Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben E Lou
OK. That was a poorly phrased question. Here's a better one: I would prefer one that would record my running and treadmill walking. I will probably start some cycling down the road. What's a good Garmin option for running, treadmill walking, and cycling? Also, I've read mention of using Polar with Garmin. Are you talking about just the strap, or the actual HRM and strap? (i.e. would I need to buy a Garmin wtih HRM since I already have a Polar BlueTooth HRM?)
|
The one you linked would be a good option if you want to include cycling as well and plan on at some point including a bike cadence sensor. The pure running watches do not support those. If you don't care about a bike cadence sensor, you can simply use a running watch while riding a bike (which is what I do right now). If you have any desire to get into triathlon or duathlon brick type workouts (one workout split into run and bike segments), you should go with a watch like what you linked.
If all you want is a running watch, the 310 would work fine for that too, but it is a little bigger of a size on the arm that bothers some runners (especially smaller runners). For the features you want.. you need a foot pod to record treadmill walking steps (or an accelerometer, even though those seem to be less accurate), and you want a HRM. So that means you would need at least a Garmin 210 or 220 level watch for both of those. The 220 just was announced and is not out until later this month though.
Regarding the HRM compatibility, that is correct, you can not use a Polar HRM with a Garmin watch. The strap part is fine, but you need the actual Garmin HRM chip piece to communicate with the watch.
So the end decision is probably on which is more important to you:
Including Bike hardware capabilities - go with the 310
Having a smaller watch that is pure running - go with the 210 or 220
Whichever is cheaper - Then either would be fine, just shop for best price between them.