Tri Talk HomepageTri Talk EventsTri Talk ForumsBlogsTri Talk TrainingTri TradeTriPlayerWikiTeam Tri Talk
New old watch - recommendations
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TriTalk.co.uk Forum Index -> Gear
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Jorgan




Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Posts: 17208
Location: alles was ich bin, alles was ich war

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 10:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Doca wrote:
Jorgan wrote:
Yes, the 920 is a good watch, but it'll still set you back a couple of hundred on eBay in most cases! The barometric altimeter is now fried on mine (s/h on fleabay - worked for the first 18 months I had it), and this has been a common issue on 920 over the years. Garmin kit can be very glitchy in my experience.


Have you checked the altimeter hole is clear?


Oh yes, many times! When I recently changed the strap, I checked the hole that's in behind that too. I guess a hard/factory reset might help...although I doubt it.
_________________
26 Years since it all began....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stenard




Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 1659

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

When my 910 went funny, Garmin customer support were able to take me into some of the engineer menus and some of the numbers from that proved the sensor itself was screwed, rather than it just outputting weird data due to being clogged up. Maybe worth the phonecall to get some certainty one way or another?
_________________
My blog: https://stenardstuff.wordpress.com/
Random stuff and race reports
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whisk




Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 8611
Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 10:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SGreg wrote:
735 is quoted at 14-16 hour...that's enough for me over long course?

Ok I haven't tested it yet in an actual Ironman, but the battery seems to last extremely well, I tend to forget to charge it more than anything as it always seems to just have life in it.

I would be very surprised if it didn't last a 13-14 hour IM Especially if you use a HR Strap

PS I got it last Black Friday for <200 with a few HR Straps included, they are still sealed in the box as the wrist-based seems fine for most applications.


I've generally been really happy with my 735. I wear it pretty much all the time to record my swimming cycling and running and as a general activity tracker. My only complaint is in respect of battery life Mad

The only IM I've used the watch for was Lanza this year. I turned off Glonas and made sure it was fully charged before the start. Everything was going well until about halfway into the run, when I got the low battery warning. The battery actually died at about 11:45 into the race Crying or Very sad . I was a bit disappointed given the manufacturer's claim of 13-14 hours. Does the use of a HR strap reduce battery usage? I've only ever used wrist-based HR with it because I find the straps irritate my skin over long runs.

Coincidentally, I met another Brit on the run course with the same watch. It turns out that his had died at about the same time in the race. He was also working on the basis that if he turned off as much as possible before the race then it should have lasted the course. He was mentally composing his letter to Garmin as he was shuffling along Wink

This sample size is only N=2, but it certainly looks like there is an issue with battery life if you are planning on going over 11 hours for an IM.

In normal training usage I haven't had a problem with battery life. I just charge it every few days. Live track does seem to eat battery life - I reckon live tracking a bike ride with Glonas on will eat the battery in about 7 hours.
_________________
2016: Just riding my bike....
Hot Chillee ride captain (sponsored by Specialized, Sigma Sports, Wattbike, Le Marq, Wahoo, BOA, Sportique, Pro-Cycle Insurance, Maserati)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SGreg




Joined: 30 Jun 2010
Posts: 1034
Location: High Peak

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 10:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wrist-based HR is quoted to reduce battery life. But it doesn't actually say if using a strap helps or hinders or if they just mean no HR.

Seems really odd as I am positive I could get 13-14 hours of BROKEN training out of it, seems odd it can't do the same consecutively.


But I have no data to add to the sample size group here so without some contrary samples it does look an issue... bugger

I only got it as my 305 was no longer lasting the course after 7+ years
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FoulOleRon




Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 6668

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 11:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I picked up a refurbed Fenix 3 a couple of years ago and have been pretty happy with it. Battery life is good, connects quickly to satellites, bluetooth to phone for alerts as well.

Only gripe would be the swim tracking, which seems quite a way off. I do have freakishly long arms though, so wondering if this is somehow throwing the open water tracking.
_________________
Find a happy place, find a happy place
http://mikemccrumpet.wordpress.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
JaRok2300




Joined: 01 May 2014
Posts: 373
Location: Worcester, UK

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 11:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've got a Fenix 2 and it is wildly optimistic on swim distances. I think my old 910xt was more accurate.

I've heard suggestions that the metal cases on the Fenix range hinder the satellite reception but not sure if there's anything in that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stenard




Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 1659

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SGreg wrote:
Wrist-based HR is quoted to reduce battery life. But it doesn't actually say if using a strap helps or hinders or if they just mean no HR.

Optical will significantly reduce battery life. It must do. The emission of the lights in the sensors, and the processing power for the HR calculations based on the readings, will have to use some up.

I don't know that it's quantified anywhere, but connecting external sensors does use up some battery life. Simply because the watch is having to read that data and record it to the fit file. But a connected HR strap will consume nothing like the onboard optical functionality.
_________________
My blog: https://stenardstuff.wordpress.com/
Random stuff and race reports
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jorgan




Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Posts: 17208
Location: alles was ich bin, alles was ich war

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As a mutli-sport watch, what are the meaningful differences between the 920 & 735? Can the 735 do all the power metrics and can you set-up Triathlon mode for timing events? Wrist-based HR is of no interest, can you turn that off?

ETA - looks like the trusty (haha) barometric altimeter is the only difference. How does the 735 give climbing data?
_________________
26 Years since it all began....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stenard




Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 1659

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gps. So it just triangulates elevation rather than using a barometer.
_________________
My blog: https://stenardstuff.wordpress.com/
Random stuff and race reports
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jorgan




Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Posts: 17208
Location: alles was ich bin, alles was ich war

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stenard wrote:
Gps. So it just triangulates elevation rather than using a barometer.


Merci. So really, given the 735 isn't fugly like the 920...seems like an easy choice?
_________________
26 Years since it all began....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stenard




Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 1659

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Depends on your pref. I actually prefer the square design. I seem to be in the minority on that though.

Mainly prefer it as 4 data fields just fits so much more effectively on a non-round screen
_________________
My blog: https://stenardstuff.wordpress.com/
Random stuff and race reports
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gus




Joined: 07 Sep 2007
Posts: 2501
Location: Freezing my nads off in Aberdoom

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks everyone... I'm beginning to really like the look of the 735...

Battery life is a potential problem (my long-course time tends to be 15+ hours!) but it's a nice looking bit of kit and seems to be going for around late-100's on fleabay...
_________________
BLOG now updating again!
In a world where I feel so small, I can't stop thinking big...

My 15 minutes of fame
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Buzz_




Joined: 19 May 2007
Posts: 338

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

But 3 data fields fit really well onto the round design - either 1/2 + 2x 1/4 or stacked in 1/3s, with the middle line bigger. 3 fields seems to be how I configure most of my screens so it works well for me.

Then I went from the 910 to the 935, so the size and technology leap was substantial!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jorgan




Joined: 12 Nov 2007
Posts: 17208
Location: alles was ich bin, alles was ich war

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stenard wrote:
Depends on your pref. I actually prefer the square design. I seem to be in the minority on that though.

Mainly prefer it as 4 data fields just fits so much more effectively on a non-round screen


Yeah well, a lot of us did the square watch thing in the 80s Wink
_________________
26 Years since it all began....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stenard




Joined: 04 Sep 2013
Posts: 1659

PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jorgan wrote:
stenard wrote:
Depends on your pref. I actually prefer the square design. I seem to be in the minority on that though.

Mainly prefer it as 4 data fields just fits so much more effectively on a non-round screen


Yeah well, a lot of us did the square watch thing in the 80s Wink
My learn to tell the time watch was definitely round. Razz
_________________
My blog: https://stenardstuff.wordpress.com/
Random stuff and race reports
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TriTalk.co.uk Forum Index -> Gear All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4
  Share
 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum





Home | About TT | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Advertising | Contact TT
Copyright ©2003-2015 TriTalk®.co.uk. All rights reserved.