I’m a big Garmin guy having long ago ditched my Polar non GPS equipment. I have two Forerunner 305 units and an Edge 305 unit for my bike. I had a chance to pull a favor to get a 310XT but insisted on waiting to get one with a heartrate band.
I’m not impressed with the 310XT. Start with the fact that one with the HR band retails for $400.00. You can get a Forerunner 305 for $164.00 on Amazon today with no tax or shipping. The 310XT unit is even larger than the 305. I heard that but did not believe it myself until I got it. It it actually thicker than the 305 and it looks ridiculous on your wrist like an old time digital watch. The orange highlights do not help. The screen size is the same as the 305 and while it seems to have slightly higher resolution it does not make much difference.
While the form factor does not impact anything out of the water in the water it is a lot of extra drag to be moving with every stroke of your arm. I can’t say that I really felt it but clearly the extra drag is there.
I can also confirm that the 310XT does not accurately measure either speed or distance in the water. I can’t tell you how far off it is because I can’t get the ANT stick to work. Unlike the other units which you could connect to upload data and recharge with one connection we now have to deal with two. Garmin has no idea of why the ANT stick is not working. What a pain.
On the run and bike the 310XT has one trick the 305 does not have which is the vibrating mode. I haven’t decided if I like it or not but I can tell you that it ain’t worth $236.00. Incidentally what the extra $236.00 will buy you is your own Edge 305 which is a much better biking instrument than the 310XT will ever be as you can have six data fields up and actually see them. Not to mention you will not have to take the extra time in T1 to move a 310XT to a bike mount.
Almost forgot multisport mode. Yes, you can now theorectically time yourself everywhere. I often forget to hit start and stop as it is. I’m going to remember now to hit start and then lap and then finish no less than six times in a race? Yeah, sure. At least when I use a separate unit I’m more likely to remember to hit start.
What is most interesting is that Garmin is now using Polar HR straps. Remember those stupid snaps and the elastic that doesn’t last a year? They’re back! While the Garmin strap sometimes did not stay in position and involved more plastic they were clearly a better strap over the long term than the Polar straps they are now using.
To summarize: Since the 310XT is useless in the swim what is the point here? A 305 will cost you at least $264.00 less for the same functionality. Actually better functionality since you don’t have the ANT stick and a separate charger connection. Okay to be fair the batter life may be better on a 310XT but that gain in battery life will be lost because of the bigger pain factor recharging the unit. What was Garmin thinking other than how do I sell more units? Do yourself a favor and if you are inclined to spend the money get a Forerunner and Edge 305 for the same or possibly less money and use them until Garmin comes out with a truly revolutionary upgrade. The 310XT is in its present form is an answer to a question that no one is asking.
i am also a big garmin guy… had a 301 and now currently use a 305 and for the bike an edge 705.
when my 305 dies i’ll get the 301xt no doubt… but after seeing a few posts like yours i am not going to replace the 305 until it dies on me.
just did an ironman and the 705/305 combo was pretty sweet.
however i am also considering getting the FR60 - it is missing a few tricks, but i like the idea of the smaller form of the unit… you can swim with it and use as a regular watch.
The 310xt was never advertised as being capable of measuring swim distance - don’t blame Garmin for not doing your homework (it’s explicitly stated on the webpage and in the manual).
As far as it being a “lot of extra drag in the water”…LOL!
I train and race with the Forerunner 305/405 combination. I’ve been very happy with the results. I see no need for the XT as I can’t imagine wearing that monstrosity in the swim.
Incidently after a few fits and starts I got the ANT stick working for my 405. Once its working it works great. Wish my 305 had the same feature.
“lot of extra drag in the water”
The “lot of extra drag” is when people can’t read. I said “. . . clearly the extra drag is there.” If you’re going to quote me then at least do it accurately.
You forgot one very important aspect…battery life. If you are a long course triathlete, then the 310 is the only one that can go the distance.
I don’t see the point in pointing out that you can’t get any swim info, as I already get all the info I need…2.4miles, how long it took me to do it, then off to T1…Who stops mid swim to see how long/far/fast they have swam?
For me, the 310 is a big step up from the 305 as it fits better, is much more comfortable on the wrist, has better features (lap vibrations, etc) and picks up satellite signals noticeably quicker.
I can also confirm that the 310XT does not accurately measure either speed or distance in the water. I can’t tell you how far off it is because I can’t get the ANT stick to work. Unlike the other units which you could connect to upload data and recharge with one connection we now have to deal with two. Garmin has no idea of why the ANT stick is not working. What a pain.
Try installing the most recent ANT drivers from the Garmin website in Windows Safe Mode.
Almost forgot multisport mode. Yes, you can now theorectically time yourself everywhere. I often forget to hit start and stop as it is. I’m going to remember now to hit start and then lap and then finish no less than six times in a race? Yeah, sure. At least when I use a separate unit I’m more likely to remember to hit start.
How is your forgetfulness (or laziness?) Garmin’s fault? What other way you think there should be to time the events than hitting a button?
I am very happy with mine. I got it week before IMLP. It took me a few days and annoying posts on ST to figure it out, but once I did, it works exactly as advertised. Its a great long course watch, and the mulitsport mode is a breeze to use. Its also really great to toggle between total time and segment time.
For someone (like me) that didnt have a multipsort watch and needed one, its perfect. Glad I had the patience to wait for it to be released.
Basically, the 310XT gives you 2 things that I wanted. The 20 hour battery life and the waterproof-ness. It’s nice that it’s smaller than the 305/205 but that’s not that important to me. I really wish I could afford one for longer tri-s (REALLY would have liked to have had one for an ironman) but as to whether that’s worth the extra money over the 205/305, I suspect for most people the answer is no.
Still if I had the money, I’d buy one in a second.
I ask, because I think the 405 is a total piece of CRAP! The GPS function is a great tool, but the touch bezel is a failure! I bought a watch not an iPod, so please make it functional, Garmin!
During every run, 100% of the time the touch bezel becomes useless the minute it gets any sweat on it and/or while trying to “tap” it with sweaty hands/fingers.
agreed that the swim tracking is pretty awful. In some way it’s amazing that the watch can pickup the satellites so quickly on arm pulls but the path tracing is terrible. Saul Rasin posted a result recently that looked really good! But mine haven’t been close to his. And I swim in the ocean daily.
So the new, soft HR straps are not good? Can you please post some photos?
The 310xt has giant buttons that work in the water. No bezel bs to deal with. Form factor of the 405 is so much better though, so you lose there.
I’m not sure that battery life for a 310xt is actually 20 hours if you are using it. Probably more like 10-12 hours. But if it’s just sitting there without satellite connection it will last for 20 hours.
I just got mine recently and like it. Much better than the 405 on which I could never seem to manage to navigate through the screens while running. It is certainly not any bigger than my 205 and I really do not notice either on my wrist after about 5 seconds. It picks up a signal much faster than the 205 . I like the vibrating alert when I hit the mile marks.
What I miss is that is does not have a field for last lap pace that I have found, kinda sucks as I liked that.
As for the battery life I accidentally left it on all night last night, it worked for my run this am and still had 14 percent when I plugged it in. The 205 would never have managed that.
As for racing it will be awesome to just do the entire race with one watch rather than dicking around with it prior to the run.
Well, I know from personal experience the battery will last at least 12:29:08! Thats as long as I could go two weeks ago in an IM!
I think it will last a lot longer actually, as the charge said about 40% left. So I think it lasts as long as advertised.
As every ST post said, the only swim function that works is the timer. Forget about GPS, distance, and speed. But Garmin does not claim these functions work for swimming, so whats the big deal?
I think this watch is great and I’m glad I got it!
Don’t know how you can be upset over having to hit a button on transitions. How else would a multisport watch know when to take the splits?
The size, to me, has been no issue in the water.
Now the fact that mine froze up for a period of time while in the water was an issue. Called the place I bought it from and they’re shipping me a new one from the “next” batch that supposedly has some fixes to issues.
If you like the heart rate strap from your 305 better than use that one. It should work with the 310. That’s why I ordered one with the monitor.
Overall a great device. And extra points because not everybody has one yet.
Is the normal Garmin HR strap water restitent? Meaning, can I wear it during the swim? Don’t care too much about HR readings, but wanted to see if the OLD strap (not the new one that comes with the 310XT) can go in the water.
I going to be careful with my quotes here, but I’m trusting my copy/paste function works properly I just noticed back in May, your response to the thread titled “Garmin’s response regarding 310XT GPS functionality and ocean swimming.” (http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum.cgi?post=2343150)
“This kind of sucks as one major reason I ordered one is that I have no idea of how far I generally swim what with my zigs zags and current effects. Waterproof with a heart rate band designed to go underwater is good but not the reason I’m spending $400.”
Based on what you knew back in May, and given what you’ve posted here, it begs the question: why DID you spend the $400? Serious question. You knew it was “useless in the swim” (did I quote that one right?) - yet that seems to be your major disappointment. Where else does the 310xt fall short in what you expected vs what it actually does? (Besides having to press the lap button yourself! C’mon!)
