Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Is the 305 just a 301 in a different package? Or is it their totally improved reciever?

I've got a garmin 301 for running. But it's kind of unreliable in NYC as far as grabbing a signal. It can take 5-10 minutes to do so and loosed track all the time - even in the wide open such as central park.
 

·
duh...
Joined
·
9,658 Posts
wolfereeno said:
Is the 305 just a 301 in a different package? Or is it their totally improved reciever?

I've got a garmin 301 for running. But it's kind of unreliable in NYC as far as grabbing a signal. It can take 5-10 minutes to do so and loosed track all the time - even in the wide open such as central park.

Presumably you're asking about the Forerunners. According to the Garmin site the new models feature the "High-Sensitivity SiRFstarIII™ architecture".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
I wont upgrade yet...

I own a 301, and love it. I live in TN, and have never had any issues with satellites, or distance measurements for that matter. It says right in the box that measurements are +/- 45 feet, and it has been good enough for me. In fact, some buds of mine took our puters out for the same distance several weeks in a row, and mine had the lowest/best standard deviation (nerd alert, nerd alert) compared to Polar and Timex. The heart rate function rocks too, and the "get you home" function is awesome for when I am travelling and have no idea how to get back to start. It just lets me run......
The issue with the 301 is the elevation reading. I have run and biked loops/crits, and the elevation reading in the software download is all over the place. Supposedly, the 305 has improved this, but nothing on Garmin's website mentions this improvement (probably just local running store BS).
The biggest difference is the size of the monster on your wrist while running. The 305 is defnitely sexier. But for the bike, it is irrelevant.
I ran in downtown Philly recently, and had one issue where reception disappeared, but any GPS functioning trainer is going to have that problem. I am waiting for the next Garmin series that will include waterproof up to 25 feet so I can tri with it. But until then, I think the 301 is fine, and unless you can take the 301 back and are willing to part with the 80 or so bones to upgrade, hang with the 301.
Hope this helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
FatTireFred said:
Presumably you're asking about the Forerunners. According to the Garmin site the new models feature the "High-Sensitivity SiRFstarIII™ architecture".

Actually...I was talking about the Garmin Edge, which may or may not be what the original post was about.
 

·
duh...
Joined
·
9,658 Posts
brewdude said:
Actually...I was talking about the Garmin Edge, which may or may not be what the original post was about.

Well I was replying to the original post. The Edge is brand new for 2006... I don't think there ever was a 301.
 

·
Weed
Joined
·
1,037 Posts
brewdude said:
That one doesn't have the altimeter does it?
It says in the specs that it has elevation data but it may just have the GPS elevation info without the barometric altimeter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
brewdude said:
Actually...I was talking about the Garmin Edge, which may or may not be what the original post was about.
Specifically I'm wondering about the comparison between the Forerunner 305 (the new wrist model) and the Edge 305 Bike model.

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
242 Posts
zyzbot said:
It says in the specs that it has elevation data but it may just have the GPS elevation info without the barometric altimeter.
The Edge 305 has a barametric altimeter, but the Edge 205 does not. The 305 calculates the total climb as you are riding, and I have heard the 205 does not. Looking at my graphs at the end of my first 15 or so rides with the 305, it appears to be accurate.
 

·
Weed
Joined
·
1,037 Posts
The Edge 305 has a barametric altimeter, but the Edge 205 does not. The 305 calculates the total climb as you are riding, and I have heard the 205 does not. Looking at my graphs at the end of my first 15 or so rides with the 305, it appears to be accurate.

I was referring to the Forerunner 305 rather than th eEdge 305. Similar numbers makes it confusing!
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top