Just got a replacement after the pin corrosion, how is your f5 holding up?

Hi guys,

I just got a brand new replacement for my Fenix 5, but I believe it's an old production unit, since it has a 7 months old firmware (12.40) and the silver pins like the other one.

I'm expecting the same issue I had before in the next weeks or months, so how is yours holding up? I read about people asking for 2 or more replacement after just some weeks.

Also, any news on how to prevent this to happens?

edit: old serial was 5361xxxxx, new one is 5363xxxxx

Top Replies

All Replies

0 StephanePELLETIER62 over 4 years ago

Hi there, what do you think about my watch connectors shape ?

SN 54GXXXXXX

0 carleson over 4 years ago in reply to StephanePELLETIER62

The color of the pins makes it seem that it is not a straight Fenix 5, which has metal gray pins. The connector shape though looks like it has been put in a charger quite a few times.

0 StephanePELLETIER62 over 4 years ago in reply to carleson

Well, I bought it 2 years ago, it’s the Asian version, all brand new with Garmin box and properly register on Garmin Website with serial number !

0 Former Member over 4 years ago

Corrosion Control was one of my primary responsibilities in the US Navy. There are strict MIL-spec standards that outline the thickness of platings. Sounds to me Garmin is using either cheap plating and applying it too thin on the contacts .The noble material used for plating with the highest corrosion resistance is gold . A perfect coating with gold is not problematic regarding corrosion. Due to the high cost of material the plating of gold is often so thin that the final coating is not free of pores. These pores are the cause of corrosion of electrically conductive surfaces with protective coatings. Therefore one of the goals of the optimization of gold coating is minimization of both the number and the size of pores of gold coating.

Gamin may not feel a watch at this price point warrants gold contacts but they need to address this issue as they are either not using any plating at all (unbelievable given the salt sweat envirron these watches experience) or they are applying some ignoble standard type tin/nickel plating with a thin oxide film on the surface, called the passive film, which acts as a protective barrier between the metal and its environment.

IMHO ignoble contacts are NOT necessarily unacceptable on a watch at this price point. It is just they need to be applied with strict adherence to the eviron they be working in. To be honest this surprises me that Garmin has chosen to cut corners like this and is making me rethink about retiring my old F2 which works like a charm, no corrosion after 5 years.

I often wondered how much gold there was on an aircraft carrier. LOL.

0 Cedricg_38 over 4 years ago

No problems of corrosion with my Fenix5 from march 2017

A lot of sport and swimming, always on wrist.

0 JM_Zogg over 4 years ago in reply to Former Member

A faulty connection has the following effects: Watch can no longer be charged, data can no longer be exchanged between computer and watch, the watch can no longer be synchronized, the computer does not recognize the watch when it is plugged in, etc...

With my first two Fenix 5x, I had corrosion on the USB connector. Now, after 6 months, I have problems with synchronization from the watch to the computer. To find the reason, I analyzed the quality of the transmission trough the connector contacts.

A USB port has four wires: Two for the power supply (the two outer contacts on the USB connector) and two for the signal (the two inner contacts on the USB connector).

As a former electronic engineer and lecturer at a university of applied sciences, I built a measuring device to check the contact properties of the different cables with the watch. For this purpose, I measured the ohmic resistance between two connections (inner and outer contacts). The watch must be switched of. The normal value of the resistance is about 2 Mega Ohm to 6 mega Ohm.

My measurement results show clearly: With the original cable (40 cm) from Garmin, contact problems occur after a certain time (e.g. 6 months). This is probably due to mechanical wear in the transition from watch-socket to cable-plug. This explains the problem: The plugs are not spring-loaded. A spring would compensate for the play of wear.

Since the cable can be inserted in two ways, the results will vary depending on the direction of insertion.

With a new 1 m replacement cable there were no failures.

Conclusion: Replacing the watch and the cable solves the problem only temporarily. In addition, the user must laboriously reconfigure the watch.

The only long-term solution would be to offer a plug-cable with spring-loaded contacts.

Can anyone confirm my observations and conclusions?

0 Former Member over 4 years ago in reply to JM_Zogg

Let me sum up my earlier observations with three words.

Piss Poor Construction.

0 Former Member over 4 years ago in reply to Former Member

I've checked the connection points on several of my older Garmin and Suunto watches under a microscope and there is no sign of corrosion whatsoever even though they are years old. None of those appear to be gold plated. My Fenix 5 shows signs of corrosion after a few months of use.