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 235 vs. 220

Former Member over 9 years ago

Hi everyone,
I need a new gps watch and I cannot decide which model to buy. I got two models in mind, but cannot decide between them, especially because of the negative reviews I read on wrist hrm of 235. So I'll write what I need and hopefully someone can help me decide :)
-First is of course the gps tracking.
-Secondly I want a fairly accurate HRM. Because I'm relatively new to running my heart rate gets too elevated which causes shortness of breath and I want to be able to measure it correctly in order to change my pace when necessary. I don't need spot on accuracy, and reading the hr wrong on the first minutes doesn't really bother me as my problem happens on the middle/in the end of the run.
-I want to free myself off the hr strap because I'm allergic and my old strap started to give me a rash after a long run (1 hour or so). But one problem I have with the measurement from the wrist is the inability to use it with a long sleeved running shirt (I want to put the watch on the sleeve instead of on my skin) Which doesn't seem like a big problem but I'm running on seaside routes and my hand freezes if I don't use coverage on my hands.
-I don't care about 7/24 tracking and probably won't use the synch with the phone thing, one of the main reasons why I want a gps watch is to leave the phone at home.
So which one do you recommend for me, the 220 or the 235...

0 FlipStone over 9 years ago

Hi everyone,
I need a new gps watch and I cannot decide which model to buy. I got two models in mind, but cannot decide between them, especially because of the negative reviews I read on wrist hrm of 235. So I'll write what I need and hopefully someone can help me decide :)
-First is of course the gps tracking.
-Secondly I want a fairly accurate HRM. Because I'm relatively new to running my heart rate gets too elevated which causes shortness of breath and I want to be able to measure it correctly in order to change my pace when necessary. I don't need spot on accuracy, and reading the hr wrong on the first minutes doesn't really bother me as my problem happens on the middle/in the end of the run.
-I want to free myself off the hr strap because I'm allergic and my old strap started to give me a rash after a long run (1 hour or so). But one problem I have with the measurement from the wrist is the inability to use it with a long sleeved running shirt (I want to put the watch on the sleeve instead of on my skin) Which doesn't seem like a big problem but I'm running on seaside routes and my hand freezes if I don't use coverage on my hands.
-I don't care about 7/24 tracking and probably won't use the synch with the phone thing, one of the main reasons why I want a gps watch is to leave the phone at home.
So which one do you recommend for me, the 220 or the 235...

Do you mean 225 vs 235?

GPS is fine on the FR235... OHR is mediocre, it works reasonably most of the time for steady easy paced runs but it's not reliable. You can always combine it with a chest-strap of course if necessary during real cold days or something. I ran with gloves and long sleeved-shirt with the FR235 without issues btw (only having to pull up the sleeve a bit every now and then to check the watch). Without issues is relative though as it does seem to have issues with correct registration with cold temperatures.

The OHR on the FR235 is slow to adjust, so for your goal of adjusting pace based on it... I'm not sure if it's the best. Perhaps a scoshe rhythm+ in combination with a 220 is an option? You put the scoshe on the upper arm, and it is way more reliable then the OHR.

Or you might want to check the old TomTom MultiSport cardio, I had good results with that. Adjusted fast to tempo and hr changes... But your mileage may vary. The newer spark seems to have issues as well (they also changed to their own sensor unfortunately) but if you don't need the 24/7 tracking and activity monitoring the old multisport (or runner) cardio should be fine as well. Should be pretty cheap as well now.

0 Former Member over 9 years ago

Do you mean 225 vs 235?

I actually meant the 220 with a heart rate belt vs. the 235. I must admit the only reason I chose 235 over 225 is the green color :)

0 R_Tellis over 9 years ago

Since you have allergy problems with the HR strap and you don't care about 24/7 HR or smart watch functions it seems like the 225 would be the best compromise.

It uses a more proven oHRM sensor which eliminates the need for a strap, has the same GPS as the 220 and will cost less than the 235.

0 Former Member over 9 years ago

220 don't support Garmin IQ, i guess and don't have OHR. Plus the screen is better in 230/235.
220/225 don't support GLONAS
220/225 don't have cycling and few post run data and running dynamics are not available.
But, 225 OHR is as of today more reliable than 235, (which could become irrelevant in future if Garmin Fix any firmware issue if there is any).

So, if your concern or priority is not to use the HRM Strap then, I guess you have only two choice and that is 225/235. And any of them are really good choice.