Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [mcalista] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mcalista wrote:
jaretj wrote:
The battery life on the 945 isn't better than the 935


From Garmin's specs:

935 with GPS: 24 hours
945 with GPS (no music): 36 hours
945 with GPS and music: 10 hours

I know I am old school, but personally I do like to do my research before posting. Others prefer anecdotes.

Ok boomer.

I prefer to look at testing and commentary from real life users, not regurgitate marketing copy. But I'm old school. (Wow I sound as condescending as you!)

All the many long term comments about battery life on the dcrainmaker in depth review indicate that the battery life is worse on the 945, and while not directly relevant to the conversation, the GPS is less accurate than the 935.

As an aside, I haven't personally needed maps or music or anything on my watch. I don't think I've gone on a run without my phone in many years, and the phone seems to fulfill these needs. So for me it isn't worth the battery life hit that using those things might bring.

Back to the topic, I've been very happy with my 935 for a few years now and keep wanting a reason to upgrade to the newest cool thing, but the 945 just isn't it. At the moment I would go with the 935 personally.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [concededpenguin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
First hand experience:

GPS is not less accurate
Battery life is nearly the same as the 935 for day to day usage while using the same features, not better.
The longest workout I've done on my 945 is about 8 hours. I don't remember the final charge level afterwards.
I've never run the watch all the way down on a workout and my longest races are 5.5-6 hours.

IntenseOne in post 13 makes some good observations
Last edited by: jaretj: May 11, 20 7:58
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [concededpenguin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
concededpenguin wrote:
mcalista wrote:
jaretj wrote:
The battery life on the 945 isn't better than the 935


From Garmin's specs:

935 with GPS: 24 hours
945 with GPS (no music): 36 hours
945 with GPS and music: 10 hours

I know I am old school, but personally I do like to do my research before posting. Others prefer anecdotes.


Ok boomer.

I prefer to look at testing and commentary from real life users, not regurgitate marketing copy. But I'm old school. (Wow I sound as condescending as you!)

All the many long term comments about battery life on the dcrainmaker in depth review indicate that the battery life is worse on the 945, and while not directly relevant to the conversation, the GPS is less accurate than the 935.

As an aside, I haven't personally needed maps or music or anything on my watch. I don't think I've gone on a run without my phone in many years, and the phone seems to fulfill these needs. So for me it isn't worth the battery life hit that using those things might bring.

Back to the topic, I've been very happy with my 935 for a few years now and keep wanting a reason to upgrade to the newest cool thing, but the 945 just isn't it. At the moment I would go with the 935 personally.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [klorene] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm sure many others have commented and provided insight on the similarities and differences between 935 and 945, so I won't; whichever watch you decide on it'll be worth your money because they're both great products. Personally, I have the 935 and I have no reason to upgrade to 945.

I do want to recommend the Quick Release Kit to go along with your watch purchase (link: https://buy.garmin.com/...US/p/pn/010-11251-0S), because this is super convenient to have especially during races:
Once out of the water and into transition 1, just unclip the watch from wrist, clip it on the bike and ride, unclip from bike and clip onto wrist again. Boom, boom, boom, easy! No need to have more than one GPS unit during the race.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [runbrassica] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
runbrassica wrote:
I do want to recommend the Quick Release Kit to go along with your watch purchase (link: https://buy.garmin.com/...US/p/pn/010-11251-0S), because this is super convenient to have especially during races:
Once out of the water and into transition 1, just unclip the watch from wrist, clip it on the bike and ride, unclip from bike and clip onto wrist again. Boom, boom, boom, easy! No need to have more than one GPS unit during the race.

I get it...if I had to only have one device with me but I'd much rather have the dedicated unit on my bike to look at. Much bigger screen and data fields.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [klorene] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
945 everyday.

You’re getting a lot of answers from owners of 935 whom answer the question from the point of view of upgrading from a 935 to 945. I agree with them, I wouldn’t upgrade.

However if you own neither, buy the 945. I’m super impressed with Garmin’s recent trend of adding new features. The addition to add the ability to broadcast HR via Bluetooth literally saved me cash. I was about to buy a new strap to allow me to broadcast HR to trainerroad. No need now as the 945 does it (and yes I find the optical HR on the 945 super accurate).

When the 955 comes out you’ll only be one generation behind and not needing to upgrade. Get 935 and you’ll soon be two generations behind.

Dan
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [DanCT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The 955 is coming out next month










Just kidding :)
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [klorene] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes it does. You don't see your HR while your swimming. The swim HR strap stores HR data while you swim and when you get out of the water it uploads it to your 935
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [Scottxs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The 935 requires the swim HR strap. The 945 can give you swim HR without an external device.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [exxxviii] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
How is that wrist HR actually working in water?
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [Feehliks] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Feehliks wrote:
How is that wrist HR actually working in water?

I have been fortunate enough to get in a handful of pool swims, and a handful of open water swims with it, and while I do not have a second watch to compare it with, it looks correct, and has been consistent. I have not done anything special, just press start for the swim, and then swim! HR seems right when I look, and the data on Garmin Connect looks correct. All that said, I do not see it influencing my swim training :-)
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [Feehliks] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ditto above. I cannot compare to an external device (like an HRM Swim). But, the numbers and consistency seem spot on-- exactly what I would have expected based on RPE. It matches what my Apple Watch produced.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [Feehliks] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Fine for me too. Although I generally only look after the event anyway, so biggest benefit is not having to wear a chest strap whilst swimming.

Dan
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [DanCT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've worn the Garmin Swim HRM and get similar number with the wrist HRM on the 945.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [klorene] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've had both. In my experience, the battery on the 945 is worse than in the 935 and I do not use music and the pulse oximeter feature is off (because it makes the battery drain even faster). GPS tracking on the 945 was definitely worse in the beginning because of the new chipset, but it got better in the past few months and I don't have much to complain about it (I did a lot when I first bought it). I still use an external HR strap because it's way more accurate than optical HR sensors, so I don't really care about it. Long story short: I used to LOVE my 935. It was the best watch I ever owned. Now the 945, I don't love it, I just like it. Shrug. It's more expensive and the two biggest new features (music + pulse oximeter) are totally useless for me. The reason why I'm on the 945 is because I sold my 935 when I went back home (Brazil) for the same price of a new one and I used my BCBS 30% discount to buy the 945.

IMHO, the 935 lower price + external HR strap is the perfect combination.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [DanCT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DanCT wrote:
945 everyday.

You’re getting a lot of answers from owners of 935 whom answer the question from the point of view of upgrading from a 935 to 945. I agree with them, I wouldn’t upgrade.

However if you own neither, buy the 945. I’m super impressed with Garmin’s recent trend of adding new features. The addition to add the ability to broadcast HR via Bluetooth literally saved me cash. I was about to buy a new strap to allow me to broadcast HR to trainerroad. No need now as the 945 does it (and yes I find the optical HR on the 945 super accurate).

When the 955 comes out you’ll only be one generation behind and not needing to upgrade. Get 935 and you’ll soon be two generations behind.

Dan

100%. All the replies tearing down the 945 are people trying to justify not upgrading, which is fine. I got tired of my Fenix 5's weight so I decided to look into 735/745/935/945 and landed on the 945 that I scored for a nice price used. Fenix 5 was basically the same watch feature wise as the 735 and it's a pretty decent upgrade going to the 945. Only spent ~$70 to upgrade so I'd consider it money well spent.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [klorene] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've reviewed and used both watches and agree with the group that the 935 does everything you NEED. I also feel like the 935 has better battery life (marketing spec sheet be damned)

I'd still probably spring for the 945 unless you can find a very compelling deal on the 935. (sub $300) There's an issue with the temperature gauge breaking on the 935 which in turn breaks the altimeter. I think it's fixed on the 945.

I also noticed that there's a few father's day sales going on for most of the Garmin gear so you should be able to get the 945 for $100 off or so.

YouTube
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin 935 v 945 [mlegrand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote Reply

Prev Next