Garmin Forerunner 305

clv101

clv101

clv101

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
10,962
Location
Bristol
I got a Garmin Forerunner 305 today. Great bit of kit. I've just been out with it and recorded this:

Training_12FEB08-2.png


Wondering if anyone who knows a bit more about running and fitness could interpret it. I'm 30, so I guess my max heart rate should be around the 190 mark - this seems to agree with the 188 I recorded after a bit of high speed towards the end of the run. I'm surprised that I spent so much time in zone 5.

The only thing I don't like is that I can't stop it recording some variables and not others. For example, it says I ran 3.67 miles in 32:31:29. Well, that's wrong. I actually ran 3.6 miles in 27:50 to give an average pace of 7.7min/mile. Then cooled down for 5 minutes as can be seen by my heart rate falling. But because it thinks the run was 32:31:29 is calculates the average pace, average speed etc. wrong.

I guess in future I'll just stop it recording at the end of the run and not bother to log the falling heart rate.

I haven't looked at some of the more advanced features yet, laps, virtual partner etc.
 
It is an excellent piece of kit. Had mine for nearly two years now.

Hit the lap button at the end of your run, you can then log your recovery as a second lap. You can then delete this in training centre if you just want your run data and it'll adjust your averages etc.

I doubt you would've hit your max HR with a burst at the end and the formula 220 - age can be way off
 
If you save your course in the training centre you can then choose to view your run in Google Earth which I thought was a pretty good feature!!
 
Yeah, mine was £130 from a book shop! I got it as I'm not only quite serious about running but also getting into cycling in big way. This means I can us one solution for both and don't need a specific cycle computer.
 
Weird, I've just been looking at this piece of kit.

My Wife's PT has one but I've never seen the graphs and whatnot it can produce. Presumably to can do comparisons to see how your speeds and heart rate are improving?
 
You can choose auto pause, and have it set to

a) Pause when stopped
b) Pause when below a custome pace

Also can I recommend either using Sport Tracks or Motionbased.com, they're both much better than the included training centre
 
Last edited:
I've just been reading quite a few reviews and the same issues are coming up again and again:

1) Altitude tracking is flawed unless you have good lock on 6+ sats. A lot of people have reported differences of up to 250' when starting and stopping at the same location.

2) The calorie estimation is out by a long way, with some people suggesting that you have to divide by 1.5 or 1.6 to get a more accurate result.

3) Because of the problems with altitude tracking and general loss of signal the speed measurement and also be pretty inaccurate.

Anyone had any of these issues?
 
The measuring calories like this is just a function of distance, speed and weight. I guess the Forerunner is as accurate as the data and the equation is uses.
 
I'm interested can people tell my fitness from the following

getmbwo1.jpg


I ran 3.74 miles in 36m30s, had an average HR of 167bpm max of 178bpm etc. etc.
 
[DOD]Asprilla;11094356 said:
I've just been reading quite a few reviews and the same issues are coming up again and again:

1) Altitude tracking is flawed unless you have good lock on 6+ sats. A lot of people have reported differences of up to 250' when starting and stopping at the same location.

2) The calorie estimation is out by a long way, with some people suggesting that you have to divide by 1.5 or 1.6 to get a more accurate result.

3) Because of the problems with altitude tracking and general loss of signal the speed measurement and also be pretty inaccurate.

Anyone had any of these issues?
Click to expand...

1) not specific to the Garmin 305, an issue with all GPS devices init (??)

2) who cares

3) only lost signal once in two years and that was next to a 20 foot high wall and surrounded by lots of densely packed trees. Based on other methods of measuring routes, times recorded, its consistency I believe the Graming to be very accurate.
 
Mad old tory said:
Ah I see. Some of the HRMs use your pulse etc to measure calories which I guess would be more accurate.
Click to expand...

There appears to be a bit of confusion about how Garmin do this. From what I've read, most initially assume that it was based upon heart rate, but the exaggerated results are leading people to think that it could be done on clv101 said.

I really, would like this to work as it looks like the perfect tool for me as a geeky runner who like to be able to measure and analyse performance, but the feedback I've read worries me.

I might just buy one and see how it goes. If it doens't work then I'll chuck it on ebay.
 
PaulStat said:
I'm interested can people tell my fitness from the following

.....

I ran 3.74 miles in 36m30s, had an average HR of 167bpm max of 178bpm etc. etc.
Click to expand...

I think you'd need more info that that e.g. intensity of exercise (you could've been running up a mountain for all we know), recovery time (e.g HR after a few minutes afterwards), your true max HR, yadda yadda yadda.
 
firstborn said:
1) not specific to the Garmin 305, an issue with all GPS devices
Click to expand...

I know it's not specific to this unit, but if the unit is supposed to be tracking how far you've run in order to make various calculations against it then I'd want it to be as accurate as possible.

firstborn said:
2) who cares
Click to expand...

I do and I'm sure a lot of other people do to. My diet is integral to my fitness and so I want to have a rough idea of how many calories I'm burning as well as how many I'm taking in. Again, if the unit offers to estimate this then I'd like to know it was to a reasonable decree of accuracy.

firstborn said:
3) only lost signal once in two years and that was next to a 20 foot high wall and surrounded by lots of densely packed trees.
Click to expand...

Excellent, as with most things, the other posts I've read tend to only come from people who have problems, so it's good to hear positive comments from those who have had good experiences.

firstborn said:
Based on other methods of measuring routes, times recorded, its consistency I believe the Graming to be very accurate.
Click to expand...

That's the thing. I already use a heart-rate monitor when running and I plan my routes with walkjogrun.com so I'm wondering if the additional accuracy provide by this unit would justify the £130 cost.
 
firstborn said:
I think you'd need more info that that e.g. intensity of exercise (you could've been running up a mountain for all we know), recovery time (e.g HR after a few minutes afterwards), your true max HR, yadda yadda yadda.
Click to expand...

True max 195, I included the elevation for you ;)

And I kind of stopped recording data as soon as I finished so I don't have recovery :(
 
I've had mine for a while now, but haven't used it recently. As I'm looking to get back into running though I think I'll reinstall the software and have a play ;).
 
PaulStat said:
True max 195, I included the elevation for you ;)

And I kind of stopped recording data as soon as I finished so I don't have recovery :(
Click to expand...

Ah, so you did, it's my age - I don't see very well these days :p

After most of my moderate to hard runs I'm looking for my HR to be below 100 within a few of minutes, whilst stretching off. I think recovery is generally a good indication of fitness (I may be wrong though), a quick google & wikipedia suggests a drop of 20 beats per minute after exercise for the average person. Whatever average means......
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom