So I went for my first run today with my new Forerunner 305.
I love it! It's works wonderfully well, and is so comfortable to wear. So what's so great about it?- Smaller and more comfortable to wear than the 301
- Heart rate monitor is more comfortable to wear
- Heart rate monitor picked up heart rate right away, with strap snug, not "so-tight-I-can't-breathe" like it had to be with the 301
- Buttons easier to press (for me) than on the 301 - less chance of pressing the wrong button by accident
- Did not lose the satellite signal under heavy tree cover (only lost the signal when going through a tunnel, and across a covered bridge, when it obviously has no way to reach the satellites)
- Auto-lap feature worked perfectly
- Heart rate alert worked perfectly
The run itself was good. Ran 6 miles total. The first two, my shins felt a little tight, but they worked themselves out, and felt fine for the rest of the run. I ran along some of the paths with heavier tree cover, to see how the 305 would work. It was great, and didn't lose the signal in the places where my 301 would always lose the signal.I was able to keep my heart rate in the correct zone (<70% HRR) except on the hills, especially the steep hill when coming up from the Isar river valley. According to Motionbased.com, the elevation changes from 1650 ft to just over 1700 ft over the span of about 0.2 miles.
It was sunny, and moderately warm out: 20°C when I started, and 24°C when I finished my run. You can see the full map of my run here. According to MapMyRun, I ran 6.17 miles, so a little farther, probably due to when I paused the Forerunner, while crossing major intersections.
7 comments:
Me again... from your map you were running just on the other side of the Englischergarten from my old flat !
I take it you are crossing the Isar at the dam.
It's lucky my HRM is still working perfectly or your report of the Forerunner would have been too tempting.
Magali
Thanks for the review, 301 is substanially cheaper than 305...I have been looking for reviews comparing the two. Although you do not really compare them you like the 305 better...it's good enough for me!
Thanks
I think I am going for a run! :o)
I love your review!! Im a 17 year old male that LOVES to excercise and im looking at the Garmin Forerunner 305 right now to make sure that it is the item that i want so far most of the reviews that i've read is leading me to get one later this year. If you use motionbase.com can you send me the links to your runs? I think that it is interesting to see how that little watch can get so much information. well if you use it here is my email address: the_aquatic_alchemist@yahoo.com
Hi,
I like your comments, very helpful.
I wonder how do you turn up the alert volume ? The alert of my unit is too soft, I have to put it next to my ear to hear the alert. The pace alert, heart beat alert, distance alert are all too soft for me to be alerted. The Garmin support is not responing to me.
Thanks
Regards
Nathan
fire9flyer@yahoo.com
Singapore
regarding the 301 vs. the 305. The 305 uses he Sirfstar III computer chip to receive the satellite GPS signal. It's one of the best for receiving a GPS signal. I don't know about the 301 though.
Here's info about the chip:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SiRFstar_III
Did you ever figure out how to turn up the volume?
I've had the Forerunner 305, a replacement for the 101 which fell apart, since October 2008. It has the same features as the 301, but is more square. Its rated battery life of 10 hours is enough for most of my bike rides, but inadequate for several of my longest rides, such as to Oakland, Hollister, Santa Cruz, San Francisco, and Half Moon Bay.
Post a Comment