Discussion: Using Garmin cycling products while running

I've just been taking a look through the garmin webpage, checking out various watches and cycling computers. It struck me that the cycling computers do a whole heap more per dollar spent than the running watches. This might be because of the size of the unit, or competition in the market, I don't know. I am thinking that the courses feature (where you can race yourself on a course you've done before, with an indication of how far infront/behind you are of a previous run) would be a nice feature, but the 110 and 210 forerunners dont have it... though the edge 200 (which is a heap cheaper in Aus than even the 110) does. Other things it has over the running watches are auto scroll and auto pause, all of which sound pretty useful, especially if running in a city.

So I am thinking of heading down to a bike store to see if I could rig something up to the edge 200 to have it on my arm, and if not, i dont mind just carrying it or putting it in my hipbelt pocket of my running pack.

I also think that for paddling, the cycling computer would be a bit easier to read and set up infront.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

Most cycling computers are not gps enabled. They would be useless off bike, except to tell time.

The ones that are gps seem to be on par with normal gps watches.

Yep, most bike computers measure distance from wheel rotations, but both Garmin cycling units that I mention (Edge 200 and 500) are GPS units, and the sensor is listed as the same high sensitivity sensor as the running units.

Maybe I'm the only one who has noticed the functional difference at price point. I might see how I go with one and report back.

You can find the missing features you mention in pretty much any of the running Garmins besides the 110/210, even the 305 (which is probably hard to get now) had them.

The 110/210 are smaller and lighter than all the other forerunners, and much smaller than the edge 200/500. Some runners have no tolerance for bulky wrist units, and I suspect that for the 110/210, Garmin chose to trade off features and accept additional cost in order to keep them small and get into that market. GPSs in particular require some space for the antenna, so bigger is easier/cheaper. Same with battery life.

That said, I have used most of the forerunners, and I'd definitely recommend against the 110 (seriously lacking features), and don't really like the 210 that much either. If you want economy+features on your wrist, you may be better off trying to pick up a used 305 or 405. I do know someone who used to run with an Edge500 in her pocket, and that was ok, though she has since switched to a 305.

Ah, thanks heaps for that, Ken! I hadn't looked at the #05 models due to their price, but like you say, a used model might be the way to go.

Cheers mate.

The 305 was super cheap on Amazon in the States a few months back.