Garmin 405 vs Garmin 305 I have the Garmin 305 and am pretty happy with it EXCEPT the actual size of the watch and the wait to find satellites. I am a smallish woman and the 305 is large compared to my wrist and also rubs by wristbone sometimes on long runs. And even though I pretty much use the 305 in the same place all the time (home) it sometimes takes a couple of minutes to find satellites (frustrating for me and my dog when we're both ready to go!)Has anybody who's used the 405 previously used the 305? If so, how do they compare? I'm thinking of buying myself a little present (I got a bonus at work) and wonder if moving up to the 405 would be worth it. What do you think? Garmin 405 vs Garmin 305 I have the Garmin 305 and am pretty happy with it EXCEPT the actual size of the watch and the wait to find satellites. I am a smallish woman and the 305 is large compared... » Read More Garmin 405 vs Garmin 305 I have the Garmin 305 and am pretty happy with it EXCEPT the actual size of the watch and the wait to find satellites. I am a smallish woman and the 305 is large compared to my wrist and also rubs by wristbone sometimes on long runs. And even though I pretty much use the 305 in the same place all the time (home) it sometimes takes a couple of minutes to find satellites (frustrating for me and my dog when we're both ready to go!)Has anybody who's used the 405 previously used the 305? If so, how do they compare? I'm thinking of buying myself a little present (I got a bonus at work) and wonder if moving up to the 405 would be worth it. What do you think? « Show Less
580337
Just for the sake of accuracy and interest, the 405 series is water resistant to the same extent as the 305, i.e. it meets the same IPX7 standard. Also please note that "water resistant" is not the same as "waterproof".
580338
I've read several reports from people with small wrists having the wrist rubbing issue with the 305. Most of these people just wear a cheap sweat band under their 305 and the problem goes away. Another benefit of wearing a sweat band is that it keeps the battery/syncing contacts on the bottom of the 305 clean. The electrical contacts on the back of the 305 tend to corrode after repeated contact with sweaty skin. Some people have also noticed that their 305's battery tends to discharge very quickly if they sweat a lot. Wearing a sweat band also prevents this.
580339
Thanks for your detailed insights. From your post and others I've read, seems like I'll stick with the 305. I am very happy with the accuracy and ease of use, I just need to find some way to make it not rub my wrist so much. And the only other thing, and this is minor, is that it does not calculate calories expended unless you are using the GPS. I would think they could make an estimate when you are using the footpod indoors, but they don't. (The Polar R200sd does do this.)Maybe they will get the kinks worked out of the 405 sometime and I'll think about it then. Until then, I guess it doesn't pay to be an early adopter. Thanks for your detailed insights. From your post and others I've read, seems like I'll stick with the 305. I am very happy with the accuracy and ease of use, I just need to find some way to make it not rub my wrist so much. And the only other thing, and this is minor, is that it does not calculate calories expended unless you are using the GPS. I would think they could make an estimate when you are using the footpod indoors, but they don't. (The Polar R200sd does do this.)Maybe they will get the kinks worked out of the 405 sometime and I'll think about it then. Until then, I... » Read More Thanks for your detailed insights. From your post and others I've read, seems like I'll stick with the 305. I am very happy with the accuracy and ease of use, I just need to find some way to make it not rub my wrist so much. And the only other thing, and this is minor, is that it does not calculate calories expended unless you are using the GPS. I would think they could make an estimate when you are using the footpod indoors, but they don't. (The Polar R200sd does do this.)Maybe they will get the kinks worked out of the 405 sometime and I'll think about it then. Until then, I guess it doesn't pay to be an early adopter. « Show Less
580340
I have 305 and I decided not to buy the new 405 because:a) I am using the 305 while kayaking (it is waterproof to 1 m) and I fear 405 is not;b) When running in a new area or city I can use the basic map of the 305 to backtrack (very useful when you are lost! ) and I read a post from the developers that the 405 does not have even the crude maps that 305 has and that basically sealed the deal fore me.
580341
I apologize if this is an ***obvious*** point, but I have found that there is dramatically better performance in finding satellites if you turn on your watch and leave it on the ground/on a rock/on a post that is in relatively clear view of the sky while you stretch or get ready to run/ride. Rather than turn on the watch and put it on, I suggest to all users to try this simple trick. You will have a much better experience using the watch (mine is a 305).
360926
You might want to check out Ascent from Montbello Software. Mac native and runs circles around Garmin Training Center for the 205/305. I'm using it for my 405, but only after exporting a file in windows from GTC and importing it into Ascent.
1992357
I have found mine to be very accurate, although sometimes it will be off usually about a quarter mile for a 10 miles ruen. I think it has more to do with the movement or adjustment of the satelites rather than the watch, since I have noticed on the peaks website that sometimes the course is really off and has me starting out in Lake Erie. There is not really much you can do about it and all brands pretty much use the same gps. If I am running a course for time, I always measure it by my bike or car for better accuracy. I did do a 10 mile race last fall and it showed 10.07 which was very good. Trees and turns or switchbacks can through it off as well. I have found mine to be very accurate, although sometimes it will be off usually about a quarter mile for a 10 miles ruen. I think it has more to do with the movement or adjustment of the satelites rather than the watch, since I have noticed on the peaks website that sometimes the course is really off and has me starting out in Lake Erie. There is not really much you can do about it and all brands pretty much use the same gps. If I am running a course for time, I always measure it by my bike or car for better accuracy. I did do a 10 mile race last fall and it showed 10.07 which was very... » Read More I have found mine to be very accurate, although sometimes it will be off usually about a quarter mile for a 10 miles ruen. I think it has more to do with the movement or adjustment of the satelites rather than the watch, since I have noticed on the peaks website that sometimes the course is really off and has me starting out in Lake Erie. There is not really much you can do about it and all brands pretty much use the same gps. If I am running a course for time, I always measure it by my bike or car for better accuracy. I did do a 10 mile race last fall and it showed 10.07 which was very good. Trees and turns or switchbacks can through it off as well. « Show Less
517090
Yes, from my research, bluetooth is the only difference between the two Garmin models you mentioned. I just ordered my 1450LMT and have not had a chance to use it. I would assume both units would function very similar as they have exactly the same feature set except for bluetooth.
1447347
I would not use the Garmin's monitor feature. I use Polar's "F" series they are accurate and dependable. I have been using thgem since late 1999 and have founbd them to be the best on the market.
1349368
Please, check Garmin home page. There´s a lot of way to choose how to see the screen. I use my watch and check just distance, time and current pace in same screen. Otherwise, if you are not a professional, see the 220 for 100 dollars less.....
1000798
I have a similar question as Bryon has. I have a Garmin Cycling Heart Rate Monitor (305) and was wondering if I could get by if I bought a running 305 and used my existing strap.
697978
Thanks N. Search YouTube for "Wonderland Garmin 405" that is what really peaked my interest.Ok, I was able to find the watch at City Sports. I love it and it finds satellites in about 30 seconds or so.I connected it via Garmin Connect fairly easily (using my Dell D620 Laptop and Windows XP), but I can't find how I can export the GPX files anywhere?
1140568
In theory, satellite triangulation is one of the most accurate way of fnding your position, not only in coordinates (Latitude and Longitude), but in altitudes as well. Altimeters in watches uses barometric sensors to measure air pressure to calculate altitude. I'm betting the 305 will give me the closest, if not accurate, altitude than the best barometer sensor watch in the market. Add the convenience of tracking and recording altitude, with your heart rate, time, pace, position and distance at the same time. Why settle for anything less?
355080
Thanks for the update, dsrussell. I'll take your advice and check out the review of the 765 that you mentioned at gpsmagazine.com. It's too bad that the folks at Garmin didn't include this info about the 765 in their owners manual. Must have been an oversight on their end. Again,thanks a bunch!
1000796
Just curious, I'm thinking of getting the 305, but I already have a Polar HRM... Did you say that your Polar strap works with your 305? If so, that'd be nice not to have to purchase a second strap.
1154322
This is my wife's watch. Never had the 220. Her 610 was stolen so bought the 620. She likes it better. Blue tooth is easier to upload and it locates a satellite much faster. Plus a little smaller & lighter. The 620 was 399 vs. 299 for last year's 610 model
866659
Unfortunately, the satellite reception and lock by the Nuvi 260 will vary widely depending upon the receiving technology Garmin put in it. Basically, there are two different receivers (originally there were three, one being the SiRF Star III very early on). They have (or had) either the Bravo chip (not well received), or the MTK chip (highly received), but who knows today? Garmin has a tendency to shoot from the hip, so there may be a 3rd or even a 4th receiver vendor. My 260 came with the MTK chip, and I found it to be a surprisingly good performer. So, if you can find one that has the MTK chip, you should have solid reception and decent acquisition times (rarely over 1-1/2 minutes on cold starts ... but it can happen), and usually 30-45 seconds on warm starts.
2065259
There is a way to pair this with other HR monitors. Garmin has posted the manuals on its website, so you can check out the details there. I would suggest you call Garmin and verify that your specific model will work with this, as that is not clear from the website. Their tech support is great. I had to call as the HR monitor that came with this was not paired with the watch, and they answered my call quickly and walked me thru the process of getting the monitor connected. I think you might like the old HR monitor better than the one that comes with this. This one requires you to wet the sensors in three places before use, not always convenient. The downside is that you can't wash the 405 one easily. The electronics of this one are housed in a case that snaps into the strap, so you can machine wash the strap. Good luck!
888826
can't answer that question but don't think these are the best gps watch for the price. when they run out of power they reset the date and take a while to find satellites. another option is choosing an older model garmin like a forerunner 405, I had one for 5 years and bought my son the same last year, much more reliable
1567531
I am also looking for the best unit; especially for rural areas as we do a lot of hiking. We have been depending on cell phone GPS navigation but it sure doesn't work well in the Far West nor on a recent hiking trip to the Great Smokys and Blue Ridge Mountains. I am thinking of the Garmin nvi 2797LMT 7-Inch or the Garmin nvi 3597LMTHD 5-Inch. Not sure what one I will pick but there are 100's to choose from and reviews are all over the place. Wish Amazon provided for comparisons. Try Best Buy for details, they do a much better job of showing all features and allow comparisons. Then search the web for that unit and get the best price (not always on Amazon).
700290
I think so. I have owned a number of Garmin Forerunners over the years and the 220 is by and far the best. Garmin has finally gotten it right! The main differences between this watch and the 10 are 1) display- you can see more data and see it much more clearly on the 220, 2) vibration alerts- even though I do not run with an ipod, I would often not hear the audio chirp when I finished each mile (which the 10 does not have), but I can always hear the vibration, 3) pace alerts, which are extremely helpful during training, 4) battery life and 5) the 220 looks way better. Hope this helps! BTW: I am an avid endurance athlete- triathlons, marathons, running relays etc. I think so. I have owned a number of Garmin Forerunners over the years and the 220 is by and far the best. Garmin has finally gotten it right! The main differences between this watch and the 10 are 1) display- you can see more data and see it much more clearly on the 220, 2) vibration alerts- even though I do not run with an ipod, I would often not hear the audio chirp when I finished each mile (which the 10 does not have), but I can always hear the vibration, 3) pace alerts, which are extremely helpful during training, 4) battery life and 5) the 220 looks way better. Hope this helps! BTW:... » Read More I think so. I have owned a number of Garmin Forerunners over the years and the 220 is by and far the best. Garmin has finally gotten it right! The main differences between this watch and the 10 are 1) display- you can see more data and see it much more clearly on the 220, 2) vibration alerts- even though I do not run with an ipod, I would often not hear the audio chirp when I finished each mile (which the 10 does not have), but I can always hear the vibration, 3) pace alerts, which are extremely helpful during training, 4) battery life and 5) the 220 looks way better. Hope this helps! BTW: I am an avid endurance athlete- triathlons, marathons, running relays etc. « Show Less