12

Garmin 110 to 220 - Anyone? (Read 232 times)

    Has anyone upgraded form the Garmin Forerunner 110 to the 220? If so I'd be interested to know if you like the 220, what you like better about it  and is it worth the cost to upgrade from a 110 that's still working fine (which I could then donate to one of my running daughters) .

    Leabo


      I've been debating the same exact thing....any input would be appreciated.

        Hard to answer without knowing what features are important to you, but garmin.com allows you to compare product features side-by-side.

        Dave

          So I went ahead and bought the Garmin Forerunner 220, and so far I'm very happy with it compared to the FR110.  It's a pricey upgrade and wasn't really necessary, but I'm glad I got it.

           

          What I like about it compared to the FR110:

           

          1) It's nearly instant satellite detection - it already has a satellite lock inside my house, the moment I take it off the charger. My FR110 has to be placed outside for a few minutes and then double-checked because it usually halts the satellite acquisition process until after I answer the stupid question about whether I intended to use it indoors or not. I've never used it indoors. Why does it keep asking?

           

          2) The lap beep+vibration is loud enough I can hear as well as feel it. My hearing isn't the best, and I often don't hear the FR110 lap signal at each mile.

           

          3) The start button is bigger and better and can't be mistaken for one of the other buttons. An improvement over the 110, for sure.

           

          4) The FR220 has a setting to prevent it from going into power-saving mode and giving up satellite lock while you're standing around for a few long minutes waiting for the start of a race. This is one of the nearly fatal flaws of the FR110, as anyone who has ever suffered from that problem just at the start of an important race will know.  This one feature alone almost justifies the upgrade.

           

          5) Less weight. It's a small thing, but the FR220 weights about 42 grams, and the FR110 is like 52 grams, if I recall correctly. It's a trivial thing, but when I'm sprinting all out at the end of a race it does make a tiny bit of difference, and sometimes, that's all it takes.  I won my age group in a major 12K race one time by just a fraction of a second in the final sprint while wearing the FR110. I had previously upgraded from the Garmin Forerunner 305, which is much bigger and heavier, just because of the weight and size.


          Maggie & Molly

            I have the 220 and like what is stated about it picked up satellites immediately.  I had the 410 and never really got used to navigating it.  The 220 is so easy, press start and go.  N bezel, nothing complicated or touchy

             

            mta:

             

            http://www.dcrainmaker.com/

             

            has very extensive reviews of all the garmins as well as other brands

             "It does not matter how slow you go so long as you do not stop."
            Wisdom of Confucius

            HF 4363


            Consistently Slow

              A club member had the 205.  It died. She went to the 110. Two weeks later she purchased the 220.

              Run until the trail runs out.

              2014***1500 miles 09/28/14

              50miler 13:26:18

              Race Less Train More

               

              Ana Trason  "Living Her Life"

              "The Marble in The Groove"

               

              unsolicited chatter

              http://bkclay.blogspot.com/

                When I lost my 205 I chose the 220 over the 310XT.  VERY happy.  I never thought the 205 was big/bulky until I started running with the 220.  Wow.  I'm also a big fan of the almost instant satellite reception.  I also like the cadence feature - more of a toy than anything else but cool to look at.

                Biggest negative of the 220, to me, is that the autopause feature is absolutely worthless on this watch.  It will autopause just fine when I stop but then it goes from autorun to autopause over and over again for a few minutes before it decides that I really did start running again.  Can't seem to fix it no matter what threshold I put in.  I depended on this feature for my daily runs when I used the 205 now I have to remember to manually stop and then restart the watch.


                The Rep

                  Used 3 305s for several years until my last one gave up.  Bought the 220.  Love it.  It locked on to satellites in 4 seconds this morning at 5:15 am when placed on the dashboard of my car while driving.  It locked onto satellites in 20 seconds while on my wrist while driving.  Something the 305 would fail at constantly.

                   

                  Numbers easy to see.  Watch size is terrific.  Alert and vibration can be heard and felt (I'm 56 and went to a couple of concerts back in the day)  Easy load to RA.  The only thing that it doesn't have that I use to like with the 305 was a setting for Last Lap pace.  I would use that while running  marathons to compare my previous mile pace  with my average mile pace to just stay consistent.

                   

                  So far, I would greatly recommend the 220.

                   





                    I forgot to mention  the FR220 also measures steps per minute (no footpod required), which is interesting - not sure how I'll use that information yet. I ran 4 miles tonight with it, and from the Garmin Connect web page, my average steps per minute were 177, maximum was 199, and my stride length is 1.37 meters. I suspect that average is a few steps too slow, due to the effect of several dropouts in the readings.


                    Needs more cowbell!

                      Has anyone had issues with the charging clip for the 220?  EVERY issue I've had with the 210 is clip-related (crashing, battery drain, inability to get all 4 contacts lined-up perfectly with 4 pegs on clip, breathing on it and having it disconnect, etc.).  I'm thisclose to just tossing the damned thing and upgrading, even though it's not even a year old.  I've actually thought about sending it back to Garmin while under warranty and then selling the refurb they'd send on fleabay.

                      I shoot pretty things! ~

                      '14 Goals:

                      • 6 duathlons (1 Olympic distance)

                      • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)

                        So far, with two weeks of use I'd say the charging clip for the FR220 is waaaaay better than the clip for the FR110, which I believe is also the same clip used for the FR210?  On the FR220, the device seems to just fall into the clip correctly and start charging effortlessly.

                         

                        I've also noticed that uploading my data to my fast new PC via USB 3 port is nearly instant; much faster than uploading the FR110 data ever was.

                          So far, with two weeks of use I'd say the charging clip for the FR220 is waaaaay better than the clip for the FR110, which I believe is also the same clip used for the FR210?  On the FR220, the device seems to just fall into the clip correctly and start charging effortlessly.

                           

                          I've also noticed that uploading my data to my fast new PC via USB 3 port is nearly instant; much faster than uploading the FR110 data ever was.

                           

                          Interesting.  My PC has a USB 3.0 port though I have my 220 USB cable plugged into a 2.0 port.  The cable looks nothing like the other devices that I have that are designed to use 3.0.  Upload is faster than my old 205 but, as I said, I'm plugged into a 2.0 port.  Do you know if the 220/620 is actually designed to operate at USB 3.0 data rates?

                            Ken,

                            I don't' actually know if the FR220 supports USB3, as it doesn't say in the online specs or owners manual. I'll try to do a speed test on it and also on the FR110 just for fun at home tonight to get a rough indication of how fast they can be read via USB on a USB2 and USB3 port.  I'd say the FR220 is plenty fast enough though even if it's running at USB2 speeds.


                            day after day sameness

                              I've also noticed that uploading my data to my fast new PC via USB 3 port is nearly instant; much faster than uploading the FR110 data ever was.

                               

                              I'll bet that is due to it having fewer workouts stored on it rather than any USB influence. The agent needs to walk all the workouts to find the new ones...

                              Choosing my words carefully has never been my strength I've been known to be vague and often pointless

                                 

                                I'll bet that is due to it having fewer workouts stored on it rather than any USB influence. The agent needs to walk all the workouts to find the new ones...

                                 

                                Actually I keep the activities folder in the FR110 cleaned out just for that reason, so it usually has fewer than 6 or 8 runs stored. It gets really slow when it's filed up with lots of runs.

                                12