View Full Version : Not sure it is worth it...
08-17-2009, 12:46 PM
So the 310xt is water proof, and the heart rate strap is water proof, but you cannot get any kind of data while swimming. No heart rate, GPS wont be reliable....
I really like the bike and run components of the watch, but I can't see this as a multisport watch if it can't be used in the water.
Maybe its just buyers remorse, but I am not seeing the advantage of this over the 305 for less than 1/2 the price. Vibrate is nice, and the 20 hour battery is great (if it could actually hold a charge, on hold with them now)...
Am I expecting to much from this? If I cannot swim with it, I should have got the 705 or the 305.
08-17-2009, 01:58 PM
I was thinking of the same when I was waiting for my triathlon to start yesterday. In fact, I considered taking my 310 off and leaving it on my bike to put on during T1, like I used to do with my 305.
In the end, it's your decision, but these are the things that I like about the 310 compared to the 305
- waterproof means that there are no worries about wearing it in the rain
- the vibration alert is turning out to be pretty useful
- the extended battery life is great, as you note
- the 310 is a bit smaller than the 305, and I think it is built more solidly; the 305 design is based on bonding two shells of plastic together, which isn't the greatest approach
- the backlight on the 310 is great
- there are more screens available for each activity on the 310, and a few other tweaks on the watch
- personally, I don't think the wireless data transfer is that big of a deal since I have to plug the watch in to recharge it, i.e., the 305 requires a cord plus cradle, whereas the 310 requires a cord plus ANT stick
As I said, it's up to each person to decide whether or not these features are worth roughly twice the price of the 310 compared to the 305. If the 310 only had a barometric altimeter, it would be an easy decision :)
08-17-2009, 04:27 PM
Putting the device under a swim cap works great for getting a very good GPS track of your activity. This solution also worked for the 305, but the 305 was a little bulkier and I had to add an additional ziplock bag in the mix to make sure no moisture got in. Obviously not a strong sell for the 310 over the 305 here, just stating that the 310 can be used in the swim quite effectively and not just for time.
I think for a number of users there may not be a hugely compelling reason to upgrade to the 310 yet (especially if you've already got a 305 or can get one very cheaply). If you don't use power, don't need 20 hrs of battery life, complete water-proof rating, or some of the other new features offered with the 310, the upgrade probably isn't going to seem like a home run. I'm personally very happy with my 310 but the 305 is still a very solid unit IMO and I still recommend it's purchase for those shy about the price of the 310 (like all the other units out there, its price will fall as they become more readily avaiable).
08-17-2009, 06:22 PM
I'm a bit disappointed in the 310. I did not realize until after I already had the unit that it did not track GPS during the swim. I was under the impression that it tracked GPS during normal swimming and it was a surprise to me when I found out it didn't. I could have sworn I read the write up on the unit and never picked up on the fact that the GPS didn't work during a swim. Seems a little odd that they didn't find a way to pick up the signal during the swim. Your arm does come out of the water during each stroke so why isn't that long enough to pick up the signal? I know it's just wishful thinking at this point but I'm still bummed. Guess I'll have to wait for the 410XT or whatever unit they come out with that picks up the signal and then I'll have three Garmins. :(
08-18-2009, 09:35 AM
I guess this is my own mistake for not fully reading into the "Time your swim" portion of the product description, but I expected more from this device.
But a device billed as "The rugged Forerunner 310XT is the triathlete's indispensable training tool" is hardly indispensable since it cannot do anything but act as a stopwatch on the swim.
08-18-2009, 10:28 AM
I can understand the complaint regarding tracking GPS while on your wrist, but I'd hardly say the device isn't capable of doing anything other than tracking time. I've been tracking open water swims ever since I bought the 305 and the 310 is just as capable, just not when worn on your wrist. Personally even if the device tracked on my wrist, it's a little too bulky for me to swim with it there--not a huge annoyance but still enough that I'd probably use the swim cap method even if the wrist did track GPS effectively in the swim. I fully admit I may be a little abnormal in this.
In fact, not only can the device record your track on the swim, using a combinations of alerts (time/distance) you can also get real-time feedback regarding your pace/distance in the swim. I really like that for races with longer swim legs.
So really, it's not a matter of whether the device is capable of tracking GPS during the swim, just that swimmers still need to wear the unit under a swim cap to do so. And that's a limitation of current GPS capabilities under water.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2016 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.