GPS watches for semi elite

Semi Elite? Troll.

garmin 405 $300

They're for anyone who wants them.

Garmin 110, less expensive and isn't a ginormous dork badge like the other Garmins are.

Garmin FR60

A LOT less expensive than any GPS unit and also small.

You don't need GPS for what you want.

http://www.google.com/products?q=garmin+fr60&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=RLgRTNjhN43LnAePy82RAw&sa=X&oi=product_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CEUQrQQwAA

I like just using GMAP pedometers

but I'm moving to CO soon and on trails I wont really know how far the runs are, so it might be beneficial to get some measurements. i dont really like obsessing too much about pace everyday though, it's good to just totally go how you feel 80-90% of the time on "easy days" than to get even slightly encouraged/discouraged because feedback from a Garmin is or isnt what you expected

on trails GPS isn't too accurate

expert wrote:

Garmin FR60

A LOT less expensive than any GPS unit and also small.

You don't need GPS for what you want.

http://www.google.com/products?q=garmin+fr60&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=RLgRTNjhN43LnAePy82RAw&sa=X&oi=product_result_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CEUQrQQwAA

Sorry, the 110 is a gps watch and is the same price as the fr60. I don't know if the 110 will give splits and such though. Besides, if you really have a tiny wrist, the 405 with Velcro strap usually fits the best.

110 is $250

FR60 is $100+ less than that

google shopping search wrote:

110 is $250

FR60 is $100+ less than that

FR60 isn't a GPS watch. It computes distance based on the number of steps you have taken.

google shopping search wrote:

110 is $250

FR60 is $100+ less than that

That's the FR60 heart rate monitor you are seeing for $100, it has no distance capability built in... if you want speed/distance, you can buy the $70 footpod as well, or spend $200 for the kit which includes watch, HRM strap, footpod, and ANT stick to download data.

For $200 you can get the Forerunner 110, which is a GPS watch with download connector (don't think it is the ANT stick other devices use, but same function). For $250 you can get the HRM included too.

If you care mostly about pace, you will get much better data from the footpod unit. The GPS, at its best (sunny, no trees/buildings to obstruct the sky, etc.), is accurate to about 8ft. You can imagine if it is only putting you somewhere in an 8ft box how accurate that instantaneous pace will be... not very. It will swing, sometimes significantly, as you run. When you go back and review the data, it will be very accurate. But when you look down briefly at your wrist, the pace it tells you right then is pretty worthless. Total distance, on the other hand, is going to be very accurate. Usually better than within a tenth of a mile, even over long runs, hilly terrain, and trails.

With the footpod, the accelerometer is mapping the motion of your foot. This is much more sophisticated than the pedometer-type data that the nike+ system uses, and you will see that accuracy reflected in the data. Since it is measuring your stride much more precisely, you can expect very accurate (and more importantly, consistent) pace data. Of course, steep hills and trails where you take odd strides could throw this off somewhat, but it is pretty good. Since it isn't GPS, any little inaccuracies in each step add up, so the total distance at the end could be off by several tenths of a mile, or more in extreme conditions.

In short, the device that is best for you depends on what data you want. Footpods are better to pace you while running/racing, but GPS will be more accurate for distance and will look way cooler when you can log maps of your runs. Or, you can buy a 405 or 310XT and use GPS and a footpod and get the benefits of both.

Oh... and back to the original purpose of the thread, elites and semi-elites certainly do use devices like this. I've spoken with Greg McMillan (McMillan Elite) and he was very much in favor of training by distance/pace. If he and his athletes find the data valuable, who am I to argue with that?

Passlevard wrote: on trails GPS isn't too accurate

^ This is true. Mine has shown me running off a cliff and also onto a freeway. I did neither of those. Not trustworthy, the GPS watch.

Quack wrote:

Oh... and back to the original purpose of the thread, elites and semi-elites certainly do use devices like this. I've spoken with Greg McMillan (McMillan Elite) and he was very much in favor of training by distance/pace. If he and his athletes find the data valuable, who am I to argue with that?

Right. I am someone to argue with your endorsement-by-extension, however. Just because McMillan believes in it and uses it with his athletes doesn't mean much at all. When he has more than two athletes run really well then I'll start paying closer attention to his methods. Of course, the difference is probably in everything and anything other than how the runs are logged. It's just something that makes it easier for him as a coach, providing subjective measure for each of his athletes. If you don't know physiological basics and know yourself well enough to be able to push yourself or hold yourself back based on feel then you're apt to either screw yourself up or not push yourself enough regardless of whether you use an odometer.

I second the Garmin 110. It's small and simple: time, pace, distance, (HR?). I have a 305, and it has a lot of functions I never use.

what is better 310xt or the 405??? anyone know the upside or down down side to these products?

You can use MyTracks with a cell phone as well.

bump

310xt is my girls favorite

ishuffle wrote:

what is better 310xt or the 405??? anyone know the upside or down down side to these products?

310xt hands-down. capable of way more (waterproof, double battery life, more accurate, doubles as cycling computer) and it doesn't have any of the interface hassles the 405's touch bezel has. there's also a $50 rebate on the 310 so you can get them now for essentially the same price as the 405.