As technology and gadget junkie, it was my luck that my initiation into the world of distance running about the same time on the market with the emergence of several high-tech new gadgets to run on: Garmin Forerunner 205 and 305, and The Nike + system. I have both the Garmin Forerunner 205 each and Nike + for over 6 months, and what follows is a review and comparison of my experiences with them.
The Nike + system
Already inIn 2007 I was at the beginning of my life as a runner, and I was looking for ways to help you find. The Garmin Forerunner Nike + system and both had an instant appeal to the techie side of me, but I was initially hesitant Forerunner invest several hundred dollars (then) necessary to buy one. I was also swept system enthusiasm for the introduction of the Nike +, and my first pair of "real" running shoes were Nike +. Since I had an iPod nano andhis shoes, pod accelerometer could take the Nike + foot little house, I decided to give me to try Nike +. For the purposes of full disclosure, I begin to say that when I am no longer with the Nike +. But this does not mean I would not recommend it to anyone because it has its benefits and uses. The Nike + definitely helped my running in those early days, and the reasons given by the + available on-line challenges Nike was great. Ias the fact that I measure my pace, distance and the distance to the race track on-line. But for a perfectionist like me, the Nike + has some serious disadvantages.
The biggest problem I had was that Nike + is just like when I was running concurrently with the steady pace at all, and was on the ground more or less flat. Any deviation from the rhythms of both the data to calibrate a mess of stimulation and removal of container for your travel, and sometimes I have found thisThe measures are far away. Well, for many runners, this is not a big deal, but if you're confused about cross-training and include things like distance, speed and long, slow, Nike + is so short. Even for me as a runner on the road, tenths of a mile and careful pacing matter how much data, so this has some serious shortcomings. That said, I'm glad I used it, and that helped a lot when I came out. Even after I upgraded GarminForerunner 205, I still continue to use Nike + running on a treadmill (this course, but GPS does not work on a treadmill). Nike + shots on a treadmill is quite accurate, and in my case are more accurate than the reading of their data treadmill console (which has never worked right for some reason).
I think the Nike + is a valuable tool for a new or recreational runners. And 'cheap (less than $ 30.00) is, so as not to affectYour wallet too much if you decide you do not like and the site and the online communities connected with the Nike + are both motivational and interesting. If you start a new runner or an experienced runner, the Nike tends to run the most of your runs together, + would be a great addition to your toolbox current and would certainly be a motivation for you on the road he met a. However, as mentioned above, has serious drawbacks for the serious racerswho cares about the lack of tenths of a mile or information to do well stimulation.
Garmin Forerunner 205/305 GPS Wrist
If you run the computer as a personal long-distance, allows you to take the race to the next level, allowing you to mix your training runs at high speed and you'll + need something more than Nike. I, unfortunately, I'm a perfectionist, and the imprecision of the stimulation and distance provided by Nike +has always bugged me (and I was tired of running my online mapping to find out the actual distance I had covered.) So after about six months of constant use, I decided to ban only the Nike + on the treadmill, and I asked Santa for Garmin Forerunner 205 for Christmas. Sure enough, it was the fancy new wristwatch GPS in my sock, and there were my wrist during a race in over a year. In a nutshell, this is one of the coolest gadgets and usefulany kind that I own, and it has allowed my running to progress in ways that probably would not have otherwise occurred.
First, let me explain the difference between the two current-generation Garmin Forerunner models (a fancy new waterproof model is on the way - the Garmin Forerunner 310 XT - but I'll explain in a bit why I'd still go for one of the current ones for now if you're considering a purchase). The two current models are the Forerunner 205 and the Forerunner 305. The only real The differences between the two clocks (in addition to color - the 205 is blue, and the 305 is red) that can synchronize with a 305 heart rate range, an optional accelerometer shoe (for the treadmill), and a speed sensor and optional cadence for your bike. Otherwise, what I understand, are virtually identical. Given the small difference in price between the two precursors (about $ 10.00-15,00 dollars more for the 305), should be done to go with the 305, if you have decided tobuy a precursor.
So, now regularly using the Forerunner 205 for over a year and I have to say anything good about them. The velocity data directly (I've run enough races with the 205 chip to ensure that fixed-term), as well as data transmission distance. In addition to the rhythm of time and distance, I have three different screens (which is the maximum of 205/305), established in variables such as average speed, altitude, grade percentage, calories burned and the time to show day. Fromthis is the only one who seems a bit 'dubious from time to time the amount, but if you in a smooth training programs that sync to the Forerunner, survey design look pretty good. So far I have almost exclusively the Forerunner in its simplest mode is used - just the way my data while I run. E 'possible to configure things such as training / partner of stimulation and interval training on the clock and use it as a (very) basic real-time mapping GPSDevice for things like hiking, but I have not used a lot for this. Besides running, I used it while walking, snowshoeing, cycling (less detailed), and it works great for all of the above.
For me, two qualities that matter most to training and running are a point, the speed and the exact distance and as I said above, this is where the blows Forerunner Nike +. I actually trust the Forerunner over many online mapping programsif it is import to calculate the distance, and the possibility of all my data in computer format. For the latter, I skipped the included Garmin Training Center software and, instead, a striking, a free program called sport rack. Sport Rack Download all data from the Forerunner and leaves in almost every way that you wish to be. Among others are sports rack, GPS maps, tons of graphic data (eg speed versus distance, speed vs.Survey, millet splits, etc.), and keeps a detailed log that the execution time / date, time, taken from the Internet, distance traveled, calories burned and includes. As a scientist, the loves, the data that Garmin Forerunner + Sport Rack me a very happy runner.
Last few comments on some potential problems with the Forerunner bear mention. One concern I had, before these watches was their size. Yes, they are great, but I never noticed a disturbingrunning, and I think the size is more positive than a negative, since it makes it easier, is a reading of data in motion. This is one of the main reasons why I would not draw well to consider an upgrade to the newer and smaller than the Forerunner 405 - if too many data packet stream on a small screen, then it is terribly difficult, can read at 20 km a marathon. The other concern that someone would have on the market for a GPS watch is the forthcoming new Garmin Forerunner 310 XT, l 'water resistant to 50m and enables wireless transmission of data. Would spend a lot of new bells and whistles for me an extra $ 100 - $ 200 choose to purchase the new XT 205 or 310 to the current 305th's new clock synchronization feature looks more sporty and wireless is nice, but I really do not I know if I can dive up to 50m with her. If for some reason I am for a run and I have placed 50 meters under the water, I probably do not Resurfacing go home anyway (though in all seriousness, I can see how the310 XT can be useful, a triathlete). For me, I'll stick with the 205/305.
Hopefully I have given you what you can do a feel for the Garmin Forerunner 205/305. Really, there are probably many more that he is capable, from what I have discussed here, but the best way to experience it, try it. As a runner who has now completed 1,266.01 miles (I had told her that I love the accuracy!) The Garmin Forerunner 205 (and is still going strong without any major problems), I can honestly saythat in addition to my running shoes, this is the most important piece of the landing gear that I own. I recommend the Forerunner - get one and will not be disappointed.
No comments:
Post a Comment