Customer Reviews:
 Very nice device September 5, 2008
1 out of 3 found this review helpful
I used to have the Forerunner 305. This is too much better. You can use it as watch (not to go to a formal dine) that was a huge con for the other forerunners. I raced 10k last weekend I it was very accurate, even the instant pace, that was not very good in the previous models. Too much better than Suunto X9i that is worthless.
The google interface and garmin connect are cool if you like to review your data in different forms.
If you want track calories, go to polar, garmin program still shows values too low, basically because they aimed top runners (olympic type) and the calories is related to speed. I am 10 km/h runners that brings a low quantity of calories spent after a 10 k run.
The bracelet also is not the most confortable, but if you think that it is a GPS, Heart Monitor and Watch definately this is very well packed.
The imporvement on the firmware also brought it to next to Polar 800 SD in terms of graphics for HR, that it is nice.
I recommend it if you a hi-tec runner...
Excellent, apart from missing Mac support September 4, 2008
I've owned the Garmin Edge 305 and various Polar heart rate monitors. Overall I'm very impressed with the Forerunner 405 - except for the lack of Mac support.
First of all the size of the device surprised me. It's actually fairly small, especially compared with the clunky previous Forerunners. Smaller than my Suunto watch. Second I like the ability to choose different data fields (up to 3) on customized displays. This is like the Edge 305 and much better than the Polar devices. Third the compass proved to be very useful when finding my way out of a mountain biking mess of trails. And fourth of course the GPS giving speed, distance, etc is great for either running or mountain biking.
Disappointments are it's not completely waterproof (crazy in this day and age), and the lack of Mac support.
I got around the Mac support by loading Vista on my Mac through Bootcamp. Needed to do this for my other Garmin products anyway, but Garmin really need to get over this!
Great HRM..... terrible software! September 2, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Well, I've been using this HRM for 2 weeks now, and I wanted to share with you all how great it is.
Since I was an addicted fan of Polar HRMs, I was afraid to change. But this FR 405 proved to be the best HRM I ever trained with.
Although Gramin still has some work to be done:
- The PACE is not accurate out of the box, so you need to go to Garmin's web page and update the HRM's firmware;
- Lack of integration with my MacBook. So I was forced to install parallels and run windows XP in order to use its PC integration;
- Terrible training software and a pain to make the HRM "talk"to the PC....It lacks the appropriate support for installation of ANT drivers.
Still, it's a great HRM, and the ability to see your route on the google earth is awesome.
The touch bezel is also very nice, and despite of what others said, it's very simple to use.
As for the terrible native software, you can replace it with gorgeous Sport Track...It's free and it would accept the data exported from the Garmin's Training Center.
By the way, I use the FR405 for running and I'm currently training for the Amsterdam marathon in October.
 Only good outside August 25, 2008
4 out of 8 found this review helpful
I bought this product. Although impressive, it's only good outside. For instance, if you run on a treadmill, you must buy the speed sensor ($120) to get calories burned. You are out of luck if you take spin class. It will not record calories.
From Garmin Support:
>Thank you for contacting Garmin International. Unfortunately, our
>fitness units calculate calories burned using speed, distance, and time.
>If you're indoors the Forerunner 405 is not able to calculate speed and
>distance. Because the unit has no distance value, it's unable to
>display calories burned. Please let us know if you have any additional
>questions.
>With Best Regards,
>Joe C
This is a deviation for how most heart rate monitors work (Polar, Timex). Most monitors calculate calories based on weight, age, and heart rate. Being able to get calories expended even during the indoor winter months is useful.
Also, there is no way edit workouts results in the software. So, if I do a spin class or run on the treadmill (w/o the speed sensor), I can't alter the uploaded data and enter an estimated distance.
This is different from the Polar software which does allow complete editing of most parameters.
Over all, this is a "cool" monitor. However, if you do alot of indoor training, you'll probably want a different monitor.
UPDATE:
After 6 weeks of use, the touch bezel stopped working. I tried a master reset and the bezel is still not functional. I've contacted Garmin Support for help. I'll update this when I hear something.
good, but overpriced August 25, 2008
2 out of 3 found this review helpful
Its a good product, but for the price it should be great. The battery life needs to be a bit longer (It doesn't live up to the promise on the package). Also, the control scheme needs work to be more intuitive. If you lock the bezel, it beeps at you every minute or two to tell you the bezel is locked. Its pretty annoying.
The software and the ANT stick work well. So does the heart rate monitor. Satellite acquisition is amazing. Fast and accurate. It even locked on in an interior downstairs room of my house.
I recommend waiting for the next generation, which will probably iron out some of the kinks. Or see if you can find one for cheaper than $350, and you'll feel better about the small drawbacks.
|
