does anyone have an opinion on which is better for running outside and on treadmill? I want to go back a simple device, but also keep up with the data
I went to the 60 after losing my 310. It works great for tracking my s/b/r data. My only complaint is that the text is small when it auto laps, so can be tough to read your mile splits, especially in the dark.
i love the fr60 & it’s simplicity yet effectiveness.
only complaint is you can’t switch sports with one button during a race, but not the end of the world.
You might also look at the Suunto t3d with the foot pod. Accurate, simple, and can be worn everyday.
I just switched from the Suunto T6C to the Garmin 210. And am very happy with the 210. I do not run on treadmills, so I can’t speak to that, but the 210 does have a footpod available.
As far as running outside, the 210 is great. It’s a small watch, but the display is easy to read and the light is a huge upgrade from the Suunto. I really like the autolap and interval features on the 210. But 210 is definitely not a multi-sport watch, you cannot swim with it, and it has no great bike features.
Its just a good GPS running watch. I’ve run with it for a month now, and would highly recommend it.
the 210 isnt really worth the money for what it gives you.
id compare the 110 to the fr 60. for most people the 110 is going to be the best option with the least amount of frustration. i prefer the fr60 even though i have to deal with the footpod. even with the inaccuracy i like having the current pace, after the first mile i can tell how fast +/- x minus seconds its off. precision over accuracy!
Sorry, I’m late to the game - been crazy busy last few days.
FR60: Awesome watch - geek-driven, tons of detail, works in the pool…but…not GPS.
FR210: Awesome watch- simplicity driven, less immediate detail, dies in the pool…but…with GPS.
It’s really a balance.
With the FR210 you get a dumbed down interface on your actual run - but the data post-workout is identical to the FR60 for running, and ANT+ scales. For cycling, the FR60 offers cadence/speed support, as well as ANT+ Gym equipment for wattage support that way - which the FR210 doesn’t do. So it’s a runners watch.
I’ve found that the FR210 meets about 80-90% of my weekly running needs. I find where it lacks is the ability to setup complex intervals. While the FR210 does do basic intervals (Warmup, Set times X, Cooldown), it can’t handle stuff like: Warmup at XYZ for 10 minutes, then build 3x5m, then repeat 5 sets at XYZ, and then do cooldown part 1, and then cooldown part 2. For that, you need the FR60 (or better yet, the 310XT). You can of course manually just hit lap - which is what I usually do, but the lack of ‘Lap time’ on the FR210 makes it more difficult.
I’ve said that for 95% of runners, the FR210 is all they need. It’s the 5% that tends to hangout here though. For that, if you want a GPS watch that looks like a regular - the FR210 is still your best bet. If you want a non-GPS watch, the FR60 is awesome an accurate. If you want the best of everything…the FR310XT (or FR305 if ya wanna save money).
Ok…enough spewing.
FR60 Review
FR210 Review ← Uber-fresh, just from yesterday, it’s still steaming.