# Garmin Edge vs. Garmin Watch



## BlueWheels (Oct 17, 2008)

I currently have a Node 1 computer on my bike and use my iPhone as a GPS when I go running or biking. I am tired of the iPhone's terrible GPS reception giving crazy maps, though, so am thinking about getting a Garmin. The question is, do I want to go with one of the watches (probably the Forerunner 410) or one of the cycle computers (probably the Edge 500). I can keep using my Node 1 to get cadence and speed info and a Forerunner to track my route with a GPS or I could have an Edge that would do everything. The benefit of the watch is that it would be good for running also. Any thoughts?


----------



## ohiorick (May 29, 2010)

Just bought a Garmin 610 forerunner. I have heard that there are some issues with the 410, so check into that if that is the one you are interested in. If you run and bike, the 610 is great! it has a touch screen and is fairly easy to use for biking and running.. The 500 would no doubt be easier to see and use on the bike, I do not have a 500, I have the 800 and with its maps and everything else, I love it.


----------



## caad9er (Oct 25, 2011)

The 610 is pretty sweet, but I like the edge 500 for cycling. If you run and bike the 610 could be a good compromise. I'd get the bar mount though. It also has a smaller screen and I think only 4 fields max (500 has 8). I don't think any forerunner has a barometric altimeter though if that's important.


----------



## charliepuyear (Oct 7, 2011)

Why do you even need a gps while your riding? Do you really not know where you are/going when you go for a ride? And if you just want it to track your ride (not for navigation) your iphone will still work great. I use the Map My Ride app or the Strava app works great. Both free


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

I've been getting a kick out of being able to track my runs via GPS, so I can see how well I was pacing myself. I've never been very good at pushing the right button at the right time to generate good splits... So I'd probably go for the watch, even though it doesn't collect all your data in the same place. Which would also be cool.


----------



## sherlock (Aug 6, 2011)

charliepuyear said:


> Why do you even need a gps while your riding? Do you really not know where you are/going when you go for a ride? And if you just want it to track your ride (not for navigation) your iphone will still work great. I use the Map My Ride app or the Strava app works great. Both free


It's nice to follow other's routes—plus the Garmin will do a better job of elevation, and can also do cadence and HR. You can still upload your Garmin .GPX files to Strava, too


----------



## looigi (Nov 24, 2010)

BlueWheels said:


> I am tired of the iPhone's terrible GPS reception giving crazy maps...


Just for the sake of technical accuracy, I'll mention that GPS only gives position in latitude and longitude. Maps are databases stored in the GPS device or are served to your smartphone quasi-real-time over a data connection. The device takes your position as provided by GPS and then plots it on its map.

The Garmin 705 and 800 come with very a very basic map installed which crudely depicts only very major roads. To get more detailed useful mapping you need to buy their maps on CD, uSD card, or via download.

In my experience, the GPS function of most smart phones, including iPhones, is quite good, and functions well even with no cell reception. It's the cell reception, particularly the data connection, that gets iffy and gives trouble with the maps.


----------



## BlueWheels (Oct 17, 2008)

looigi said:


> In my experience, the GPS function of most smart phones, including iPhones, is quite good, and functions well even with no cell reception. It's the cell reception, particularly the data connection, that gets iffy and gives trouble with the maps.


It could just be the phone I have, but the data points that I get from my iPhone are spaced too far apart for it to get a good read on where I am and where I have been. This often results in maps that show me running across the middle of Baltimore harbor when I am actually running around the harbor instead. I also will get random location points once or twice a week that put me between 4-5 miles from where I actually am which makes the map that it plots useless.


----------



## jpaschal01 (Jul 20, 2011)

BlueWheels said:


> It could just be the phone I have, but the data points that I get from my iPhone are spaced too far apart for it to get a good read on where I am and where I have been. This often results in maps that show me running across the middle of Baltimore harbor when I am actually running around the harbor instead. I also will get random location points once or twice a week that put me between 4-5 miles from where I actually am which makes the map that it plots useless.


It could also be the app you are using. I can't keep a GPS signal with the Stava app. The iMapMyRide app has been perfect and matches within 1/10 of a mile to the distance my Cateye.


----------



## me_not_you (May 22, 2010)

jpaschal01 said:


> It could also be the app you are using. I can't keep a GPS signal with the Stava app. The iMapMyRide app has been perfect and matches within 1/10 of a mile to the distance my Cateye.


Could also be the version of the iphone that is being run. I've found that when I had the 3gs it's iphone gps reception was pretty crappy. I've upgraded to the 4s and it is miles better in showing me where I've been with no weirdness.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

I'll have to try MyTracks again... With Strava and my Android, I get a pretty zig-zaggy track. Distances are close enough, especially since I don't track volume that way. But if I'm riding on the side of a hill, the zig-zagging can do really funny things to elevation. By the end of a mountain bike ride, my Strava track is likely to have significantly more elevation gain than independent reports of the gain on that ride.

I actually turned down a GPS unit as a gift back in May. I don't regret it - my MTB shoes were falling apart, and that's what I got instead. But it was that conversation that got me turned onto Strava, which I'm quite enjoying. So now I'd like to have a better GPS receiver. From reading about it on some other forums, there are a couple of different products available. With the exception of a Garmin smart phone that was supposed to have sucked as a phone, all cell phones and smart phones have a fairly crappy receiver, while almost all dedicated GPS receivers have one of maybe three nicer ones. Certainly if I look at GPS tracks on Strava, people who used an actual GPS device generally have much smoother tracks that better conform to the map.


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

charliepuyear said:


> Why do you even need a gps while your riding? Do you really not know where you are/going when you go for a ride? And if you just want it to track your ride (not for navigation) your iphone will still work great. I use the Map My Ride app or the Strava app works great. Both free


Hummmm, ever been out on an organized ride and missed a turn arrow? How about being out on that century ride and wondering if you are on the right road while thinking you need to refill your bottles. 

I've had this happen. No other riders, no street signs, no markers for 5 miles makes you wonder.


----------



## caad9er (Oct 25, 2011)

I've had generally good luck using an Android phone, but the simplicity of the Edge and bar mount has value and battery life is much better than running a smartphone for this. Guess it depends on your priorities. The 500 has the ability to do 1 second recording too which might make for better tracks and overall accuracy. Also, most phones can't pair with a HRM or cadence sensor (except maybe over bluetooth but most sensors are ANT+).


----------



## Love Commander (Aug 20, 2009)

I really want to get a 405 now that they're sub $200. I've heard the big complaint is that the touch bezel is too sensitive and goes wonky in wet/sweaty conditions. I've also heard you can just turn the touch bezel option off, which would be fine by me. Anyone here use the 405?


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

If you are 90% cyclist and 10% runner, then get the cycling device. If you are 10% cyclist and 90% runner, then get the watch. If you are inbetween you can go either way. If you are a triathlete go for the watch (and choose a waterproof one!).

I think you can get a wrist-band so that you can wear an Edge 500 like a watch (albeit a fugly watch, though all the Garmin watches are pretty ugly IMHO). You don't get pace though, and allegedly the speed readings on a cycling Garmin are worse than a watch Garmin because it doesn't take into account the arm swinging. I suspect this just means that the averaging/smoothing algorithm is tweaked differently for running vs. cycling units. Also, GPS reception appears to continue improving as Garmin introduces new products so in poor GPS scenarios it seems that Edge 200 is better than Edge 800 which is better than Edge 500 (based on some pretty limited data admittedly), and all those are better than the Edge 305. In general and looking a quite a bit of Strava activity records, I think the Garmin units are much more robust than a smart phone for GPS accuracy.


----------



## scryan (Jan 24, 2011)

looigi said:


> Just for the sake of technical accuracy, I'll mention that GPS only gives position in latitude and longitude. Maps are databases stored in the GPS device or are served to your smartphone quasi-real-time over a data connection. The device takes your position as provided by GPS and then plots it on its map.
> 
> The Garmin 705 and 800 come with very a very basic map installed which crudely depicts only very major roads. To get more detailed useful mapping you need to buy their maps on CD, uSD card, or via download.
> 
> In my experience, the GPS function of most smart phones, including iPhones, is quite good, and functions well even with no cell reception. It's the cell reception, particularly the data connection, that gets iffy and gives trouble with the maps.


Elevation ON the 500, and others is done via barometric and temperature measurements, then corrected later with map data.


----------



## Golfguy (Nov 20, 2010)

caad9er said:


> most phones can't pair with a HRM or cadence sensor (except maybe over bluetooth but most sensors are ANT+).


Using CycleMeter on the iPhone (and Android, I believe) allows connection to ANT+ sensors (HRM/Speed/Cadence) for the bike, although I don't have any experience with them. CycleMeter is generally pretty reliable for generating maps/routes.


----------



## caad9er (Oct 25, 2011)

Golfguy said:


> Using CycleMeter on the iPhone (and Android, I believe) allows connection to ANT+ sensors (HRM/Speed/Cadence) for the bike, although I don't have any experience with them. CycleMeter is generally pretty reliable for generating maps/routes.


The application will work with ANT+ devices if the phone has the proper hardware. Most phones don't. You would have to buy an additional adapter for this to work. CycleMeter has some information on how to do this (ANT+ Advice | Abvio).

EDIT: wow, that bike pack to work with the iPhone is $150 plus whatever the app costs. Seems a dedicated unit (like edge 500) would be a much better solution. It is a bit more expensive, but also seems a better all around device, less bulky, good battery life and a screen that's easy to read in sunlight.


----------



## Vulcanccit (Nov 6, 2011)

Golfguy said:


> Using CycleMeter on the iPhone (and Android, I believe) allows connection to ANT+ sensors (HRM/Speed/Cadence) for the bike, although I don't have any experience with them. CycleMeter is generally pretty reliable for generating maps/routes.


I too use CycleMeter on the iPhone 4 and it works awesome here in Phoenix. GPS, Speed, altitude, etc. Both in the mountain bike parks, and out on the road. I recently bought the DuoTrap for my Madone 4.5 to get the Cadence. 

I would like to hijack this thread just slightly and ask about the Speed Sensors... since the Duotrap will track speed (if I add the spoke magnet which I have not yet done), and the iPhone will track speed as well....which is best? would the spoke magnet be more accurate? 

As to the OP's question, so far I have been happy with the iPhone but I have been thinking of the Node 2, or the Garmin meters. 500, or 800 and a friend of mine suggested the 310x as it waterproof if you are a swimmer, can be used for running, really anything.

So I am following this thread to learn as you are.

I am new to this forum and this is my first post


----------



## lacofdfireman (May 2, 2010)

Don't count out the Garmin 305 Watch. That's what I use and love it. Had a Garmin 705 on my last bike and it was nice but to be honest I really didn't need all the added features and with the 305 I can take it off and run with it and swim with it also. I like that I can use it on Triathalons etc. It is not water proof but is water resistant. There is a difference. You would need to put it under a swim cap or something if you plan on swimming with it but it works. Goes great from cycling transition to running. Also ANT compatible so it will give you cadence etc. It's a great cyclometer for under $150 all day long brand new on ebay... If you are interested I can post up some pics of it mounted on my bike. Just PM me if you want to see how it looks on the bike...


----------



## tpgrole (Aug 20, 2009)

Love Commander said:


> Anyone here use the 405?


I had one for almost 2 years but sold it when I bought a 310XT. The bezel does stink, the small display bugged me especially when strapped to my bars (not so bad on your wrist). I'd gladly answer questions if you have them.


----------



## AZPOWERHOUSE (Dec 16, 2008)

I bought a 500 and it works great if you do a lot of riding and not much running. I just throw it in my pocket for running with auto pause off.

However, as I am getting more into running I kinda wish I had the watch. I may end up buying one at some point.


----------



## rose.johnp (Jul 20, 2011)

I've had the Forerunner 310 for a while now and use it for both biking and running. It's great for the runs, but is a bit annoying on the bike. It's annoying trying to get the watch around the handle bar mount under the brake and shifting cables - and a bit distracting trying to read while riding. But at the end of the day, it records the GPS data for review later. I'm thinking of getting the 500 as well to work with the Duo Trap on my Trek. Let me know what you end up with.


----------



## BlueWheels (Oct 17, 2008)

I ended up getting a Forerunner 405 and after just 2 runs with it, I am amazed by how capable it is. I ended up deciding that the computers I have on my various bikes are all good enough at everything I need them for other than GPS, so I went with the option that I can use for running and biking. I went trail running 7 miles on Saturday and 5 yesterday and the number of data points it provides blows away the iPhone. More importantly, it is spot on with it's ability to record your location even under heavy tree cover. When I have gone MTBing in Patapsco, the iPhone gives spotty information at best, but a quick zip through some of the trails yesterday with the Garmin gave perfect information. 

For now, I am going to stick with just the watch and see how that goes. I can use it road biking, MTBing, and running, so it will get me through the winter. In the spring I may have to pick up an Edge for the road bike, though.


----------



## hrumpole (Jun 17, 2008)

It depends on how much you run. The mount for the 500 is the same as for the XT versions of watches, but it will not display pace. So if you bought a wrist strap-voila-instant watch. Odd about the Iphone, but it must be location-based. I use the training peaks app for running, and it seems to work just fine mapwise.


----------



## roscoe (Mar 9, 2010)

you can get a cadence sensor that's compatible with the 405, 

and after about 4000 miles of running, I can say the bezel issues aren't that bad. if you know it's raining for example, you can lock the bezel out.


----------



## teamtrinity (Nov 14, 2011)

I have the garmin forerunner 410xt and the 305. I have the 410xt quick release kit so it can mount on my stem. Works perfect. Unless you need bigger numbers or you need a gps, I don't think the garmin cycling specific devices are necessary. Plus, the forerunners are good for running!


----------



## Love Commander (Aug 20, 2009)

tpgrole said:


> I had one for almost 2 years but sold it when I bought a 310XT. The bezel does stink, the small display bugged me especially when strapped to my bars (not so bad on your wrist). I'd gladly answer questions if you have them.





roscoe said:


> you can get a cadence sensor that's compatible with the 405,
> 
> and after about 4000 miles of running, I can say the bezel issues aren't that bad. if you know it's raining for example, you can lock the bezel out.


How wet does it have to be before the bezel starts giving you problems? What kind of functionality do you lose when it's locked?


----------



## roscoe (Mar 9, 2010)

it has to be raining or pretty sweaty to start acting crazy. if you've got it on your bars instead of your wrist it should never be an issue, and I find I end up less sweaty biking vs running with the amount of wind making all the sweat evaporate, so running with it on your arm is far tougher for it than biking 

what you lose when you lock the bezel is the ability to change info screens, although you can set it to auto scroll through 1-4 info screens. if you're using the virtual pacer, you won't be able to change it's virtual pace while the bezel's locked. Other than that, it will still record all your info, you can still stop/start your timers, manually or automatically record laps. 

if you get it wet the general affect is that it thinks the bezel's being touched in places that it's not


----------



## Love Commander (Aug 20, 2009)

Cool. Thanks for the info!

I sweat like crazy, so I'm sure I'll be making good use of the lock-out function.

How long does a charge usually last when using GPS? Very few of my rides last longer than 5 hours, so it shouldn't be a problem. But I know I'll manage to forget to recharge it every now and then. I figured I'd get the speed/cadence sensor for this, since I understand you can just turn off the GSP to preserve battery life and rely on the sensor for speed/distance, right?


----------



## roscoe (Mar 9, 2010)

on a full charge, a 4-5 hour activity is no problem.. my battery lasts longer than I do

I've started activities with battery life as low as 30% and been able to complete hour long workouts without running out of power. 

there's some discrepancy though, my GF has a 405CX, I have the older 405 and when we go running my garmin uses WAY less battery than hers does. No real explanation as to why, but it's consistent. 

I don't think you can turn off GPS on the watches and use the sensor for speed, at least not on the "running" watches.. you may have that feature on the more cycling oriented garmins, but I think you only get a cadence sensor on the cranks, not a wheel speed sensor.


----------



## MojoHamuki (Feb 20, 2009)

I have both the Forerunner 610 and the Edge 800. I like how the 610 is ANT Stick compatible in uploading your stats to your computer and to garmin automatically when you are within 10 or so feet from your computer wirelessly.


----------



## ooskyoome (Jan 23, 2011)

I would really hate to have an iPhone on my handle bars in all riding conditions. I have the Edge 500 and love it.


----------

