87 of 88 people found the following review helpful
Fantastic Device - But get the HRM Version,
This review is from: Garmin Forerunner 410 GPS Sportswatch (Electronics)
The Garmin Forerunner 410 is the replacement for the Garmin Forerunner 405 and Garmin Forerunner 405CX and in this respect is a second generation device. The Forerunner 405 was almost a great device, small enough to be used as an everyday watch and a fully functional GPS runner's tool, but when the reviews started trickling in it became clear that it had a major problem, the sleek touch sensitive (iPod like) bezel didn't work too well when it became wet (with rain or sweat). The Forerunner 410 looks and works much the same as the Forerunner 405 but the troublesome bezel is now much improved.
The Forerunner 410 is primarily a runner's watch with just enough features to make it useful to cyclists; it's not really well suited fto the tri-athlete for several reasons. Garmin states that the Forerunner 410 is rated at IPX7, this means that it has been tested in water at a depth of one metre for 30 minutes. The GPS signal does not penetrate water so the GPS function will not work, likewise the Heart Rate Monitor will not work in water.
The Forerunner 410 came with no charge at all in the battery, but charging is quick and simple; it was 100% charged after about 2 hours. With the GPS enabled the battery will last up to 8 hours; this is borne out by experience. One improvement over the earlier Garmin Forerunner 405 is that you can now disable the GPS function and this extends battery life to around a week (apparently).
The Forerunner 410 has four customisable screens to view and each can be configured to display 1,2 or 3 of the 35 available data fields. Three of the 35 data fields will require the additional foot-pod for cadence information and a further eight fields will require the optional heart rate monitor. The Foot Pod is useful for capturing cadence (steps per minute) and for distance/speed when no GPS signal is available (in the gym and on the treadmill). The heart rate monitor strap is worth the investment and provides a wealth of additional data.
The GPS facility is excellent, it typically picks up the GPS signal well within one minute and so far it hasn't lost it. Tracking appears to be very accurate, typically within 5% of the actual distance run. The elevation calculation can be a little vague (this is not the fault of the watch but a result of how GPS calculates elevation) but even this seems to tally on the Forerunner 410.
One of the most useful features is the Virtual Partner, this enables you to set a target pace for your virtual partner and track progress against him/her on your run. This is a fantastic feature for pacing yourself, especially in a race when it's so easy to start too quickly. It's easy to switch between the Virtual Partner page and the data pages on the watch by simply tapping the bezel (or using the auto scroll feature). I've tried this in the rain and deep into a run with sweaty hands with no problem. I've even tried it with gloves on and it worked fine. The display can also be locked to prevent accidental activation.
The PC software setup was simplicity itself (I use Windows XP) and the watch automatically downloads the run data as soon as it's within range of the USB antenna (about 2 metres). The GarminConnect web site is free and gives a very good analysis of the data. It will show the route you took, heart-rate, speed, elevation and cadence and will even animate it to show all the readings as you ran - really impressive. There is also some free software available on the web (Sports Tracks 3.0) that is compatible with the Garmin 410 and that enables you to analyse the data still further.
The Garmin 410 is a really impressive piece of equipment and now that the bezel issues appear to have been largely fixed is definitely worth getting if you're a runner. If you're more of a Tri-athlete I may be tempted to go for the Garmin Forerunner 310XT as a more suitable device.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-6 of 6 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 6 Jan 2011 16:34:39 GMT
Last edited by the author on 6 Jan 2011 16:37:10 GMT
G. Hodgson says:
The 310XT has the same issue with GPS signal as the 410, for the reason you gave, that GPS won't work while underwater, and the ANT+ signal from a heart rate monitor can't penetrate far enough in water. If you swim with a 310XT on your wrist, you will get only a rough approximation of where you have been as the signal will disappear every second stroke.
It is clear that the 310XT is designed for triathletes, coping with transitions and change from speed (bike) to pace (run) but still won't track GPS well while swimming, and won't pick up HR at all while swimming.
The usual solution to the GPS issue is to put the watch under a swim cap, which works pretty well.
In reply to an earlier post on 11 Jan 2011 16:59:00 GMT
Agreed, these are valid comments. My point (not too well made I agree) is that the FR410 is an odd shape (not flat underneath like the FR310XT) and wouldn't sit under your cap or on your neck as comfortably as the FR310XT. You're right though, the HRM won't work in water regardless of the model. Of the two, the 310XT is arguably more swimmer friendly and so better suited to the tri-athlete.
Posted on 16 Feb 2012 19:05:35 GMT
Dr. R. A. Crossley says:
I've just got this watch and was REALLY excited to start using it... However, it came with "Slovenska" across the front and I cannot find any pages in the guides or blogs / posts on how to get this to English!
Can anyone help?
In reply to an earlier post on 16 Feb 2012 23:46:29 GMT
Okay - this should be simple enough. With the watch displaying the time press the menu option on the bezel. This will display three options - select the top option (settings) by moving your finger on the bezel anti-clockwise and then tapping the bezel to select it. You then need to select the System option by moving two clicks anti-clockwise around the bezel. The first option display is 'Language' and you should see 'English' as one of the options. Hope this helps.
Posted on 29 Apr 2012 14:19:57 BDT
Andrew Michael Sykes says:
I've wanted this watch for a while and have found this review very helpful but the fact that GPS tracking is 'typically within 5% of the actual distance run' just makes me think that that renders the whole concept of pricey GPS enabled watch pointless. I'm really surprised that a top of the range brand like Garmin is that far out still. 5% is a lot. Until they're absolutely accurate I can't see it as a worthwhile investment.
In reply to an earlier post on 30 Apr 2012 10:25:24 BDT
The limitation in accuracy is down to the GPS system rather than Garmin's implementation of it. I have found it to be much better than 5% over time. On a recent half marathon it recorded 21.17Km on a measured 21.1Km course - and even that slight variation could be attributed to weaving around other competitors. This device is easily accurate enough to measure your pace in races.
Of course you should really look at the Garmin 610 and 910 now which are more recent devices, the 610 seems to be a replacement for the 410 although Garmin don't market it as such.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›