Vivoactive for running (collegiate athlete)

Why not a real running watch, like the 230, 235 or 630 (or older versions)?

Vivoactive is pretty cheap right now, have owned the 220 and 210 in the past, interested in trying something new. Perhaps I do not fully understand the shortcomings of the Vivoactive for running? I just need it to track relatively accurately and have some functionality for intervals like the 220 did

34wt43erv45h365tvqc wrote:

Vivoactive is pretty cheap right now, have owned the 220 and 210 in the past, interested in trying something new. Perhaps I do not fully understand the shortcomings of the Vivoactive for running? I just need it to track relatively accurately and have some functionality for intervals like the 220 did

Vivoactive doesn't support intervals.

Read this review:

The Vivoactive is the best watch I've ever owned! I logged 5400+ miles last year with it and uploaded via Bluetooth to Garmin Connect/Strava-- definitely have put it to the test in terms of usefulness/durability/accuracy! The battery in GPS mode lasts 7-8 hrs, which has gotten me through 50 mile/100K races. I haven't seen any decline in the longevity of the battery with exceptional use.

I had a Garmin Forerunner (405?) at one time, and it did my head in. Too much bells and whistles and took forever to set up for a workout. Plus, it would hit my wrist bone-- the Vivoactive is thin/lightweight and finally (maybe because of the square design?) doesn't hit the wrist bone at all. It's much simpler to use and setup (~for timed intervals)-- a single start/stop button and has whatever apps and widgets you want on it. The only thing that was kinda weird at first is it alerts you via vibration and doesn't have an audible beeping alarm.

There's an app store-- I specifically needed an Interval Timer (the one I use is called My Timer; I also have another called Timer). You can set it up for a interval time+rest interval. I'll do like 6 min interval/3 min rest and set it up to repeat (vibrates to alert you between intervals). I'm not sure you can set it up for measured distance intervals or to know the pace of your intervals (which I personally don't need because I train and race by effort). If you had it in Run mode you could tap it to record splits.

https://apps.garmin.com/en-US/devices/vivoactive/appTypes/application/apps

Of course, the other great features are that it's a Smart watch and activity monitor. You can set up whatever notifications you want to receive.

Let me know if you want to know anything else. It's been a great watch and probably the most bang for the buck of any Garmins.

kenya wrote:

34wt43erv45h365tvqc wrote:

Vivoactive is pretty cheap right now, have owned the 220 and 210 in the past, interested in trying something new. Perhaps I do not fully understand the shortcomings of the Vivoactive for running? I just need it to track relatively accurately and have some functionality for intervals like the 220 did

Vivoactive doesn't support intervals.

Read this review:

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2015/04/garmin-vivoactive-in-depth-review.html

Only matters if you need to program in a specific workout in advance. Most runners I know can remember their workouts just fine, so they use the lap button. I suppose it's a bigger deal if you're trying to do interval workouts or timed fartleks on the roads, but if your key workouts are done on marked courses or tracks, then it's a non-issue.

Really appreciate the useful feedback from you all. DC Rainmaker is great, should have read his review before even posting here. That being said, the more I think about it the more I think lap button should be good enough for workouts especially considering the fact that distance intervals can be an issue when doing a track or measured grass workout where the watch can bee off by a bit.