This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Forerunner 245M vs Forerunner 645M Advice

Former Member
Former Member
Looking for some advice from some seasoned Garmin runners please.

Currently running about 35/40 miles a week, compete in anything from 10k to the occasional marathon, may look at an ultra next year. Mostly road, no real interest in trail running. Odd cycle here and there but that's about. No swimming.

Have for the last year or so been using an Android Wear smartwatch linked to Strava for my runs but need to switch out due to the fact it's basic, the battery life is no longer sufficient (started cutting off runs etc) and I HATE the fact it's touchscreen, especially in the wet. I'm also just starting to get into reviewing and understanding various metric data available.

Therefore looking at a step up to a proper running watch to aid me with training. Had previously discounted Garmin's as I want something with internal music playback and those with that feature were too expensive, however saw the initial reviews for the Forerunner 245M were positive, and then that the price for the 645M has dropped as well. Have discounted Vivoactive 3 due to touchscreen.

My needs are primarily standalone music playback, battery life (which appears to favour the 245M), ability to have training runs on the watch (both), sleep tracking (both) and longevity with price ultimately coming into it as well.

From what I can tell, the 245M benefits from updated innards, improved sensors, and 3 extra FirstBeat metrics. The 645M has the barometric altimeter (which given I don't do huge variations in elevation maybe isn't important) and Garmin Pay (which despite criticisms of it I would actually use as I have a compatible bank account) as well as some other things that I don't care about.

It appears to me that the 245M is the more feature-rich watch training-wise, but given I've only just got into metrics I don't necessarily have an understanding of what some of those additions entail. Whereas on the 645M the addition of the barometric altimeter and Garmin Pay are tangible additions which I can quantify.

If both were the same price, I would likely go for the 245M, however I can currently pick up a 645M for about £260 (has been as low as £240 recently) against circa £285 for the 245M.

Does anyone have any real world thoughts/advice? Will the training additions on the 245M outweigh the tangible benefits of the altimeter and Garmin Pay? One of the things that did concern me was the battery life on the 645M as some of the reviews criticised it quite heavily (although I note it still states 14 hours with GPS and I'm NEVER going to run for over 14 hours).

Any comments gratefully received.
  • There was an update from the firstbeat features for 245, respiration rate is no longer there. May be it can be added in the future I think, as the 945 has it but it states that for this you need HRV data that can only be provided by certain chest straps. The same will be the case for the 245.

    I don´t have a 645, but no matter if Race Predictor is or not a Firstbeat ® feature it appears to me that this info is provided by the watch or in Garmin Connect if you have one on it. Is that right? (https://www8.garmin.com/manuals/webhelp/forerunner645/EN-US/GUID-31B2458A-859A-4A34-AB83-224E4A29387A.html)

    If you dig a bit on the internet there are several places from where you can get your predicted finish times. In my case I´m used to check the data derived from Jack Daniels resources, you have at hand VDOT calculator from runsmart project (web or phone apps) to see if it works for you.

    The last feature was Body battery? Does it provide something really usefull? I´m 42, work all day and have two little kids. Seems that in the seventies we where loaded with NiCd ones, my body remembers how tired I was the night before while going to sleep and rules my day from the first moment I step out of bed :rolleyes:

    So for me there are no real advantages from the firstbeat features standpoint. But from the battery side of the analysis I thing the 245 is the right one, both will be able to cover any single workout but with this 645 you will have to get close to the wall more often....something I hate.
  • There are all kinds of race predictors out there most of which are based on a previous race and extrapolate from that. The previous method Garmin was using was a simple lookup table based on Age, Gender, and Vo2Max. And usually was pretty optimistic about loner races.

    What Firstbeat is doing is taking Vo2Max in conjunction with your over mileage and how long your long runs are to make the predictions more in line with what your recent workouts might support.

    I'm a 55 yo male with a Vo2Max of 51. With the previous Garmin lookup predictor from my F5+ predictions are 5k-20-24; 10k-42:19; HM-1:33:41; FM-3:15:07

    The 5k time is in reason normally but I'm only 3 weeks back to running after a foot injury so that's gonna happen anytime soon. Last year with a Vo2Max of 52 I ran my PB marathon in 3:43:36 so obviously 3:15 now is way off the mark.

    I'm waiting on delivery of my 945 so I don't know how or how much those will change with the new Firstbeat predictor but it can't really be any worse. ;)
  • The previous method Garmin was using was a simple lookup table based on Age, Gender, and Vo2Max. And usually was pretty optimistic about loner races.

    Not to be pedantic, but the previous race prediction method was based completely on a lookup table from VO2Max alone (and not age/gender — those might affect the VO2Max calculations, although I always thought VO2Max was derived from pace vs HR without regard to age or gender.) In your example with a VO2Max of 51, any other Garmin user with a VO2Max of 51 would’ve gotten the exact same race predictions, regardless of age and gender. 

    It was no different than any of the VDOT/equivalent race calculators you could find on the web — e.g. “What’s my equivalent VDOT/VO2Max/half marathon time if I can run a 10k in 40 minutes?”. (Those calculators don’t care about your age or gender either, except after the fact, to give you an age grade.)

  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 6 years ago

    So, does the 245 not measure any change in elevation at all? I just ordered one and if that's the case I'm sending it back without even opening it! I mean, I don't run hills daily but I do run hills. I can't believe they'd make a running watch that doesn't record net elevation gain/loss. 

  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 6 years ago in reply to Former Member

    I found the answer. I am coming from the 630 so nothing changes in that regard, phew!

  • It does measure, but not so precise as FR945 or other device with barometric altimeter. I got gain 33 m and loss 41 m in total today, at the same time 945 shows less than 5 m on that distance, that is true.