active network espn
Active Home | Directory | Community | eteamz | Results | Support Support | Event Directors & Organizers
Community: Exchange advice in the forums and read running commentary Resources: Personal running log, calculators, links and other tools for runners News: Running news from around the world Training: Articles and advice about fitness, race training and injury prevention Races/Results: Find upcoming races and past results Home: The Cool Running homepage
Cool Running homepage  Search Cool Running Community
Up to Threads in Basic Training
11 Replies Last post: Jan 11, 2008 6:40 AM by Beantown runner  
Click to view Michael.'s profile Community Moderator
Michael.
676 posts since
Nov 9, 2007
Login to Reply

Jan 8, 2008 10:54 AM

Garmin 305 vs. 405


I am planning on picking up a Garmin this year and up till now my choice was easy, the 305 was the way I was going to go. Now Garmin will be coming out with a 405. I seems to be the size of a sports watch and something you could wear all the time since it functions as a watch. After I looked into it on Garmin's site I found to achieve the small size Garmin had to remove some features. The following features were removed from the 405:

  • Routes
  • Multi-sport (changes sport mode with a press of a button)
  • Pace alert (triggers alarm if you vary from preset pace):
  • Time/distance alert (triggers alarm when you reach goal):


How big of an issue are these things to you Garmin 305 users? Is it worth the savings of having a lighter unit that also functions as a watch? I would appreciate any opinions.


Mike

Click to view JPGarland's profile Legend
JPGarland
777 posts since
Dec 7, 2007
1. Jan 8, 2008 5:43 PM in response to: Michael.
Re: Garmin 305 vs. 405
I don't use any of those features. My computer seems to know when I'm cycling as opposed to running without me doing anything with the watch itself.
Login to Reply
Click to view Girl In Motion's profile Legend
Girl In Motion
253 posts since
Feb 4, 2007
2. Jan 9, 2008 8:34 AM in response to: JPGarland
Re: Garmin 305 vs. 405
I don't use those features, but I wouldn't trade my 305 for a 405. Although I'm a petite woman and the 305 is admittedly big, I appreciate the amount of info I can see at once, plus the numbers in the 405 sub-fields look smaller, too.
Login to Reply
Click to view Michael.'s profile Community Moderator
Michael.
676 posts since
Nov 9, 2007
3. Jan 9, 2008 8:53 AM in response to: Girl In Motion
Re: Garmin 305 vs. 405
I understand where you are coming from. It seems the selling point on the 405 is that it can be used as a daily watch and and it has wireless data transfer. It does have trade offs for it's size. I also wonder if I saw it in person if it truly is small enough to use as a daily sports watch. I am leaning towards the 305 as well, also when the 405 becomes available the 305 prices should drop a little as well.

Mike
Login to Reply
Click to view andyndallas's profile Amateur
andyndallas
13 posts since
Jan 6, 2008
4. Jan 9, 2008 8:58 AM in response to: Michael.
Re: Garmin 305 vs. 405
I just bought a 205 and am waiting on it to arrive. I too was looking at the 405, but wanted something with a bigger display. I also wanted something that did not have a separate GPS pod to carry. Should be here tomorrow, I will post my thoughts after I run with it. It will be great running and knowing how far I have gone instead of having to take the car out after to measure a route.
Login to Reply
Click to view Michael.'s profile Community Moderator
Michael.
676 posts since
Nov 9, 2007
5. Jan 9, 2008 8:59 AM in response to: andyndallas
Re: Garmin 305 vs. 405
Does the 405 have a separate GPS pod? I did not see that.

Mike
Login to Reply
Click to view Beantown runner's profile Rookie
Beantown runner
4 posts since
Dec 14, 2007
6. Jan 9, 2008 10:31 AM in response to: Michael.
Re: Garmin 305 vs. 405
Michael,

I have the 305 and the size or weight of it never bothers me. The way it is designed allows it to wrap around the wrist a little at the top. You should go test wear it at a store first to see how it feels. As far as the routes, multi-sport, or pace alert go I never use these. However I do have distance alert set to go off at every mile so I can see my splits while I run (if this is what you're referring to with Time/distance alert).
Login to Reply
Click to view JPGarland's profile Legend
JPGarland
777 posts since
Dec 7, 2007
7. Jan 9, 2008 11:44 AM in response to: Beantown runner
Re: Garmin 305 vs. 405
I also use the every-mile-alert thing. I found the 305 took some getting used to, and for a while it aggravated a bone in my wrist, but that hasn't been a problem for a while. Also, if you don't use the HRM, you can make do with the 205.
Login to Reply
Click to view Michael.'s profile Community Moderator
Michael.
676 posts since
Nov 9, 2007
8. Jan 9, 2008 11:53 AM in response to: JPGarland
Re: Garmin 305 vs. 405
Well, right now I have nothing so anything will be a step up but I think I would use the heart rate monitor. Thanks for the suggestion.

Mike
Login to Reply
Click to view runawayjesse's profile Legend
runawayjesse
538 posts since
Dec 14, 2007
9. Jan 9, 2008 5:51 PM in response to: Michael.
Re: Garmin 305 vs. 405

I would go with the 405 if I already didn't own a 305. The 305 is great but my only caveat is the size. It isn;t that bothersome, it just looks weird. Due to it;s size I whacked it off a few things before too. If this dies I'll upgrade to the 405 but otherwise I'm just going to stick with this.
Login to Reply
Click to view staunen2's profile Amateur
staunen2
12 posts since
Jun 8, 2005
10. Jan 10, 2008 12:27 PM in response to: runawayjesse
Re: Garmin 305 vs. 405

I'm considering getting the Forerunner 50 instead of the 205 (the 405 is just too expensive) because I don't think I'll use the watch for more than pace and distance. So, as I've found them for roughly the same price on-line, should I be looking to "grow in to" the 205 or just go with the what I know I'll use on the 50?

Is anyone willing to offer an argument for having the extra features that come with the extra bulk of a 205?

Login to Reply
Click to view Beantown runner's profile Rookie
Beantown runner
4 posts since
Dec 14, 2007
11. Jan 11, 2008 6:40 AM in response to: staunen2
Re: Garmin 305 vs. 405

StephenOB

I have never seen the Forerunner 50 in action as I jumped on the Garmin bandwagon with the 201 and now have a 305. Like you said it all depends on what you are going to use it for. If you only want something for pace and distance the forerunner 50 will give you that. The Garmin website has a compare option where you can see what features the different watches offer. The two things I see is that the Forerunner 50 is not GPS-enabled and has a non rechargeable coin cell battery.

Login to Reply

Actions

More Like This