Customer Reviews

Garmin Forerunner 301 GPS Personal Training Device

5 star:		(132)
4 star:		(53)
3 star:		(17)
2 star:		(19)
1 star:		(16)

 

 

I have recently purchased a Forerunner 301 after having used a Sports Instruments heart rate monitor for about a year. The heart rate monitor was excellent, and certainly usefull in the gym - rather than wait a certain length of time between sets, wait until your HR is below 120bpm. It allows you to pace yourself much more.
When it comes to running, it is difficult to measure your performance (time, heart rate, and distance) over the days and weeks. A heart rate monitor is good, but when training you need to push yourself and will always have a high heart rate.

The forerunner is a completely different animal. So different, that there really isn't any fair comparison at all.
With this puppy on your arm you can build a workout (they are quite simple but effective) on your pc, slap it on the forerunner, and off you go. Great running feedback, and excellent info when transferred to the pc. Everything is easy to do - not quite WinXP wizard easy, but simple none the less.

If you live in a large city, forrested areas, or anywhere with sky obstructions, then it may give your trouble with reception. I have had a gps for years, and with my wifi experience I knew that reliable reception was going to be an issue. However, for me I found the reception excellent. Great in fact! In my lounge I can still get a lock with 4 good strength sattelites! If I stop it reacts within 1 second, and another second it knows I have stopped (due to the 1 second display update speed). Much better gps calculations than my garmin gps12.

If you are gagety inclined, and ARE taking (not just wanting or planning to) your running or biking seriously then without a doubt, this is the machine for you.

It isn't too big, but big enough to read. Locks on in less than 1 minute in my small back yard, and has stellar reaction time. Perhaps even just keeping track of your exercise history is worth it for you? Or the in running feedback? Or the calorie (much more realistic than anythng else I have seen) info?

I am very happy with my buy. I paid $230 for it. Worth every last buck. From my experience I have no trouble recommending the Forerunner 301 to any one who is taking their running seriously!!

I have had my Garmin Forerunner 301 for about nine months. During that time I have seen it has some good points but it fails significantly in several ways.

I'll start with the Garmin 301's best point(s): It is an excellent GPS device for a runner. I have done several organized races on certified courses which proved the Garmin GPS is an excellent distance gauge. Your stride length can vary greatly with no affect. I have not seen anyone run with a Polar foot pod and get nearly as precise measurements as I get from the Garmin. I just ran the California International Marathon with the Garmin. At the finish, it said 26.2 miles. Compare that to the Polar with foot pod my brother was wearing that said almost 28 miles. The only time I have found Garmin's GPS questionable has been on winding trail runs under trees.

Coupled with its ability to measure distance is the Garmin's setting for automatically tagging and storing mile splits. I love this function. Often times after a really long run, it's difficult to remember how you felt over certain areas of the course. This function means you don't have to remember anything. It's there.

I also like that it will tell me elevation, and even the steepness of the grade I am running up. This is especially nice if you are a trail runner. However, I don't like that it won't tally the total elevation change like a Polar will.

The speed and pace measurements displayed while in motion are a valuable gauge. I know of no device that does it better for a runner. But the accuracy can vary widely depending upon your overhead view. Clear sky generates an accurate reading. Throw a tree or a building in the mix and forget it. I have accepted this for what it is, a relative gauge that requires me to factor in my own judgment.

If you are a really serious athlete, you might want something that will run a little longer from a single charge. It isn't waterproof and it crashes periodically with no way to reset until the battery actually dies completely.

The heart rate feature, the one thing that supposedly makes this device worth $100 more than the Garmin 201, is actually its least reliable feature!! They owe me a hundred bucks! The unreliability of the heart rate monitor on this device should be so embarrassing to Garmin, it warrants a recall. Search the web. It's horrible. I routinely see readings over 220BPM. There is less than a 50/50 chance it will even READ my heart rate through an entire workout. Between the CONSTANT spikes and signal drops, there is no such thing as really knowing your average heart rate. I have given up on the heart rate function. It's a negative distraction from my training. As a result, I would not buy another Garmin 301. I would not recommend one to my friend. I would even go out of my way to dissuade a casual acquaintance from buying one if I found out they were considering it!

Customer service: I sent an eight-year old monitor back to Polar with a dead battery. For the cost of shipping they sent me a whole new monitor. I sent an email to Garmin telling them I thought their product had some strong points but could benefit from a few improvements. I offered specific suggestions about the software and offered to provide any additional necessary feedback. Garmin didn't even send an automated reply.

With all these factors in mind, I bought my wife a Polar heart rate monitor and a Garmin 101 for Christmas. Together, they cost less than I spent on my Garmin 301, and the combination will provide the same information far more reliably.

The idea is amazing; combine a compact GPS unit with a multi-functional heartrate/exercise monitor. I have owned one for one month. Overall, the unit is light, easy to operate, and easy to download to my pc. Using the unit on trail runs, I find the GPS functions give consistently reproducible data. The pc download gives accurate distance, elevation, and pace. The heartrate monitor, on the other hand is very unreliable, often blanking out or giving unrealistic heartrate. My recommendation is to get the Forerunner 301 if you want a compact GPS. If you are looking for a heartrate monitor to structure your workouts, look at something far superior like the Polar S610i. Also, the Garmin pc training program, for all its bells and whistles, does not compare to Polar's software.

I have the Forerunner 201 and liked it very much. Combined it with my Polar S810 and Sportsim software and was able to coordinate the heartrate info plus minus Ok.

The 301 solves that. Garmin's Training Center software (2.3.3 beta) is a vast improvement over the previous "Logbook" software. In particular the graphing function is quite useful. No, the software is not perfect and I have several things that I think should be changed but it works well for me when it comes down to analyzing the run. I also use Topofusion 2.51 (also beta-earlier versions can't read 301 data accurately) and am able to view runs on USGS satelite maps including landsat images. It also has some nice analysis features and allows Digital Elevation Map data to correct elevation data.

The device is nearly identical in appearance - buttons are a little easier to use, has USB instead of serial interface. Does not have WAAS and still is plus minus 30 feet accurate although I think it has improved algorithms. Device software has been improved mostly with addition of multisport options and workouts.

Multisport isn't well supported (IMHO) particulary within Garmin's Training Center, but I think it is still considered beta software.

Workouts are very nicely done and I have used the Training Center software to setup workouts that are uploaded to the device and then executed when you run. These are intuitive and straightforward to use and I have found them to be quite useful, especially with the HR monitor.

No real problems. Some have complained that the instantaneous accuracy of the device is variable and this is probably true but overall the real time data is accurate in my experience (over a year with the 201 and 3 months with the 301). Compared to measuring distances with my car's odometer and then guessing pace based on a stopwatch - what do we want? Once uploaded to the computer data looks pretty accurate. Occasional track points are obviously erroneous - if you use Topofusion you can edit the track to correct these. I have a 4 mile route that I run frequently - 2 miles out and back. Distance variance is about 1/10th mile and the tracks line up well - errors do occur but over about 10 seperate runs they are pretty consistent - not perfect, consistent.

I have had no problems linking to satelites or losing signal using the device in south Texas, Salt Lake, Park City, Maine, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and in airplanes between. This applies to both the 201 and 301.

Heart rate data analysis has been exciting. Never could accurately line up the data points using my Polar monitor and the 201. I have actually discovered helpful correlations using the HR and speed/elevation data graphs from this device that weren't possible before.

Overall, quite pleased with the device. Training Center software is acceptable and for me actually useful. If you are willing to utilize other software (Topofusion, Sportsim) you can get quite a bit out of this device.

I'm a gadget freak. So when I read about the 301 last year I decided I had to have one. And I am glad that I got it -- I really am. The 301 released me from the need to clock running routes with my car, or to run on a treadmill if I wanted accurate pace times. All the stuff that the product description says: all true. It really will transform your workouts. I really like the advanced workouts -- when training for a race I set up a month of training runs at a time, and the 301 keeps me honest.

Or it tries to. Because there are a couple of problems with this wee beastie. First off, cloud cover and trees cause it to lose the signal. A lot. When I ran the Vancouver half-marathon, I didn't get a signal once after entering the wooded areas of Stanley Park (2 miles). At home in Sammamish, WA, I regularly lose the signal if it is raining or if I am running in a suburban area with treed streets. And if you know this area you know that there are A LOT Of trees here. In the summer (no clouds) it works great.

The 2nd complaint I have is with the heart rate monitor. The strap is hard plastic -- not nearly as comfortable as my Polar HRM. And the pickup is spotty. You have to keep the contacts wet or it won't pick up at all. And even when I am sweating profusely there will be times that the 301 just starts yelling "Heart Rate Too High". I'll look down and it's reporting a h.r. of 200+. Trust me, when I am running my heart rate NEVER gets to 200. This happens often enough that you start to doubt if you can rely on the data it provides.

THE "PERFECT" 301 (I would pay $100 more for this!)
Here's how Garmin could fix this:
1. Use a soft Polar HRM strap rather than their plastic one.
2. Include an inertial shoe tracker similar to the Nike or Timex models, and have the watch use the shoe tracker when the GPS signal is spotty.

SUMMARY
It isn't perfect. But I haven't sold it, and I still use it 5 times a week. I know that sometimes it won't read correctly and I am bummed by that. But I don't have anything better.

I was concerned about this product because of the negative reviews and particularly about the heart monitor. But I received it the next day after ordering from Amazon - whose service continues to get better for me - and I immediately charged the battery and then set up my profile.

The next morning I used it for the first time and the heart rate monitor worked flawlessly for me. The GPS was exceptional as well. The heart rate monitor worked as well or better than my trusty Polar and they agreed with each other, too.

The only negatives I experienced were: 1) that the unit seemed a little bulky to me at first but I gradually became accustomed to it; 2) the lap button is near the start/stop button and I run in the dark so I had a bit of trouble with laps. I think I'll get the hang of the buttons soon.

Also the Training Center software did not work and I had to download the latest version from the web site. But I like the training center software just fine for my needs.

I would recommend it.

Let me start by saying I use the forerunner mostly on my bicycle. I don't have the mount as I just wrap it over my old bike computer.

I have had it about 3 months and I can't leave the house without it. I ride my bike to work, which is about 3.5 miles away. I also ride three times a week at a nearby college since they have a nice mountain in the middle of campus.

On the road it is very accurate. In about 50 sessions I have had it lose a satelite once. I also don't get a lot of cut off corners, but I think streets lend themselves well to GPS. For each ride home I use the Training Assistant and essentially race against my best time. It's not perfect since it only shows you how you are doing against an average speed, instead of how you were doing during a sepecific leg. This has really made beating personal records a lot of fun.

Next often, I use the device in the woods. Here it is still invaluable, but it's recption does suffer a little. I usually will lose the satelite several times during an hour ride, but often times I don't notice it. It polls often enough that a few missed point has a minimal effect.

For climbs, it is excellent. It polls the satelite enough to provide an accurate detailed map. For downhills it polls the same amount, but my speed increases 10 fold and critical corners are missed during the polling. Downhills aren't near as detailed as they should be.

I have used the device for running a few times, and really liked it. I am a stats freak and record every run and bike ride. This really eases the burden.

As I mentioned, I have had few problem with picking up the satelite. Even under trees, it's reception is acceptable.

Battery life is excellent and when the battery dies you don't lose all your data. It shuts down with enough power left to store the data.

Garmin is also pretty aggressive with their updates. The last update I installed actually improved my battery life and added new features.

Another feature that would be nice is to save routes with the personal trainer allowing you to save and use different times for different routes.

The Garmin PC software is very basic and the overlay maps stink. I do use it, but in conjuction with some freeware called SportTracks. It downloads maps from the USGS and they are much better than what garmin provides. You can also save images and upload your route to Google Earth. It will also figure out what the temperature was at the time you rode/ran.

The Forerunner has a very large memory. After at least 50 rides, I still have not had to clear the memory. I think I read that it can store up to two years of data.

The heartrate monitor has been a little flaky recently, but i suspect I just need a new battery. Once I break a sweat it works great. It could also be my chest hair causing poor conduction.

Support is not that great, at least via email. I asked a real simple question, but never got a reply. It wasn't important enough to call, so I didn't.

The forerunner is well made and waterproof, although make sure the USB slot is covered before you dip it in water! It is very feature rich and can be adapted to different styles of use.

Garmin is coming out with a new GPS just for bikes that fixes most of the flaws I pointed out.

If you keep track of every run, I think you can't go wrong. if want to use it on a bike, wait for the bike specific one to come out later this year.

I dont like that you cant print your results from the workout from the software. The device isnt completely accurate on distance. Close, but not precise.

If you accept this then the Garmin 301 Forerunner is a great tool for excersize. The workout partner feature I use alot. You set your pace and the display shows you a partner keeping that exact pace. It then lets you know how far ahead or behind you are. It has high and low alarms for your pace as well as heart rates. You can easily customize your workout by workout time, pace or distance.

It will lose signal if you go under large trees or underpasses. I recently did a half marathon and lost signal when I went under the bridges. This caused a discrepancy in the overall distance.

The software lets you trend your data (distance, pace and heart rate) on overlapped or seperate displays.

I do like the Forerunner. Its just a training aide and does a good job at that.

If you are particular about your information being very accurate then you should get a different product.

Because of these slight inaccuracies it loses one star with me. Its still worth a solid 4 stars.

The Garmin Forerunner 301 is an incredible tool, but make no mistake--you will need to learn how to use it.

Basic functionality of gathering distance, pace, and time is easy--turn the Garmin on and press the start button. But if you want more, like a virtual partner, auto-lap markers or directions home, you need to spend some time playing with it and reading the manual.

I can guarantee that every minute you spend learning will be worth it, though. My favorite feature is the ability to set pace alerts. When running, the unit will signal me with one beep if I'm running 2:00/mile too fast and another beep if I'm running 2:00/mile too slow. It also auto-pauses when I stop and begins to record this as "rest time". Oh yeah, and it will help you find your car in a parking lot.

There are many more features that can be used with this item, so I suggest you download the manual for more detailed info.

As for the accuracy of the GPS unit, it is excellent within standard GPS parameters. What the heck does that mean? No GPS can track you in a tunnel, and no GPS can track a moving target in a forest. (I'm sure the military has something for these applications, but we're talking about a wristwatch priced in the low hundreds here) So when you run in an open field on a clear day, the Garmin will be nearly flawless. But when you run in the city or in a park, be prepared for some inaccuracy. If you hit open sky every once in a while, you should be fine, but just be aware that it will not be perfect.

Some tips:
1. Each time you're out for a run, wait for the Garmin to acquire its signal before starting. A little bit of patience pays off when your start location is accurate.
2. All data produced by the GPS is a "best estimate". Don't get worried if your pace alert says that you're running at 2:15 minutes per mile. Wait a second and it will clear up (unless you really are that fast!)
3. The Garmin probably uses the same Mini-USB connector as your digital camera, so try it out before swapping cables!

In short, if you are willing to take the time to understand the Forerunner 301, you will LOVE it. If reading the manual and minor tinkering is not for you, then you might want to think twice. Have fun!

I'm an avid cyclist who loves gadgets. I purchased the Forerunner 301 several months ago and overall I'm disappointed. The Forerunner 301 is not particularly good at any of its tasks. As a GPS it frequently looses its signal. This may seem tolerable but if like me you like to keep records of your cycling performance (ie average speed, top speed, distance, etc) the 301 is mostly useless. The signal drops will result in loss of top speeds and very erratic high speeds when you are standing still. Mine has recorded speeds as high as 60 mph. The graphs indicate that I achieved this speed vertically while waiting for a traffic light. To be fair, I tend to ride roads that often have a lot of tree cover but comparatively my Magellan Gold GPS generally will keep its signal much more solidly than the 301. As a heart rate monitor... well read the other reviews - it too can be very erratic at times. And last but not least - the software. Garmin's Training Center software is woefully inadequate. As a result I signed up for the MotionBased subscription service. The folks at MotionBased are I believe truly dedicated to trying to provide a quality service. It just isn't there yet. Further, why do I want to upload my result sets to an internet based subscription service for analysis? I'd rather purchase PC software that runs on my local PC and avoid the common upload and connectivity issues associated with MotionBased or any other WEB based service. If you are looking for a great tool for recording and analyzing your cycling performance then buy a Polar. I own a Polar S720i and a Polar 725. Both have performed extremely well. Polar's software, while not perfect, is light years ahead of Garmin's Training Center and well ahead of MotionBased. So in short my recommendation is buy a Polar S725 for cycling and heartrate analysis. For GPS capability, take a look at the Garmin eTrex series or the Magellan Meridian series.