Revision as of 13:23, 7 July 2012

A good running watch can provide valuable information while you run, as well as automating your training log.

1 Summary

I would recommend…

• Garmin 310XT is the best for nearly every runner.
• Garmin 610 if you want something smaller and don't need much battery life.
• Polar RS800CX if you need a long (20+ hours) battery life
• Garmin 305 can sometimes be found cheap, but it's becoming rather rare these days. The 205 is sometimes even cheaper if you can find one.

2 What to look for

There are several features to consider when looking for a runners watch.

• GPS provides an easy measure of how far you've run, which is critical for your training. While it is possible to map out a run afterwards, this tends to be tedious and is typically less accurate than GPS.
  • GPS is easy to use and accurate enough for most running, but it is not accurate enough for things like interval training.
  • The errors in GPS average out over a run, but they cause a problem when trying to display current pace.
• A footpod can be used to provide Cadence and in some watches it can also provide pace and distance. Unlike GPS, footpods need to be calibrated to provide accurate pace/distance.
• A barometer will measure the atmospheric pressure and give you altitude. This is more accurate than GPS, but will require calibration to adjust for weather related pressure changes.
• Heart Rate is important information when training, though it is important to understand the limitations of heart rate based training. Having a Heart Rate Monitor that will record your heart rate is particularly valuable for evaluating your training. The heart rate strap that goes across your chest can be intrusive and sometimes can chafe. Polar heart rate monitoring is far better than the Garmin equivalent.
• The ability to record your workout and store it in a training log such as Dailymile or SportTracks is vital. All of the recommended watches here have that ability. I'd strongly advise even a new runner to store their data so that they can look back over the months and years to understand their progress.

3 The best - Garmin 310XT

While not perfect, the best watch for most runners is currently the Garmin 310XT. It is available as the 310XT 'Fitness Monitor' without the Heart Rate Monitor for $50 less.

Garmin 310XT

3.1 Pros

• The 310XT is one of the most advanced watches available, but is no harder for a beginner to use than most alternatives.
• The killer feature is the ability to use the optional footpod to display your current pace while using GPS for overall pace, distance and route. Only the 310XT and Garmin 610 can do this.
• The GPS is more accurate than earlier watches, and has a faster startup time. (It uses the SiRFstar III with Instafix, one of the latest GPS chipsets)
• The housing is fully waterproof (to 50m/160ft), so running in the rain is no problem.
• Connection to a PC is wireless, using a USB adapter. This is less hassle than any of the other options I've tried.
• The display is big enough to show four readings. I often display current pace, average pace for the current lap, average pace for the run and either heart rate or distance.
• You can upload courses and display them. This is great when running somewhere unfamiliar.
• There are several optional extras for the 310XT, including the already mentioned footpod and heart rate strap. For cyclists there is also a speed/cadence sensor and it works with various power sensors.
• The vibration alert works nicely. I often run with the 310XT set to record a lap every mile, and it will vibrate as well as beep.

3.2 Cons

• The biggest downside for most people is the price. The watch without any accessories is $250, though you can sometimes get it a little cheaper (Black Friday). However, many of the alternatives are even more expensive.
• Some people find the 310XT to be rather large, and it is much larger than a normal watch.
• The battery life is good for about 16-20 hours, which is enough for most people. Ultrarunners doing 100 mile or longer races will find this a problem.
  • For 24 hour races where the GPS track is not important, you can extend the battery life by turning off the GPS receiver and use the footpod. After 12 hours of running I still had 85% of the battery left.
• The heart rate monitoring is not as reliable as the Polar systems, though I'm told a new strap is coming that improves this. I find that the Garmin heart rate strap give bad readings far too often, even with a conductive gel. There's nothing more annoying than seeing your heart rate way too high when you're running and having to joggle the strap to get it working again.

4 Sometimes Cheaper - Garmin 305/205

These watches are the predecessors to the 310XT and are quite similar in a number of ways. The 305 has a few extra features, such as the heart rate monitor and support for a footpod.

Garmin 305 with 205 on the right

4.1 Pros

• At one time the 205 could often be found for under $100, and 305 for under $130, but it's now hard to find. When I checked, the 305 was more expensive than the 310XT (305 at Amazon.com.)
• Usability, display size, heart rate monitoring (305) and course display are similar to the 310XT.

4.2 Cons

• The battery life is quite a bit shorter than the 310XT (6-10 hours), though still good enough for many runners.
• The 305 can use a footpod for cadence and for when satellite reception is lost, but can't display current pace from the footpod.
• The GPS is not as accurate or as fast as the 310XT.
• They're not fully waterproof, but I never had a problem with my 205 in the rain.

5 Smaller – Garmin 610

The Garmin 610 is a new watch from Garmin that is smaller, but overcomes many of the issues seen in the 4xx range (see below).

Garmin 610

5.1 Pros

• Smaller than the 310XT/305/205 and closer to the size of a traditional watch.
• The touchscreen interface works with gloves and in the rain, unlike most touchscreens found on phones or media players.
• Good GPS accuracy (uses the SiRF SiRFstarIV with the Instant Fix II)

5.2 Cons

• The battery life is rather short. It is claimed to provide 8 hours, but based on experience with other Garmin devices, the actual live may be quite a bit less. This is likely to cause an issue for slower marathon runners or ultrarunners.
• The price is quite high, listing at $350 or $400 including the heart rate monitor.
• Not the range of accessories that the 310XT has, such as power meter for cycling.
• No display of course maps.

6 Longer Battery – Polar RS800CX

Polar RS800CX

I used Polar systems for many years and their quality is great. However, I find the convenience of the Garmin GPS systems to be superior and I'd only recommend the RS800CX if battery life is of paramount importance.

6.1 Pros

• The battery life of the RS800CX is measured in months not hours.
• Heart rate monitoring is far better than with Garmin. The RS800CX will even record each individual heart beat for analyzing beat to beat variation, though it's unlikely anyone will ever make use of that feature.
• The RS800CX is the size of a conventional watch, and because of the long battery life, it can be used as one.
• Includes a barometer for altitude (GPS has very poor accuracy for altitude).
• Fully waterproof.

6.2 Cons

• It's Expensive at around $370.
• While the RS800CX can support GPS, it requires an add-on box you strap to your arm, which is a rather crappy solution.
• There is no display of course maps

The rather clunky GPS and arm band

7 Not Recommended - Garmin 405/405CX/410

The Garmin 4xx series watches use a touch sensitive bezel which does not work well with gloves or when wet. The Garmin 410 has an 'improved bezel', but there are still problems. I also see more people struggling at the start of marathons with the 4xx watches than all the other devices combined.

8 Not Recommended - Nike+ Sportwatch

There is a lot to like about the Nike+ Sportwatch, but it has one weakness that I believe is unacceptable. The software for the Nike+ does not allow you to use the data from your runs in anything other than the Nike web site. A training log is important, and while beginners may not need one, buying a watch that prevents you from accessing your data in the future is too limiting. If you're still interested, have a read of DC Rainmaker's review