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

Should I move from F5 to 935?

Had my F5 for about two months and initially fell in love with it. However, I am facing the below issues which are making me consider returning it for the 935 and just wanted people here to confirm the 935 doesn't also fail in these areas..

Current pace is off a lot during runs (especially near trees)
GPS falls short during most runs (eg today ran 3.4 mile as seen by Strava app on my mobile but F5 recorded 3.2 mile)
Watch strap - buckle digs in quite a bit especially when done up tight during an activity.
OHR - resting seems okay but will occasionally check the widget and it skyrockets for no reason before coming back down again. And activities generally get a lower recorded HR.
Altimeter - keep having to set this either manually or using GPS and keep the setting as automatic but it goes way off after a few hours from my usual 20ft to -+300ft

Would be interesting to see if the non GPS related issues also occur in the 935 seeing as it's running the same software.

Thanks,

0 FlipStone over 7 years ago

Cadence shows ZERO simply! Speed ok, But there is no cadence. No matter what powermeter. What version of firmware you have?

That's weird...

I'm on 9.72 now, last 2 runs were with the HRM Run strap... cadence shows fine.

Runs before that were watch only, also no issues with cadence (checked for 9.70 and 9.60 FW).

0 Zako over 7 years ago

That's weird...

I'm on 9.72 now, last 2 runs were with the HRM Run strap... cadence shows fine.

Runs before that were watch only, also no issues with cadence (checked for 9.70 and 9.60 FW).

He talks about cycling cadence. Since the 9.60 FW we don't have cycling cadence anymore.
The 935 is an excellent hardware, and had excellent FW until the 9.60 FW came out.

0 Former Member over 7 years ago

Zako did you menage to paste your files to FR 935 after downgrading ?

0 ekutter-dnu over 7 years ago

The last couple fw versions have caused some definite regressions, like a pretty significant elevation issue when in some activities (mostly longer mountain bike rides for me) where the elevation gets smoothed at random times (mostly down hill sections), greatly reducing total ascent by 30% in some cases. But from reading the various threads, this is happening on all 935/Fenix/Fenix+ devices. Open water swim does seem like another one that got messed up starting with 9.1 or 9.6. In any case, these will be fixed and are likely impacting your F5 even if you don't realize it.

As for durability, I never had the F5 because of the weight and size, but I have had my 935 for over a year and have had zero durability issues. No scratches, malfunction buttons, etc. And I use it for trail running, mountain bike riding, pretty much everything.

0 FlipStone over 7 years ago

He talks about cycling cadence. Since the 9.60 FW we don't have cycling cadence anymore.
The 935 is an excellent hardware, and had excellent FW until the 9.60 FW came out.

Ah, I see... that sucks. Lucky for me I only run then but sure is crappy that these pretty big bugs slip in with these updates... The love-hate relationship with garmin continues.

0 chunkywizard over 7 years ago

I get cycling cadence from my Vector3s using 9.72...

0 Dr Phil over 7 years ago

pretty significant elevation issue when in some activities

On some devices, but not all. Is the elevation problem hardware or software? Mine looks fine - https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/2870248402 and always has been.

0 Zako over 7 years ago

I get cycling cadence from my Vector3s using 9.72...

I did not have cadence from my Favero Assiomas with 9.72.

0 Ante over 7 years ago

I owned the F5 for about a month before switching to the 935 (which I own for over a year now). The looks were my main concern as well, but I now actually prefer the 935. It's a more casual watch, slimmer, smaller, easier and more suitable to wear on a day-to-day basis.

My main gripe with it is still the black emptry ring around the display, but I only when I actually pay attention to it. It's more comfortable to wear then the F5, lighter and fits a bit better under a sleeve. Combined with the leather strap it's perfect imo. I have pretty small wrists though, perhaps that matters as well.

My main reasons for switching were sub-par GPS, also fixed with the 935.

All in all I had some hesitations as well, but they are all completely gone and I haven't regretted the switch at all,

A 935 is on its way from Garmin to replace my F5. Hope this will solve the GPS problem.

0 scotthunter2 over 7 years ago

And how do you experience the everyday use and build quality anesthetic of 935?

I don't think build quality is a reason to buy a Fenix over a 935, even if you are an outdoors enthusiast. If you bump either of these watches against rocks or a brick wall they will leave some unsightly scratch marks, but I very much doubt that you could actually "break" either watch in day-to-day use, unless you are rock climbing. I have had a 935 for over a year now and the plastic body seems to be really tough. Don't be fooled into thinking that the stainless steel on the Fenix is somehow significantly more durable and immune to cosmetic damage, because it's not.

For that reason I don't see the point in the Fenix series. You might as well get a 935 because it's much lighter and has a slightly slimmer profile, which makes it way more comfortable for running as it doesn't feel like you have a pendulum on your wrist. It's the best choice for serious athletes or people who are of lighter build. Also, because of its plastic design, the GPS performance on the 935 is second to none.

My only gripe with the design is the inner black ring / bezel which I feel makes the watch unnecessarily big. For the 945 I hope Garmin either makes the bezel smaller so that the watch can be smaller, or increases the screen size so it looks more "edge-to-edge". Hopefully this can be achieved without impacting on the excellent battery life.