Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
251 of 254 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Garmin 205 vs. the Garmin 201, April 12, 2006
I've run 4 times a week with the Garmin 201 for the past 2 years so I was anxious to get the 205. After 10 runs with the 205 (some runs with both) here is my take on the new 205:
Pros:
- better form factor (although still big and same weight as the 201)
- Buttons are more intuitive (less guessing in the dark)
- More accurate - If I run the same run 3 times (e.g. a regular 6 miler) all 3 distances are within .02-.09... the 201 varied by as much as .3 miles. The 205 also appears to be more accurate according to "known distances"
- Less satellite drops compared to the 201 (although see the BIG con below!)
- The strap is rubber so it doesn't act as a sweat band (the 201 was harder to clean and smelled for weeks after a marathon)
- Better software
CONS:
- Fonts are smaller (especially on history and other screens)
- The strap is rubber and doesn't fit as well as the cloth/Velcro on the 201 (although the pro I think outweighs the con!)
- BIG CON: On one regular run along the bay in San Francisco (no hills, trees, or buildings) the 205 lost satellite in a "usual" area (common for my 201 to drop in the same place) one mile into the run, but the 205 never recovered during the whole run. So the 205 doesn't drop satellites as much, but when it does it might not recover - this is a fatal issue if it continues (note: the 201 drops often, but always recovers right away).
Overall I would still highly recommend the unit. I definitely prefer to run with the 205 instead of the 201. I will be watching the drop-recover issue carefully to see if others report a similar problem.
|
|
|
125 of 128 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Well worth the extra cost!!!, April 7, 2006
I wrote an extensive six-part review comparing the Garmin Forerunner 205 with my older Garmin Forerunner 201. Here is the URL to the first part and you can find links at the bottom to the other parts:[...]
If you don't want to read the full reviews then here is a summary of my likes and dislikes:
Likes
* Comfort and Form factor: Usage model is very important and while the 205 is big, it feels and wears like a wrist watch. The plastic strap is more comfortable than the 201's velco strap, and the unit also comes with an extension strap if you need to bundle up and wear it outside your clothing. Personally, I want to look at my watch for instant data (i.e. time, pace, distance, etc) and feedback so I'm unwilling to place a device on my upper arm even if I have to sacrifice accuracy. In terms of form factor, the lap and start/stop buttons are well placed and sized on the face of the watch.
* GPS Accuracy: The Garmin Forerunner 205's GPS receiver seemed much stronger. I can lock onto a signal inside my house next to a window, I haven't received one weak signal in a week over routes that caused my 201 trouble. And on my one run over a tree-covered, GPS signal-challenging course, the 205 came out a star, finally allowing me to measure a route that I was unable to with my 201. The GPS accuracy data field and the satellite acquisition screen are also cool bonuses.
* Customization: The 205 allows you to customize 2 main screens and a third activity specific (i.e. run, bike or other) one with 1 to 4 data fields per screen. This is very cool, especially for data-driven geeks like myself. Another great thing about all the Forerunners is you can customize screens and settings on the fly without interrupting your current activity.
* Real-Time Pacing: I'm not that interested in knowing how fast I'm going at a specific moment in time so never was a big fan of the "real-time" pacing feature of the 201. With that said, the 205 seemed to be more consistent and showed a tighter range of paces. It also seemed closer to how fast I felt I was going relevant to the current conditions (i.e. uphill, downhill, flat) than the 201, which showed a lot of variation and lag.
* USB Cradle: Charging and uploading via USB is a nice. Much faster than the 201's serial port.
Dislikes
* Display: The display of the 205 seems smaller and the history screens are dark and hard to read. I wish they didn't use the shading and just had the plain background.
* Real-time elevation: For me this isn't a big deal, but the "real-time" elevation reading lags on the 205. It seems to tie closely with GPS accuracy. For example, after I finish my runs I'll usually walk a little in my backyard to cool down. The real-time elevation reading will then "catch up" to the correct elevation.
* Buttons: My broken power button seems to be an anomaly so far since I haven't read of others with the same problem. With that said, the side buttons seems a bit stiff to me.
* Battery indicator: It just shows 4 vertical bars. I liked the feature on the 201 where it told you how many hours of charge were left when you powered it on.
Cool Stuff
* Tons of features: There are a lot of things the 205 can do such as import courses, advanced workouts, virtual partner and a bunch of other features that I need to explore
Wishlist
* Reduce form factor
* Color screen
* Increase battery life
* Improve waterproofing/water resistance
* Add wireless connectivity for uploading and downloading data and information over the air to PC or mobile service
|
|
|
66 of 67 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Fantastic!, June 13, 2006
I purchased the 205 to mainly get an idea as to how far I was running. This is my first training GPS device. I figured the circuit I ran was about 5k. To my pleasant surprise the 205 told me I was doing 3k more than I estimated so that was great news to me! But the 205 did not stop there. Read on....
If you are anything like me the runs I do at 5:30a on the weekdays are not as strong as the ones I do at 8a on the weekend. A couple hours of extra sleep seems to make a lot of difference. On Saturday I ran my 8k circuit at 8a and came in at a good time (for me). I saved the 8k circuit as a "course" in the 205. The Training Center software that comes with the 205 allows for fairly easy editing of the course adding in markers on when to turn, valleys/summits and saving the course back to the 205. This morning (5:30a) I started the 8k "course" in the 205. Straight away I could go to the navigation page and with the "virtual partner" function turned on there I was racing my(virtual)self! What fun! As expected I could not keep up with my(virtual)self and based on when my(virtual)self would start to break away I knew I had to put on more power. Without a doubt the virtual partner function is going to help me improve my early morning weekday runs. While I intellectually understood the benefit of the virtual partner function until I actually used it I didn't appreciate what difference this function will have on my training.
[Update Dec 2006: The virtual partner function has indeed improved my training. I have shaved 6 minutes off my 8k run since I bought the 205. Each time I make a new PR I save that as the course and work against that on subsequent runs. At worst I try and keep pace with myself. At best I beat myself!]
I find the 205 to have fairly good ability to get satellite signal. I can turn it on in our house (2 story with me on the ground floor) and get a signal. But overhead tree cover does seem to affect the current pace accuracy (see my nits below).
The integration with Google Earth and Maps is incredible. I can save the images as JPGs and post them to my blog so every one can see where I've been. Tres cool!
As I mentioned earlier the Training Center software that comes on the CD with the 205 is good. However, I would recommend going to Motion Based whose URL is provided in a flier that is packaged in the 205. I really like MB and you can check out other people's GPS data/times.
Now that I covered what was important to me there do seem to be some minor nits with the device that I noticed and I see other people have already commented on. The nits I would like to see corrected:
- the extensive menu navigation. There has to be a way to simplify the menu depth and make it a little more intuitive.
- current pace is negatively affected by overhead obstructions. On my 15k I run down a trail that has intermittent clearings and tree cover. Every time I ran into the tree cover and lost signal strength on the satellites the current pace dropped even though I'm fairly sure I was keeping an even pace with the music I was listening to. The 205 has a "pace alert" function that can alert you to when you slow down. Not very useful when every time I ran into tree cover the alert would sound. I eventually had to turn the pace alerts off as it was too inaccurate to be of any use. The overall average pace seems to be accurate.
[Update Dec 2006: As I travel a lot the only comment I have here is when I start up the 205 in a "new" city it takes a long time to lock into the satellites. Subsequent startups are fast so there must be some initialization process that is skipped on subsequent runs. I have run in San Francisco without GPS issues so not sure why others are having problems. ]
Overall, if you are on the fence about a GPS training device (as I was) then jump down and join the rest of us that are reaping the significant benefits of owning one. And the 205 works really well so I highly recommend it!
Oh, the reason I did not get the 305/HRM combo is because I get heat rash from wearing an HRM.
|
2115|RDKD0SITSTQPR;2115|RZCWY25AEA0R8;2115|R1JNU3SF6DHHYS;
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
