Yes, I have both and I sell neither.

In general, both great units, but the 625x seems to be easier to use on the bike (oddly enough since it is sold by Polar as a predominantly running unit) with the speed read out/pick-up.

The software that comes with the Polar unit is better than Garmin's log software.

For running, the Garmin 305 is nicer in my opinion, but you need to fortify its capabilities with motionbased.com for the best capture and display of data from the unit.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

The features are pretty comparable; you can see other reviews for a
run-down. For triathlon-specific comments, here are my observations:

Advantages of FR305

- Accuracy of running distance. I don't care what Polar (and Nike and
Suunto) say, the pod-based distance measurement just isn't as
accurate as the FR305 (note that the 305 is much more accurate than
the 301 because of the improved GPS reception). Yes, you can
calibrate the pods, but calibration depends on running surface,
tightness of lacing, position of the pod on the shoe, etc.. Change
any of those, and the calibration's off.

- No foot pod needed. With some shoes, particularly with some of the
speed lacing products, attaching the foot pod is problematic. Some
folks also think the foot pod is uncomfortable.

- Bike measurement less trouble-prone. Here you can calibrate the 625
accurately enough, but Polar is notoriously finicky when it comes to
transmission from the speed and cadence sensors to the computer. Some
people find the 625 receives the signals okay if they're in the aero
bars, but not if they're on the drops or hoods. I've haven't found it
to be reliable in any position. Plus, there's the chance that going
over a hard bump could shift the sensor or magnet sufficiently that
they don't pick up each other. (This has happened to me.) With the
305, you can add the optional speed/cadence sensor and get backup
even if the GPS reception falters.


Disadvantages of FR305

- No swimming. Some people stick it under their swim cap, but that
seems uncomfortable, Even then the heart rate monitor won't work
because the Garmin wireless protocol won't transmit through water.
(The 625 works fine in the water, though you may have to cinch the
heart rate strap fairly tight to get a consistent reading.)

- Battery life. Unless you're thinking of Ironman events, this isn't
an issue (so long as you remember to keep the 305 charged). Unless
you're pretty good, though, 10 hours of battery life won't cut it for
an Ironman.

- No dual display. I haven't verified this, but I don't think you can
use both the FR305 and the Edge305 simultaneously and get a heart-
rate reading from both. That's because Garmin uses a wireless
protocol that requires the computer to pair with the heart rate
transmitter. I hope I'm wrong about this though. Why is this useful?
If you're hammering away in the aero position, it can be difficult to
read a watch on your wrist. With the 625, you can pick up an
inexpensive CS100 and mount that on your stem. There it's clearly
visible during your ride, while the 625 continues to also record
heart rate etc. on your wrist.

- No power option. With the 625, you have the option of adding power
sensor. But if you think getting the Polar speed/cadence sensors to
work is a challenge, just wait until you try the power sensor. Some
people have apparently gotten it to work, but plan on hours of
installation time and constant re-adjustments.


Stephen

They don't have a bike mount for the FR305?



Would you suggest just using the FR305 for running and a bike computer for biking?

[reply]They don't have a bike mount for the FR305?[/reply]

Drop by Home Depot on your way home and buy some foam pipe insulation. A five foot strip shouldn't cost more than a couple of bucks. These are essentially cylinders of foam that are slit along their length with glue inserted in the slit. Get one with an inner dimension that matches your handlebars. From the cylinder, cut a strip about an inch wide. Wrap it around your handlebars and then "mount" the watch on top. The glue might not last more than a few months, but you've still got 5 feet less an inch, so it'll definitely last longer than the watch.

tom,

have you tried the garmin 305 in an urban environment? I live in chicago, and the 301 is all sorts of buggy in either tree cover or tall buildings. out in the open, it's great. I'm wondering if it's worth upgrading.