I can’t seem to figure out which would be better the edge 305 or the forerunner 305. I’ve looked at past posts and don’t see anything comparing the two systems.
Is one more accurate or gives better running / cycling functions?
I am buying it primarily for cycling but think it would be nice for my runs as well.
Thanks,
pat
Can you strap the Edge to your wrist like you can the Forerunner? If not, and you want to use it for running, then you might want to go with the Forerunner. The downside of the Forerunner is that it doesn’t have a barometric altimeter. Instead it relies on GPS to measure elevation and consequently the elevation readings of the Forerunner are worthless.
Victor
I don’t know if you can run with an edge. i thought that was only a cycling computer. I have a 305 and I vote for that.
I have the forerunner. I wear it on my wrist for my bike rides, some mount it to the handlebars.
I went with the forerunner because I wanted it mainly for my trail running, but works great on the bike.
I have heard that some have found a way to mount the edge to their wrist for running but it doesn’t work too well for running.
If your looking for a cycle computer, the edge is great, if want one for both running and cycling I’d go with the forerunner.
not much difference in features other than the edge can show more data at once on the larger screen.
The edge 305 and forerunner 305 are pretty much the same, except the forerunner is portable (worn on the wrist) vs the edge which is fixed to your bike.
Some previous post have indicated the elevation accuracy of the forerunner is pretty much useless. The edge 305 might have better elevation tracking, but I don’t know.
The cadence sensor can be used with either the edge or forerunner.
The forerunner is water resistant for approximately 30 minutes, although I have not tried it. So, if you race HIM or shorter tri’s this may be important. I have no idea if the edge is or not. Judging from the size of it in pictures, I would not want to swim with it attached to my arm.
From some of the post yesterday, the Garmin HR transmitter does not work with various power meters. I don’t have a PM so it’s not an issue for me.
I have used my forerunner for almost a year and have not had any problems with it. It has been a good all-around training tool.
We used GPS to navigate the route each day while riding the entire Tour de France course.
I had an Edge. Another guy had a Forerunner. For both units altitudes were remarkably close to the printed altitude on signs every km going up the cols. I didn’t realize they weren’t relying on the same technology.
We would plot out the next day’s route each night, which might include many hundreds of individual route segments to follow along roads and turns. Oddly, the Forerunner had no problem importing these routes for us to then follow, but the Edge would only allow 100 points. So we had to create 2 versions of each route: the detailed one for the Forerunner that was very precise so we knew if we were ever off the course, and a less precise one for the Edges where we only marked turns. This difference between units seemed very odd to me, especially as the Edge is the cycling computer and should be built to do exactly what we were doing: follow routes with hundreds/thousands of points.
I did love the Edge’s ability to show 8 pieces of information at once. Going over the cols I would be locked in on: time, distance, elevation, % grade, HR, speed. The small screen of the Forerunner obviously limits what you can see.
The Edge 305 is the only one of the Garmin (201, 205, 301, 305) that has a barometric altimeter, making for accurate altitude readings.
You can overcome the inaccurate altitude readings of the other Garmin units by uploading your Garmin data to www.motionbased.com and using the altitude correction function. It’s simple, quick, and is free.
The Edge cannot be carried along on a run, it’s designed to be mounted on your bike. The Forerunner is more like a watch, but if you have a small frame (most women), the Forerunner is much too big and bulky for running (in my opinion).
Both the Edge and Forerunner are incredibly accurate for distance readings; I’ve been using the Edge for road riding and mountain biking and it has been excellent even in deep woods. Never lost any signals.
The 300 series are the ones with the heart rate monitors; the 200 series are less expensive and do not have heart rate monitors. I don’t know how the HR function compares to Polar or Timex comparable devices.
BrokenSpoke
Major differences between the Edge and Forerunner 305 models:
The Edge has slightly more battery life, a barometric altimeter, the ability to set more data fields per screen (8 vs. 4) and a larger display.
Both the FR and Edge allow the use of routes and waypoints (100 point limit), courses (around 13,000 trackpoints) and various (somewhat minimal) navigation/performance features. Both can use the cad/speed sensor and HR strap.
The Forerunner allows switching between three sports and also allows custom settings for each of these (ie autolap settings, displays, profiles (gear weight, HR zones, etc.) and training options). The forerunner is also compatible with a footpod for tracking runs indoors and for runs without using the GPS.
IMO the Forerunnner is a much more versatile option if you plan on doing any sport in addition to cycling. Strapping the Edge to an arm can work, but is a compromise.
Whichever option you chose, signing up for a powerbar newsletter will get you a $75 rebate for the Edge and $50 for the Foreunner (http://www.powerbar.com/Newsletter/)
Couldn’t agree more on the “worthlessness” of the altitude on the Forerunner. I use it on the bike too, and also have a VDO computer that uses a barometer for altitude. The 2 are almost never close, and usually the Forerunner has several times the feet in ascent. I believe the VDO. Other than that, I love my Forerunner. Someday, I might get an Edge just for the bike. But even if I were to buy just one GPS, I’d still get the Forerunner, even knowing what I know.
I have several HR chest straps (from polar watches and other bike computers). Does anyone know if they will work with the garmin units? I have some coded and uncoded and thought it might save me a few bucks if I go with the Edge with just cadence.
Thanks for all of the input…and for the rebate info!!!
pat
I can’t imagine if you want it for bike AND run why you wouldn’t want the Forerunner over the Edge. The quick release kit is nice, the only thing I don’t like about it is that it elevates the unit a little when you wear it as a watch. I’ve had mine for about a year now (replacing a Forerunner 301) and love it.
Agree with all the reponses thus far. I have had a forerunner 305 for about 1 month and I love it. The way I see it
Forerunner. 305
Positives
Negatives
EDGE
I don’t own one but here is my understanding of how this stacks up
Positives
Use. Best for training and racing (Bike/Run Only)
Negatives
Usage - MTB, long bike rides, course evalutation/navigation
Garmin Overall
Luv it. The bike same cadence and heart sensors will work with both systems
Wish list.
Then you have the complete all-in-one solution which as yet does not exist
If your primary usage is multisport training then get the Forerunner first.
I’ve even used my Forerunner on the water. Double bag it beneath a swim cap and it works great.
If you want to take your Forerunner for IM, you can take a look at this site, that shows you how to mangle a spare mount, a quick release kit and USB cable to have it battery powered during the ride. Fast people wouldn’t need this. 
This is not correct. Both the Edge and the Forerunner offer the exact same navigational features (and limitations). For units missing any features, make sure the latest firmware is installed.
fwiw, in my experience it was the Forerunner that had the ability to import routes with >100 points and thus the better navigational abilities than the Edge, not vice versa. It’s interesting to read the other poster claim that both units have identical capabilities with routes and courses, so either it is somehow user error or he is wrong. My experience leans me toward the latter, but I do not rule out the former. There seem to be “tracks”, “routes”, “courses”, and “history”, each of which seem to me to be a set of long/lat points. In the Forerunner we would import a track and it would become a track that we would navigate. In the Edge we could not import tracks, so had to Save As a route and then import that, but it would truncate at 100 points. Again, maybe user error…
Baffling to hear other’s negative experiences with altitude and the Forerunner. Maybe in France we had signal to a large number of satellites so the readings were always accurate, but over 3 weeks and 2200 miles, both the Forerunner and Edge were always very near spot on. I don’t know about total gain calculations, though.
Sorry I misread your evalutation of the navigational capability. I had the idea that the Edge would be better in my mind and didn’t read attentively enough your account.
As I said GPS elevation is usually correct at a specific point. In fact more accurate than the barometric, since the barometric needs to be calibrated at a specific temperature which usually changes during the day and from day to day. However for some reason the GPS approach has never been able to accurately sum the elevation gain over a course. This even with the known errors in the barometric approach, the barometer method ends up being more accurate.
fwiw, in my experience it was the Forerunner that had the ability to import routes with >100 points and thus the better navigational abilities than the Edge, not vice versa. It’s interesting to read the other poster claim that both units have identical capabilities with routes and courses, so either it is somehow user error or he is wrong. My experience leans me toward the latter, but I do not rule out the former. There seem to be “tracks”, “routes”, “courses”, and “history”, each of which seem to me to be a set of long/lat points. In the Forerunner we would import a track and it would become a track that we would navigate. In the Edge we could not import tracks, so had to Save As a route and then import that, but it would truncate at 100 points. Again, maybe user error…
Baffling to hear other’s negative experiences with altitude and the Forerunner. Maybe in France we had signal to a large number of satellites so the readings were always accurate, but over 3 weeks and 2200 miles, both the Forerunner and Edge were always very near spot on. I don’t know about total gain calculations, though.
No offense, but this is not a claim, but a fact.
The problem here is the use of terminology. Using routes for navigation a user is limited to 100 total waypoints (this is a limitation of the units, so you can have 5 routes with 20 wayponts each, or 1 with 100, and both of which would be further limited if you have any individual waypoints stored on your units). Waypoints are simply a set of lat/long points though may also contain elevation data. This is exactly the same for both units.
Courses are the only way, aside from using the “back to start feature,” to navigate using more than 100 “points”. These work with trackpoints, and can utilize about 13,000 of these points depending upon the presence of any coursepoints (special points used to designate points of interest like turns, water stops, summits, etc)which additionally tax memory. Trackpoints, in addition to containing navigation features (lat/long/elevation) also contain performance metrics based on previous activities, or unit “history,” (or arbitrary metrics if you use a 3rd-party course creator rather than your own history to create the course).
“Routes” and “courses” are not the same thing at all. Routes offer very basic navigation (simple connecting of dots) compared to courses (which can offer info like off course warnings, upcoming turn notifications, etc.).
“Tracks” are not used at all on either of these units, though it is terminology/feature commonly used in other GPS units.
I cannot account for your differing experience between the two without knowing more about how you are creating the routes/courses you were attempting to navigate and how you loaded them into the unit, however, think with a little experimentation you’ll be pleasantly surprised to find both units fully capable of the same features.
Thanks for that link and information.
I had a similar idea and bought one of these single AA battery packs, sold as an emergency charger for the Motorola Razr.
Having the small usb type connector, it plugs directly into the cradle. It seems to work; the charging sign comes up on the face of the Garmin when it’s hooked up, but I haven’t tried charging it completely, or running this setup for a long time to know by how much one AA battery will extend the use. Changing a battery might be tricky on the bike. Maybe I’ll just have to hurry up.
I also ordered an extra cradle to hack up for parts, and a quick release.
Alternatively, I might just get an Edge for the bike, leave the Forerunner hooked up to this battery charger, and pick it up in T2. I’m kinda likin’ the idea of a larger screen on the bike.
Victor,
With due respect, elevation readings from a device which uses GPS to measure the altitude is always a lot better than a device using barometric pressure which can be effected by the atmospheric conditions.
Recently I was in Peru on a running trip and Forerunner was dead on with the elevation.