If you don’t care about the swim function, is there anything (useful) the 910 has that the 610 doesn’t have?
battery life?
No multisport function like the 310XT, 300 or 910XT. so you can’t capture the swim/bike/run parts in a single file. I actually quite liked this in my forerunner 305 days…
A big thing for me though is no power meter compatiblity… does that matter to you? only the cycling models or the XT models include this i think.
I’ve always found the DCRainmaker reviews pretty good:
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2011/04/garmin-forerunner-610-in-depth-review.html
Waterproof is key
.
I would go 310 over 610. There isn’t much of a difference between 910 and 310 other than swimming capabilities. Also, it is supposed to be a bit more durable I believe. You should be able to find some good deals on the 310 though.
I would go 310 over 610. There isn’t much of a difference between 910 and 310 other than swimming capabilities. Also, it is supposed to be a bit more durable I believe. You should be able to find some good deals on the 310 though.
It’s also a fair amount smaller. The 310 is also not getting the new bike metrics (the NP, IF, TSS stuff).
True, I really don’t really see the benefit to those metrics until post-race analysis, though. Apparently it does make a difference to a lot of people though.
If you don’t care about the swim function, is there anything (useful) the 910 has that the 610 doesn’t have?
Related but similar question . . . if you don’t care about a fancy touchscreen, is there any real advantage of the 610 over the 410? I guess the wet bezel problem wouldn’t be an issue, but I’ve never thought that was too difficult to manage. The 610 seems unnecessarily complex to me, and when I played with one I did not like the way the touchscreen worked. I thought it would be too difficult to operate while running (I was having enough trouble doing it standing still and focusing on it). It also has a couple less hours battery life than the 410 and costs a lot more.
Related but similar question . . . if you don’t care about a fancy touchscreen, is there any real advantage of the 610 over the 410? I guess the wet bezel problem wouldn’t be an issue, but I’ve never thought that was too difficult to manage. The 610 seems unnecessarily complex to me, and when I played with one I did not like the way the touchscreen worked. I thought it would be too difficult to operate while running (I was having enough trouble doing it standing still and focusing on it). It also has a couple less hours battery life than the 410 and costs a lot more.
if it makes your decision easier- the 410cx is on sale at WalMart right now for $159. And that’s with the HR monitor. a steal!
I never ever needed to use the touch screen while running with the 610. It is light years better than the 410. The touch screen takes some “figuring out,” however; it is not like a phone…requires a more determined touch.
910: better battery life, normal buttons, same weight, no touch screen, water proof and better resale value.
the 610 fails IMO, it doesnt really add anything to the line up.
its really about the 910/310xt vs the 210.
910: better battery life, normal buttons, same weight, no touch screen, water proof and better resale value.
the 610 fails IMO, it doesnt really add anything to the line up.
its really about the 910/310xt vs the 210.
The 610 is great if you’re primarily a runner, whereas the FR410 is a solid PITA (touch bezel). Touch screen on FR610 is fine, whereas I’d purposefully kill the FR405/FR410 if I had to use it day to day. Over the FR210, the FR610 has a customizable screen, whereas the FR210 isn’t really customizable.
Agree above though, for most, the choices really come down to:
A) FR310XT or FR910XT - for triathlete. If you want swim, get FR910XT. If you don’t care about swim (butonce you use it, you’ll love it in the pool), then FR310XT.
B) FR310XT vs FR210 - for those not caring about swim. For 95% of runners, the FR210 will be perfectly fine. FR210 is waterproof for rain, not for laps though. Can do basic interval workouts (warmup, rest/work interval setting, cooldown), but not anything super complex (i.e. multi-main sets). Though even for mine, I just press lap as I go along.
C) FR210 vs Timex Run Trainer: The FR210 is cleaner/smaller, but the TRT has far more features.
To:If you don’t care about swim (butonce you use it, you’ll love it in the pool), …quit teasing since we have to wait!
.
Do either (or both) pick up an ANT signal from a power tap hub? That something to consider if you train/race with power.
I would go 310 over 610. There isn’t much of a difference between 910 and 310 other than swimming capabilities. Also, it is supposed to be a bit more durable I believe. You should be able to find some good deals on the 310 though.
It’s also a fair amount smaller. The 310 is also not getting the new bike metrics (the NP, IF, TSS stuff).
The press release i read from garmin said the 310 would be getting the metrics. It was the 705 which would not be…
For 95% of runners, the FR210 will be perfectly fine.
Would love to give the FR210 a try, but no interval time is a deal breaker for me. I find it strange that they excluded that, seems like an important feature for anyone that does intervals by time.
I would go 310 over 610. There isn’t much of a difference between 910 and 310 other than swimming capabilities. Also, it is supposed to be a bit more durable I believe. You should be able to find some good deals on the 310 though.
It’s also a fair amount smaller. The 310 is also not getting the new bike metrics (the NP, IF, TSS stuff).
The press release i read from garmin said the 310 would be getting the metrics. It was the 705 which would not be…
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2011/11/garmin-decides-not-to-add-leftright.html
i stand corrected and that is a real shame!
I actually find the metrics, well NP and TSS really helpful so i’m glad I have updated to a 800 recently!