Apple Watch - pros/cons

[MeridaAndAngus]

I got the FR230 yesterday. On of my local running stores was having a "buy $100 in gift cards, get $20 in gift cards" deal, so I did that and used the gift cards to pay for the watch. I like it so far! It's basically the FR220 (which I have and love) + activity tracking + smart notifications. The real test will be taking it out on a run!

Does that one have a built in heart rate monitor in the wrist (optical)?

 

[opusone]

Does that one have a built in heart rate monitor in the wrist (optical)?

No, only the 225 and now the 235 have the optical HRM.

 

[opusone]

I've also looked in to the Fitbit Surge. Not ideal for me to wear to work, but at half the price of the Apple Watch it is appealing. Anyone have any experience with the Surge? Anyone know if it'll allow you to upload HR data after your workout if your phone is out of range?

Sounds like the HR data can have some issues (see link here): DCRainmaker Fitbit Surge In-Depth Review

 

[Ariel484]

Does that one have a built in heart rate monitor in the wrist (optical)?

Like @opusone said, that's the 235. The 230 has an option to bundle it with the chest strap.

 

[afan]

Aside from the Garmin, which is what I'm leaning towards, are there any other gps watches that are decent? I only plan on wearing the watch when I run. I get tired of having to pull my phone out to see how much farther I have to go since I do a down and back on a trail near me. I would also use it at runs when I don't need my phone for safety because of all the other runners and course people around.

I have an old generation nano that is the size of a shuffle and it has nike + but it uses steps and it's fairly accurate but not totally.

 

[IamTrike]

Aside from the Garmin, which is what I'm leaning towards, are there any other gps watches that are decent? I only plan on wearing the watch when I run. I get tired of having to pull my phone out to see how much farther I have to go since I do a down and back on a trail near me. I would also use it at runs when I don't need my phone for safety because of all the other runners and course people around.

I have an old generation nano that is the size of a shuffle and it has nike + but it uses steps and it's fairly accurate but not totally.

I have had the Nike Plus watch. I really liked it but it had some pros and cons.

Pro: Very waterproof. I used to swim in mine.
Unique style and face.
Integrated USB in the band so no external charging cable needed.

Cons Needed to be updated regularly or it could take a while to connect to satellites.
Didn't really integrate well with runkeeper.

I wound up buying my buddies used Garmin 220 a couple months ago. I liked it but I really wanted a smart watch.
Tonight I purchased the Garmin 235. That's I think pretty close to my perfect watch.

 

[Ariel484]

I've had my FR230 for about a week now and I really like it. I posted a review here if anyone is interested (it's sort of long, otherwise I'd copy and paste it here, but I don't want it to take over the entire thread! ). It's not super technical...if you want that then check out DC Rainmaker.

 

[opusone]

Tonight I purchased the Garmin 235. That's I think pretty close to my perfect watch.

Please let us know how the new optical HRM works.

 

[IamTrike]

I will. I as a little concerned about them switching from the Mio sensor to their own, but I am hoping it works well. It's my Christmas present so it'll be a week or 2 till I can post a real review.

 

[DVCFan1994]

I'll be interested to hear what you think. I bought the 225 in October. While for actual run performance I love it, it has all kinds of issues. I can't leave Bluetooth turned on or it freezes. It freezes occasionally anyway, though never on a run thankfully. It has had syncing issues and the calorie counts are all over the place if I'm doing indoor workout. I bought it at REI, which has an extremely liberal return policy. I may return it, because it is not working properly for me, and I can't use all of the advertised features, and get the 235, my only hesitation is the optical HRM, as the one I have works great, have seen enough reviews of the new one to be comfortable with it yet.

My husband has the Apple Watch and loves it. But he's a cyclist, not a runner. He's happy it will now broadcast HR so he could use Strava to record.

 

[opusone]

I'll be interested to hear what you think. I bought the 225 in October. While for actual run performance I love it, it has all kinds of issues. I can't leave Bluetooth turned on or it freezes. It freezes occasionally anyway, though never on a run thankfully. It has had syncing issues and the calorie counts are all over the place if I'm doing indoor workout. I bought it at REI, which has an extremely liberal return policy. I may return it, because it is not working properly for me, and I can't use all of the advertised features, and get the 235, my only hesitation is the optical HRM, as the one I have works great, have seen enough reviews of the new one to be comfortable with it yet.

Odd. On my 225 (had it since July), I leave the Bluetooth on all the time and have never had it freeze. Also, my calories are pretty consistent based on similar distance/time although I have only used the 225 once or twice on a treadmill, so I don't have extensive indoor use.

One question: have you updated the software on the watch? If not, I would try that before returning; otherwise, maybe you got a lemon and could return for another 225. Upgrading to the 235 is also a great choice, but I'm with you on the optical HRM being unproven.

 

[DVCFan1994]

Odd. On my 225 (had it since July), I leave the Bluetooth on all the time and have never had it freeze. Also, my calories are pretty consistent based on similar distance/time although I have only used the 225 once or twice on a treadmill, so I don't have extensive indoor use.

One question: have you updated the software on the watch? If not, I would try that before returning; otherwise, maybe you got a lemon and could return for another 225. Upgrading to the 235 is also a great choice, but I'm with you on the optical HRM being unproven.

Yes, I updated the software, there have been 2 or 3 updates in the 7 weeks I've had it. The first time it happened I headed to the Garmin forums to see what I could find. I found there are a lot of people who have the same issue, despite upgrading software. Seems like there was a bad lot in production somewhere.

I do love the optical HRM on the 225. I hated wearing a chest strap. It has seemed very accurate to me, consistent output, and numbers that seem accurate based in prior runs while wearing the chest strap. I'm leaning toward returning for the 235 to also get the smart features. But I'm waiting to hear/read more about the non-Mio optical HR. DC rainmakers review was pretty good, and the few problems he noted he a) attributed to things Garmin could likely address in updates and b) he only encountered with specific types of hard runs such as tough hill repeats that aren't a huge concern for me.

I am considering wearing my husbands Apple Watch on a run sometime soon to compare the two, if I do I'll report back here.

 

[GreatLakes]

Aside from the Garmin, which is what I'm leaning towards, are there any other gps watches that are decent? I only plan on wearing the watch when I run. I get tired of having to pull my phone out to see how much farther I have to go since I do a down and back on a trail near me. I would also use it at runs when I don't need my phone for safety because of all the other runners and course people around.

I have an old generation nano that is the size of a shuffle and it has nike + but it uses steps and it's fairly accurate but not totally.

The Suunto Ambit line is really nice. I am looking for a triathlon watch and went back and forth between the 910xt and Ambit2 for weeks. I don't really need any of the upgrades offered in their respective replacements (920xt and Ambit3) but I ended up deciding I'll be going with a 910xt. There isn't really any one thing about the 910 that made me go that way but there are a few small things that added up. If you are looking for a more watch-like feel look at the Ambit2. They have multiple lines and the Ambit2R might be all you need depending on your type of running.

As for the original question about Apple watches, I am not a fan. Apple as a company likes to obsolete their devices a bit too much for my liking. If I was looking for a daily wear watch I would probably get a VivoActive. I suspect the next version of the VivoActive will come with a watch-based HR monitor but I really don't need one. I don't train with a monitor and don't need to track my heart rate for medical reasons so I don't worry about it.

 

[afan]

Thanks to an amazon gc as a gift I had enough to get a refurbished by Garmin forerunner 10. It'll be here Tuesday. I think for what I need, just the basic gps and time keeping when I run outside, along with the 59.99 price, I will be happy with it. Also comes with a 1 year warranty so that helped make the savings to a refurbed one better. Now it just needs to stop raining and be warm enough that I want to run outside. Normally this time of year when it's not raining the lows are close to freezing and I prefer it to be at least 40 to run outside if I don't have to for training.

 

[LadyDi13]

I just received an Apple watch for Christmas. I have been happily using a Garmin 210 for the past 2 years. Just for fun, I wore both out on a 5 mile run on Sunday. My phone was with me, in my husband's Camelbak but with the exception of having Bluetooth enabled, I did not have any extra apps running. The watch recorded a 4.99 mile run to my Garmin 5.0 and an average heart rate of 160 to my Garmin 161. Statistically these values would be considered equivalent. Have I converted to wearing my Apple watch for running? No. But I did think there was some value in comparing the 2. I am a numbers person and can not imagine not logging all of my running miles into my Garmin connect with all of the data I have stored in there. I have decided that at least until I have completed my January Disney races I will stick to my Garmin but would consider switching to the Apple watch once I am more comfortable and familiar with it. I have not put any different apps on it nor have I even changed out the band for the smaller one, which might fix some of the crazy fluctuating heart rates it has measured.
I just wanted to contribute the results of my side by side comparison to the thread.

 

[IamTrike]

I got a 235 for Christmas and have run with it every day since. Most of the runs have been in the 7-8 mile range at paces ranging from 9 - 7:15. I had an issue with the heart rate dropping out on one of the faster runs treadmill, but I think that was due to me not having the watch on tight enough. I haven't done any runs comparing it to my chest strap though.

 

[margitmouse]

I got a 235 for Christmas and have run with it every day since. Most of the runs have been in the 7-8 mile range at paces ranging from 9 - 7:15. I had an issue with the heart rate dropping out on one of the faster runs treadmill, but I think that was due to me not having the watch on tight enough. I haven't done any runs comparing it to my chest strap though.

Thanks for this! I've been waiting for some feedback on the 235!

I'll be interested to hear what the chest strap comparison reveals!!

 

[GreatLakes]

For those of you who would like a heart rate monitor that isn't a chest strap check out the Scosche RHYTHM+ which is both ANT+ and Bluetooth. I stumbled across it while reading reviews and recommendations on DC Rainmaker's site and put a lot of weight into his reviews and recommendations.

It would give you the ability to use a single heart rate monitor with multiple devices without the need for a chest strap.

 

[MaMa3Princess]

I'm liking my vivoactive so far. The real test for me will be taking it on an outdoor run and comparing the stats to what I get with my trusty FR220 (seems like it should since they are both Garmins...). I didn't really look at the 230 (don't need the HRM so I wouldn't get the 235)...didn't realize that it has the smart notifications too. But there's no way I could have gotten it for the price I got the vivoactive for, so if the vivoactive performs well on my outdoor runs this weekend, I'll be happy.

ETA: Weird quirk...I'm pretty sure the vivoactive is tracking steps for me when I'm driving. That's something I read about before I bought it. Going to pay better attention today when I drive home.

yes,it does count steps when you drive, last road trip to Orlando I racked up 4,000 steps before we stopped for gas. I have to shut it off when I am driving because like you, we chose the option to reduce our insurance premium with fitness tracking. Other than that I love the active. I chose it mostly over the apple watch as I swim for cross training and it is definetely water proof and even gps swim distance.

 

[Keels]

yes,it does count steps when you drive, last road trip to Orlando I racked up 4,000 steps before we stopped for gas. I have to shut it off when I am driving because like you, we chose the option to reduce our insurance premium with fitness tracking. Other than that I love the active. I chose it mostly over the apple watch as I swim for cross training and it is definetely water proof and even gps swim distance.

Not that I don't doubt the steps-driving thing, but I think there may be a setting you may have to check.

I ONLY say this because when I drove from Texas to Florida (and it was me driving, all 19 hours over two days), I just checked my GarminConnect account for those days and on the first day, I had 12,000 steps (roughly 6 miles) - which makes sense, since we went to the Saints game in New Orleans and then walked the French Quarter, and then only 4,000 steps the next day (2 miles) - which, again, makes sense since I spent 10 hours in the car and only stopped to get gas, let the dogs out and go to the restroom.