Pricing of F645 compared to F935

As you say the 935 is a true multi sport watch whereas the 645 is a running only watch (well with some multi sport support) so presume that is why it is a bit less.

Ultimately Garmin set a price. It is up to us as consumers to decide if it provides value for money.

It's my cynical view that Garmin deliberately tweaked the software in the 645 to remove the multi-sport profiles to justify the £120 premium of the 935, as there is absolutely no reason that I can see why the 645 shouldn't be able to track triathlons and duathlons like the 935, as it's just a function of the software. I'm sure they were aware that the mass-market appeal of the 645 wouldn't be as high if it shared the same price tag as the 935.

The 935 should have been no more than £370 at launch, but because the launch coincided with the launch of the Fenix 5, it was sold as the plastic version of the Fenix 5, costing £30 less. Now, 9 months later, Garmin's top of the line running watch does everything their top of the line triathlon and hiking watches do, minus the aforementioned software tweaks to prevent multi-sport use, but for £120 less.

Well the Vivoactive watches have always been good value for the money, look at the Vivoactive HR that had a barometer when the 630 or 735 didn't. On the other hand the "Triathlon" watches have always been overpriced, 920XT, 735XT, 935, so...I for one have no use for a triathlon watch so would probably have bought the 645, had it been available at the time. Other than the triathlon features, the 645 lacks "Running Power" (another pure software limitation) but adds the appealing "answer a text message from the watch" that is apparently not coming to the FR935 or F5.

Adding insult to injury, the FR645 will likely have better buttons than the "worst sport watch buttons known to mankind " of the FR935 !

Adding insult to injury, the FR645 will likely have better buttons than the "worst sport watch buttons known to mankind " of the FR935 !

I think you are just unlucky. I had my 935 exchanged (standard one for the tri bundle one with the yellow accents). The buttons on the new one are all properly 'clicky', whereas the old one had a really spongy feeling up button. It was the first batch of 935 so Garmin may have since addressed the quality control issue.

I recommend you send it back to where you brought it from if you are still within warranty as it shouldn't be like that.

On the other hand the "Triathlon" watches have always been overpriced, 920XT, 735XT, 935

Wasn't the 735XT the same price as the 630 with HRM-Run bundle at launch?

What makes you think that the 645 won't support Running Power. The VA3 doesn't do it despite having a baro and the latest CIQ because it doesn't support running dynamics. Since the 645 meets all of the criteria it most certainly should.

as a high-end running watch it's bound to support Running Power IMHO

as a high-end running watch it's bound to support Running Power IMHO

Support, most likely from the HRM-Run/Tri but not natively via stryd or runscribe...which, come on Garmin, Suunto and the Polar V800 (the 4 year old V800) support it natively why not ANY of your watches?

Again, you have to ask yourself: What type of person are you? Do you need ALL the things on the 935? Or are you primarily a runner? If the latter, then the 645 might be a no-brainer since it has music on-board and NFC tap pay (optional). If you do more than these and want the full suite of metrics, well the 935 is the better choice (as of this writing).

I think this whole argument is going to be moot in about a year anyways. The 645 and vivoactive 3 were just product tests to see how many people desired these options on the watch. next year, and you can mark my words on this: come CES 2019 (and Q1 in general) ALL the major watches named will have the option for music on board/Tap Pay....if not just come standard with it. It's going to be just like pretty much every watch comes packed with a OHRM now.

If you have a 935 and want music on the go, then why not buy an iPod Shuffle and EarPods (the ones which have a little remote control on the cable). It’s way easier to change tracks and volume when you are running using that remote compared to fiddling about with the watch, trust me. Plus, battery life on the 645 must suck when using GPS and playing music at the same time, especially if the battery is smaller than the one on the 935. That’s the downside to convergence.

This is a pretty amusing conversation. Obviously the 935 isn't over priced as it seems to have been selling well. Price has nothing to do with cost to manufacture. Quite often, companies actually spend resources to dumb down a product so they can sell it for less. You could argue Apple products are all over priced if you look at their cost to manufacture. But people keep buying, so they clearly aren't over priced either.

Nobody is making any of us purchase these devices. If the value isn't there for you, do't buy it. None of us can't live with out these devices.