.com/en-US/legal/waterrating

The steady and resting heart rate are very accurate for me. I have not done intervals with it yet. Maybe update your software? As I mentioned in my earlier post that can be tricky. The computer software will report it's updated when it's not. If anyone has more incite on how to update it reliably that would be helpful.

Not worried so much about the sweat destroying it, I've just heard issues with things like the Fitbit HR and other optical sensors that don't work well with heavy sweat.

I just upgraded to the 235 from the 220, specifically because I was interested in the optical HR. First thing's first - check out the DCRainmaker review. Ray is pretty spot on - the HR is good, but isn't perfect. That's fine by me, as I sometimes have chest strap HR problems anyway. It's a trade of an imperfect technology for another one that's less annoying (I really wanted to ditch the chest strap). The optical is pretty useless during cold weather, which I knew going in, so I do still have to wear the strap for my long runs outdoors this time of year. However, Indoors it has tracked well, and I've liked being able to ditch the strap.

The surprise for me was how much I have enjoyed some of the other features. The 24/7 HR tracking automatically pulls out your resting HR each day and gives you a rolling 7-day average. I watched that figure go up and down as I got sick just after Christmas, and expect to see the same it I was starting to overtrain. I've also watched it nudge down as I've been working into my winter Marathon cycle. Really great data, which I'm too lazy to collect otherwise.

I'm also a chronic phone-ignorer (miss calls, don't return texts for days), and I think my family and friends have really appreciated that now my wrist jiggles whenever I get a call or a text. I know I have liked those connected types of functions. Connect IQ does nothing for me, but I certainly don't mind having the ability to fiddle with custom watch faces and apps that tell me the phases of the moon (or whatever).

The 220 was a little higher on the just-works meter, and was probably my favorite watch ever, but I'm happy with the 235 and feel comfortable recommending it. Just make sure you know what you're getting into with the optical HR (again, see DCRainmaker) - that will make a world of difference with your satisfaction.

Thanks, Treadmore. I get a bit annoyed with the chest strap at times too so I might take a harder look at the 235. And I'm not sure if I'd use all the extra data from the 630 that would make that extra $100 worth it.

405 was a terrible watch.

Anyone have any comparisons to draw between the new 225/235 and the 610 or 6 series?

Hi there, I know the post is a bit outdated, but if you wish to have a clear & direct comparison of each of the 3 watches you mention, I suggest you go to http://garmin-forerunner.com , which is a site that compares all garmin watches

+1

thomas fog wrote:

Hi there, I know the post is a bit outdated, but if you wish to have a clear & direct comparison of each of the 3 watches you mention, I suggest you go to

http://garmin-forerunner.com

, which is a site that compares all garmin watches

I've had a 235 for over a year now after using the 405 for many years prior. I was very happy initially, but now realize it's a shit device. The hr monitor is terrible for anything other than an easy run. The GPS tracking is decent at best. For example, just today, I ran with a group of friends wearing various garmin watches, and my watch recorded 13.3 miles vs. 14.7 from the garmin 410xt. The 410xt had an accuracy as close to wheeling it as gets. If serious hobby jogging is your thing, don't base anything off of the data a 235 gives you.

Bump.

Any other feedback from 235 users?

I'm looking for my first gps watch and thinking of getting either the 230 or 235. If I'm not mistaken, the only difference is the HR monitor? Is that correct?

Thanks in advance.

In Israel, the most popular among mid range devices is GARMIN Forerunner. Here is the info -

http://www.chinaprice.co.il/smartwatch/6493/garmin-forerunner

220 is still my fav. When this one dies, I will find a refurb.