Replacement for my Garmin Forerunner 235?

I loved the 235... but the Coros Pace 2 is considerably better. Simpler, lighter and the battery life is where it counts. I used to have to charge my 235 after every run or two. I charge my Pace 2 once every 10-12 days.

Plus, unlike Garmin, Coros seems to not have their production environment susceptible to ransomware.

I have the 245 music. I like it although I don't use a lot of the non-running options.

I considered the Coros watch but it doesn't offer a music option. And, no...I don't run with music. I only listen to music during stretching, drills and strides. I get about 3-5 days battery life.

Had several Garmins, now recently a 245.

Does everything you need in combination with the Connect app.

Pulse is very accurate on my watch but heard als different stories.

I think it offers a good ROI.

Accurate on my WRIST, I tried to say...

Used my FR 310XT from 2009 to 2020.

Changed to 645 non-music.

Wrist HR can be sketchy sometimes, but just wear a belt.

Barometric altimeter is super sketchy. No way to mitigate.

Battery life is extremely good.

Sub Max wrote:

Simple as that really. Had the Forerunner for a few years and looking for a good replacement.

Anyone have the Forerunner 245?

Is the Garmin still the 'go to' for running watches or is there a better alternative out there?

Just a few years? Mine's lasted a long time & showing no signs of dying anytime soon. You retiring it early?

kmaclam wrote:

Sub Max wrote:

Simple as that really. Had the Forerunner for a few years and looking for a good replacement.

Anyone have the Forerunner 245?

Is the Garmin still the 'go to' for running watches or is there a better alternative out there?

Just a few years? Mine's lasted a long time & showing no signs of dying anytime soon. You retiring it early?

Yeah I have had my 235 since 2016 and it’s still going strong. Running everyday and prob have to charge every 3 days or so. Doesn’t have some of the features I would like to try on the newer watches but it has been rock solid for GPS and multiple marathon races so won’t retire it yet

Our MAPS important to you? Do you hike?

If not, you don't need to spend money on the Garmin 945 or any Garmin watch that pushes MAPS. That raises the price quite a bit for a feature that you would not use.

Here's a vote for Coros. I switched from Garmin to Coros a year ago and have no regrets.

Sportwatchinfo wrote:

I have the 245 music. I like it although I don't use a lot of the non-running options.

I considered the Coros watch but it doesn't offer a music option. And, no...I don't run with music. I only listen to music during stretching, drills and strides. I get about 3-5 days battery life.

Same experience, have had the 245 Music for a couple of years and it performs perfectly. Had Suunto prior and was also looking at Coros. I've yet to be able to get the watch to connect to my bluetooth headphones yet though I usually run long with other people so it's not much of an issue for me. I'll listen to podcasts while walking the dog and I'm usually not wearing the watch to do that.

I also use it for hikes and cycling, it's worked well in those activities. It's not a daily wear watch for me so battery life has been perfectly fine, I can usually get 3-4 runs before having to plug in to charge.

Forerunner 245 is great. Forerunner has everything a real runner needs.

I got the FR 45. Cheap and does everything I need from a running watch. Seems to be a lot of useless functions on the more expensive watches, well useless to me anyway.

UltraDude wrote:

Here's a vote for Coros. I switched from Garmin to Coros a year ago and have no regrets.

What does Coros 'connect' to? The hardware is almost immaterial to me (as long as it meets some minimum functionality which is Garmin 235-level for me), what I want to know is can it upload to different fitness aggregators such as Strava(don't use) and RunningAhead. If it's sitting out there in it's own 'app island' I ain't buying one. I use RunningAhead for my online log and Garmin Connect pushes all of my data there with no input from me.

So the 245 is the logical successor to the 235.

I bought my FR 230 (just like the 235 but w/o the heart-rate monitor) in 2016 like some others here, but I still get a full week-per-charge (not just 3 days; max at 60 miles/week). Perhaps it goes longer because I don't charge it until it's fully discharged, and then fully charge it. That would mean battery memory is still be a problem for rechargeables despite the assurances of manufacturers. Or the HR monitor (now standard on all Forerunners) drains a lot of juice.

Just get another 235. I just bought a new one and only have to charge once every 8-9 days running 60/week v

I love my 245. I had the 220 for years before hand. The one regret was that I did not get the 245 music. It would have been worth it

Jeffro wrote:

So the 245 is the logical successor to the 235.

I bought my FR 230 (just like the 235 but w/o the heart-rate monitor) in 2016 like some others here, but I still get a full week-per-charge (not just 3 days; max at 60 miles/week). Perhaps it goes longer because I don't charge it until it's fully discharged, and then fully charge it. That would mean battery memory is still be a problem for rechargeables despite the assurances of manufacturers. Or the HR monitor (now standard on all Forerunners) drains a lot of juice.

Yeah I could get more then the 3-4 days if I turned off bluetooth. Having bluetooth on for the notifications on the watch certainly eats up some battery life but I quite like that feature so happy to take the hit

The GPS and HR accuracy on 245 is way better than 235. Recently upgraded and very happy. It's so much better I'll upgrade again when a new one comes out. Didn't think it would make a difference so held off too long.

The 245 also has the track run mode which measures your runs/intervals on the track accurately. In other words, your 400m reps will record as 400m instead of 0.26 mi or whatever incorrect distance your gps measures it as. Fantastic feature. Highly recommended.