I think this is a similar question to the multi-device vs. 920 debate, but I was curious if anyone has any experience in using a combo like the Forerunner 10/Edge 500 vs. using the 620 only? I’m not going to be using a power meter anytime soon and can’t really justify the expense of a 920 right now, so I’m curious to know if the combo or standalone 620 would be adequate?
It seems as though the cycling update to the 620 makes it a capable watch in that arena, but obviously nothing compared to the 500. But the 620 obviously outperforms the FR10 in the running category, so I’m torn. I could get the FR10/Edge and 620 for about the same price between the two, so price isn’t that much of an issue.
i think for most purposes the only real difference is in the form factor - the edges has a nice shape and mount for on the bike whereas the watches even if you use the QR mount are not quite so nice on the bike. if you’re happy with the watch style then the 620 will do very nicely for the common bike uses and be better for running so is the way to go with added benefit of only having 1 device to learn to use.
personally i’m thinking at this stage i’ll end up with 2 devices as i don’t like the added bulk/poor security of the watch QR nor the watch strap bike mounts.
No HR for FR10 was the deal breaker for me. Other than that, I only care about distance and lap pace so it would have been a nice option.
I think this is a similar question to the multi-device vs. 920 debate, but I was curious if anyone has any experience in using a combo like the Forerunner 10/Edge 500 vs. using the 620 only? I’m not going to be using a power meter anytime soon and can’t really justify the expense of a 920 right now, so I’m curious to know if the combo or standalone 620 would be adequate?
It seems as though the cycling update to the 620 makes it a capable watch in that arena, but obviously nothing compared to the 500. But the 620 obviously outperforms the FR10 in the running category, so I’m torn. I could get the FR10/Edge and 620 for about the same price between the two, so price isn’t that much of an issue.
If you’re not going the powermeter route (why aren’t you?) then I think the 910 is enough. This is what I used and I just kept an eye on HR and cadence (kept the watch on my wrist even). Since I’ve recently gone the PM route, however, I feel that I want it on my handlebars, and that the four fields just aren’t enough so I’m looking into getting an Edge.
Less fuss for running. If you know your pace and zones, I think less hardware is more when it comes to running and I nowadays only need pace, time and distance.
Caveat:
I would not recommend the FR10 for an athlete who tries to figure out/establish his zones/pace for run training.
I admit that I sometimes miss having heart-rate (to see on easy runs how much recovery I have/need…).
I might go to a 220 on the future.
But for running, less watch is more for me.
Can’t beat the size, simplicity and price of that watch (and yes, I wear the women’s model in black).
Go with the fr15 then. Hr now
I use the combo you mentioned.
Less fuss for running. If you know your pace and zones, I think less hardware is more when it comes to running and I nowadays only need pace, time and distance.
Caveat:
I would not recommend the FR10 for an athlete who tries to figure out/establish his zones/pace for run training.
I admit that I sometimes miss having heart-rate (to see on easy runs how much recovery I have/need…).
I might go to a 220 on the future.
But for running, less watch is more for me.
Can’t beat the size, simplicity and price of that watch (and yes, I wear the women’s model in black).
I have been using the fr620 for both bike and run (while my 920xt arrives this week… yay)
Works fine for me… With the exception that I have the new cadence/speed sensor from garmin (that is two separate units place of one). The fr620 only pairs with one. So I get cadence or speed but not both. Cycling outside with gps ain’t a problem (because I use GPS for speed so I pair with the cadence). But on the indoor trainer I need to choose one.
Presumably the old speed/cadence unit that is not separate would solve this
I think it depends how much you are likely to use the advanced features on the 620, the intervals, virtual partner and the like. If you do the 620 might be good, if you don’t then you’ll be far better off with a 10/15 and a 500. As you say the 620 would be adequate at best for the bike and the 500 is superb - it does all I need it to and I’d replace mine with another if I had to rather than buy a 510
Currently I’ve got a 310 and use it for running and races with a 500 on the bike and a swim in the pool. IMO the ease of using the right tool for the right job far outweighs buying one device to do it all. I know the newer multisport devices are getting smaller (as is the 620 line) but I don’t really use the features that make it cost so much so when my 310 bites the dust I’m fully intending to replace it with a FR15 or the like. Small, simple and does all I need it to. Should be able to use it for races as well in non GPS mode to keep a track of total time and turning the GPS on for the run.