Customer Reviews:
 Better than I expected! August 23, 2008
3 out of 4 found this review helpful
If you are like me..you have been researching this product obsessively. I am here to tell you to BUY the 405! I know there are many reviews about the 405 that aren't very good...but here's something that everybody has forgotten to mention: This unit has wireless technology, which means it can be updated. So, yes, there are some quirks Garmin is still working on, BUT they can and have been addressed with the available updates. I LOVE my 405! Like anything you purchase..sometimes things don't work correctly..return it and try again! I really like the Garmin Connect, a feature I didn't think I'd even use. The 405 is soo..much more comfortable to wear than the 305 and the good ole' 101! I am excited to see just how far Garmin will take the 405, Garmin Connect and it's upgrades! The Forerunner just keeps getting better!
 Comparison: Garmin Forerunner 405 vs. Suunto X9i August 20, 2008
8 out of 10 found this review helpful
After two weeks of side-by-side usage, I've concluded that these watches are targeted at very different markets. Furthermore, in many respects, it seems like neither watch is totally ready for prime-time. Both have nice feature sets, but they each seem to be lacking some very important features to make them truly useful across several sports. The Suunto X9i seems to be targeted and more useful to the climbing crowd, whereas the Garmin Forerunner 405 seems targeted at the fitness/jogging crowd. Neither has the complete feature set that the above-average hiker/trail runner/mountain biker needs. Thus, if you purchase either, you have to accept the compromises inherit in one or the other.
If I was pressed to recommend one over the other, I very hesitantly lean towards the Garmin Forerunner 405 due to smaller size, better battery life, faster GPS synch, slightly better navigation screen and of course, lower price. I'm hesitant because of several important cons which I elaborate on below.
STATS:
Battery Life (w/ GPS): 4.5hr (X9i) vs. 8hr (405)
Battery Life (w/o GPS): 16d. (X9i) vs. 12d. (405)
Size: X9i is larger in every dimension than 405
Weight: 74g (X9i) vs. 60g (405)
Water Resistence: 100m (X9i) vs. 3m (405)
Heart Rate Monitor: No (X9i) vs. Yes (405)
Outside Temperature: Yes(X9i) vs. No (405)
CONS: Garmin Forerunner 405
1) Does not display raw latitude/longitude position on standard screen. You can save a waypoint, which they call "location", and then edit that point to see the latitude/longitude (displayed in non-decimal format).
2) Does not have On/Off button to save battery-life.
3) Comes with very basic software with limited maps. Cannot export tracks into GPX format.
4) Difficult to upload waypoints for future route.
5) Limited to WGS84 map datum (limits international usage of tracks)
PROS: Garmin Forerunner 405
1) Easy to use menu system.
2) Fast GPS satellite synching.
3) Can connect to heart rate monitor.
4) If you can get waypoints loaded, there is a nice screen that shows the direction/distance to the selected waypoint.
5) Great fitness monitoring screens and many are customizable.
CONS: Sunnto X9i
1) Large physical size.
2) Poor battery life with GPS on.
3) Slow GPS satellite synching.
4) Difficult to use and complex menu system with 5 buttons.
5) Does not have On/Off button to save battery-life.
6) GPS tracks, which they call "logs", tend to have jumps/errors when GPS drops out, which is often.
7) Comes with very basic software with no maps.
8) No screen to show direction to a selected waypoint.
9) Limited to WGS84 map datum (limits international usage of tracks)
10) Suggested Retail Price is 25% more than the Garmin 405.
PROS: Suunto X9i
1) Does display raw latitude/longitude position on Position screen, but in non-decimal format.
2) Does have temperature feature.
Good but very fragile August 20, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
I have been using the garmin mainly for running, for a month. I must say that it provides accurate information, such as distance, heart rate, and it is very easy to download workouts from the PC, and upload information from the watch to the computer.
The drawbacks are related to the impossibility to receive water, which has created problems with the watch basically while running in a normally rainy day. I have also experienced problems when running with long sleeve, since it touches the watch and it changes the screen.
I prefer it over my previous Polar S410, especially for the ease to program workouts and donwload information to the computer. The major drawback is not be able to use it to go swimming, or even at rainy days.
 A Terrible Disappointment - Stick with the 305 August 19, 2008
92 out of 96 found this review helpful
As a long-time user and fan of the Garmin 305, the Garmin 405 was a product I was looking forward to for months as I was excited to see the next generation of the 305 I have enjoyed so much.
I could not be more disappointed with the result.
The Garmin 405 is a classic example of a good product concept and clever design gone horribly wrong as the Garmin team focused on form (looks) clearly beat out the folks worried about function. The watch looks fine (great for a HRM/GPS watch, so so for an everyday watch) but in terms of actual purpose-built functionality, it is terrible. There are multiple reasons for this which I will outline below.
(1) Useless when wet (yes, that includes sweat). The fact that you cannot toggle between screens or do anything with the bezel while the device is wet should have caused the designers to toss out this novel touch sensitive concept and stick with what works. Instead, they decided to go with a neat design concept that works great when the salesperson is showing it to you at the store, but will provide endless hours of frustration when you are out running and just want to see your heart rate. This is my first bullet point because it is the best example of the type of design failures that make this a terrible device.
(2) Use of built in functions/screens - The makers carried over the capabilites of the Garmin 305 and added a virtual training partner functionality, but the display can only show three fields at once and the fields themselves are too small for good viewing while in motion (ie running). Cycling between the displays is easy to do while sitting on a couch, even fun when you run your finger along the bezel, but when you are out running you quickly realize that it is very difficult to accomplish anything with the device. With the 305, if you wanted to change fields on the fly, you could manage to do it while keeping a reasonable pace. With the 405, you need to press buttons and run your finger along the bezel to switch fields - again, great on a couch, nearly impossible on a run.
(3) GPS Accuracy. I have traded messages with people who disagree, and I will say that I sometimes have great accuracy, but have also had multiple experiences where the accuracy of this device is off by so much as to make the pace and distance benefits of a GPS useless. The best example is running a measured mile with typical neighborhood street tree coverage and having the device show I went a total of 0.70 miles (the 305 on the same stretch showed 1.01). I have had this happen multiple times in various locations and therefore have stopped using the watch in races when I want to know my true pace and distance (I am using the 305 again).
(4) Silly things that might (or might not) drive you crazy - There are two buttons on the Garmin 405 - both on the right side of the face as you look at it. These buttons perform some useful functions, including locking the bezel so that you can wear the device in a non-GPS mode and avoid running down the battery needlessly while still using the device as a watch. The problem is that if, like me, you actually own a daily wear watch and when you travel you prefer to put the 405 in your bag or suitcase, having the two buttons on the same side means that if they press against anything they will unlock the bezel and the GPS will start running (or try to). The result will be a dead battery when you pull it out of your bag. It may seem minor, but pulling the 405 out of your bag after you arrive and want to go for a run, only to see it is dead, again and again, is annoying. The positive offset is that the watch actually charges at a pretty decent speed. Oh yes, and when the battery does, in fact, die, you will need to go through all of the into screens again to get it going which will sometimes freeze on you (check message boards for solution to this as some people have posted them).
Overall, this is a terrible product and if you really want to get a GPS enabled running device, I would highly recommend you buy the Garmin 305. It is much cheaper and while it does not look as good, the size will not bother you after a couple of wears and it will work flawlessy for you. I suspect they will eventually correct the failings of the Garmin 405 but until they do it is not a good use of your money.
Works great! August 17, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
This is my first heart rate monitor so I don't really have anything to compare it against. I did a lot of research before deciding upon this unit with the heart rate monitor. I didn't find anything that came close for the price. There are a lot of features so for the less tech savy who want to simply push one button and be done this may not be the unit for you. If features are what you're looking for and aren't against actually reading the manual then this is a fantastic device. It works extremely well even under tree cover, even under bridges for that matter! I've not yet had it loose the GPS signal.
It's really cool to be able to download the GPS data into Google earth with just one click.
I also really like the fairly compact size of the watch. It's small enough to wear as a normal watch and not have people star at you because of this enormous contraption on your arm. I also bought this one because the GPS receiver is built into the watch, no separate unit required!
There are lots of accessories for this unit like a foot pod for running in doors and a bike unit to track your cadence, etc.
I'm very impressed with this unit and highly recommend it unless you want to use it swimming. It's not intended to be submersed in water.
|
