login
Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt?
-
No new posts
|
 2014-02-22 9:46 PM |
Member  388   Miami |  Subject: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt?I was about to buy a Garmin 910xt when I read DC Rainmaker's review about the latest Garmin gadget, the Fenix 2: http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2014/02/garmin-fenix2-multisport-triathl... I had a 910 and I was very happy with it until it broke. I know this watch is one of the top choices for triathlon and I quite honestly think it gave me all I needed; however, I like a lot the following capabilities than the Fenix 2 offers: a. Running dynamics like the Garmin FR620 b. Bluetooth connectivity and integration with phone c. I can use it as an everyday watch Would you buy again the 910xt or would you go for the Fenix 2? |
| 2014-02-22 9:59 PM in reply to: davidfedez |
643 | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Depends on price. I knew Garmin was going to come out with a new triathlon watch soon but I bit the bullet and bought a 910 a few months ago since I found a website, that mistakenly, allowed promo codes to work on garmin products and I got a new 910 for $310. Would I want this guy? Sure! But... I'm sure this new watch will come with nice premium for at least a year. I never owned a 310 but it does 95% of what I want. I didn't think the pool metric of the 910 would be useful but I l really like it now since I can compare workouts and tell if I'm actually improving or not pretty easy. I went with a 910 over a 310 due to the website deal + I wanted a smaller profile. Otherwise a 310 looks to still be a great watch. Now moving onto the 2013+ watches, the new running metric these new watches have are pretty cool but again a pretty penny I'm sure. Cadence would be nice but since it's winter, I worked on my cadence for months (randomly test myself and aim for 15 right steps/10 secs), so it's not a feature I "need" but it still would be nice. To answer your question though, I'd stay with the 910, more so since I'm sure the 310 will be cease soon and I bet the 910 will finally go down a little in price. |
| 2014-02-23 10:16 AM in reply to: Blastman |
Veteran 629 Grapevine, TX | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? I've had the 910xt for a couple of years, and I love it. The Fenix 2 looks like a significant improvement (thanks for the heads up), and I'm definitely going to get it. For HR data, however, I am going to rely on the Mio Global watch. Now the Mio Global is currently only available in blue tooth mode, so I"m hoping that it will pair with the Fenix 2. Without pairing, it gives you reliable instant HR (good for pacing) as well as average workout HR (good for overall TSS calculations in Training Peaks). But the Fenix 2 is just awesome looking from that pre-review! |
| 2014-02-23 10:50 AM in reply to: davidfedez |
Member 1293 Pearland,Tx | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Comparing Fenix vs. Garmin 910XT In general regarding Triathlons I would say it provides everything the 910XT does but better. 1.) The Fenix 2 can be used in indoor and outdoor swimming. 2.) Can detect powermeters now ,but exclusively for the Vector, so not a good choice for non Vector users. In general if i am a mountain biker and loves Xterra Triathlon or a trailrunner , I would buy this watch in a heart beat. Since for now i am just doing Vanilla triathlons wont be enough for me to switch from 910XT. I would wait for the new 910XT. Garmin is good in enticing customers with new products.  |
| 2014-02-23 11:41 AM in reply to: davidfedez |
Regular 606 Portland, Oregon | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Reading between the lines of initial reviews...I am a bit skeptical. There are many caveats that the watch is still beta and NOT a replacement for the 910. It makes me think that the watch either has some serious issues (that Garmin has told the early reviewers will be fixed before release) or that some other such reasons why it is not as great as it reads. So far, I am planning on selling my 910 for the fenix 2, but certainly will not pre-order until I read full reviews from finished products. The only downside I can tell it that the screen only shows 3 data fields instead of 4. Everything else (as said above) looks as good or better. |
| 2014-02-23 12:22 PM in reply to: strykergt |
Master 1858 Salt Lake City | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Originally posted by strykergt Comparing Fenix vs. Garmin 910XT In general regarding Triathlons I would say it provides everything the 910XT does but better. 1.) The Fenix 2 can be used in indoor and outdoor swimming. 2.) Can detect powermeters now ,but exclusively for the Vector, so not a good choice for non Vector users. In general if i am a mountain biker and loves Xterra Triathlon or a trailrunner , I would buy this watch in a heart beat. Since for now i am just doing Vanilla triathlons wont be enough for me to switch from 910XT. I would wait for the new 910XT. Garmin is good in enticing customers with new products. DCRainmaker's preview says pretty clearly that any Ant+ PM will work with the Fenix2 |
| 2014-02-23 1:00 PM in reply to: JZig |
| 643 | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Originally posted by JZig Originally posted by strykergt Comparing Fenix vs. Garmin 910XT In general regarding Triathlons I would say it provides everything the 910XT does but better. 1.) The Fenix 2 can be used in indoor and outdoor swimming. 2.) Can detect powermeters now ,but exclusively for the Vector, so not a good choice for non Vector users. In general if i am a mountain biker and loves Xterra Triathlon or a trailrunner , I would buy this watch in a heart beat. Since for now i am just doing Vanilla triathlons wont be enough for me to switch from 910XT. I would wait for the new 910XT. Garmin is good in enticing customers with new products. DCRainmaker's preview says pretty clearly that any Ant+ PM will work with the Fenix2 Also, the 910 can be used for indoor and outdoor swimming as well, so I don't see that being a a perk over the 910. It looks like a neat watch but if I were to get one, I'd wait about a year after release. No product is perfect when it initially comes out. Let other people find and deal with the bugs and then buy the thing after these are sorted out. |
| 2014-02-23 1:13 PM in reply to: Blastman |
Regular 606 Portland, Oregon | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Originally posted by Blastman Originally posted by JZig Originally posted by strykergt Comparing Fenix vs. Garmin 910XT In general regarding Triathlons I would say it provides everything the 910XT does but better. 1.) The Fenix 2 can be used in indoor and outdoor swimming. 2.) Can detect powermeters now ,but exclusively for the Vector, so not a good choice for non Vector users. In general if i am a mountain biker and loves Xterra Triathlon or a trailrunner , I would buy this watch in a heart beat. Since for now i am just doing Vanilla triathlons wont be enough for me to switch from 910XT. I would wait for the new 910XT. Garmin is good in enticing customers with new products. DCRainmaker's preview says pretty clearly that any Ant+ PM will work with the Fenix2 Also, the 910 can be used for indoor and outdoor swimming as well, so I don't see that being a a perk over the 910. It looks like a neat watch but if I were to get one, I'd wait about a year after release. No product is perfect when it initially comes out. Let other people find and deal with the bugs and then buy the thing after these are sorted out. Those two features, indoor/outdoor swimming and power meters, were both lacking in the original fenix but are now present in the fenix 2. He was saying that these were two things making the 910 batter than the Fenix which are now no longer an issue. So...not a perk, just leveling the playing field. |
| 2014-02-23 1:48 PM in reply to: dfroelich |
| 35 | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Timely thread. I've been looking for a multisport watch, but wanted something "newer" than the 910 (eg some of the newer features on the 220/620). Haven't heard any rumors on a 910 replacement (920 perhaps?), but with the Fenix 2, I'm wondering if it is a viable alternative to the 910. I already have an Edge 500, and was considering just getting a 220 and using both, but if the Fenix works, I'll probably get that and just sell the edge. I'm going to wait a couple of months for some real world date to trickle in before pulling the trigger though I think. |
| 2014-02-23 2:04 PM in reply to: dfroelich |
Member 1293 Pearland,Tx | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Originally posted by dfroelich Originally posted by Blastman Originally posted by JZig Originally posted by strykergt Comparing Fenix vs. Garmin 910XT In general regarding Triathlons I would say it provides everything the 910XT does but better. 1.) The Fenix 2 can be used in indoor and outdoor swimming. 2.) Can detect powermeters now ,but exclusively for the Vector, so not a good choice for non Vector users. In general if i am a mountain biker and loves Xterra Triathlon or a trailrunner , I would buy this watch in a heart beat. Since for now i am just doing Vanilla triathlons wont be enough for me to switch from 910XT. I would wait for the new 910XT. Garmin is good in enticing customers with new products. DCRainmaker's preview says pretty clearly that any Ant+ PM will work with the Fenix2 Also, the 910 can be used for indoor and outdoor swimming as well, so I don't see that being a a perk over the 910. It looks like a neat watch but if I were to get one, I'd wait about a year after release. No product is perfect when it initially comes out. Let other people find and deal with the bugs and then buy the thing after these are sorted out. Those two features, indoor/outdoor swimming and power meters, were both lacking in the original fenix but are now present in the fenix 2. He was saying that these were two things making the 910 batter than the Fenix which are now no longer an issue. So...not a perk, just leveling the playing field. Just to discuss. I am just curious DCRM is a very meticulous technical triathlete. He probably owns every advance equipment out there. Why did he only test it on the Vector PM? why did he not test it with the other PMs. just an observation. I really would wait as mentioned above. I know when the Vector came out alot of bugs happend pairing it with 910XT. Have to wait for an update. Garmin also made sure that the Vector will never pair with the 310XT. "I would not want to fix whats not broken" |
| 2014-02-23 5:29 PM in reply to: strykergt |
Member 388 Miami | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Thanks for the responses! Tough decision here, I'm struggling between don't fix what's not broken (buy another 910xt) vs all the new bells and whistles that come with the Fenix 2, especially running dynamics that I felt the 910xt was lacking. I wanted to get a watch as soon as possible, but I may have to wait til march to read the full review from DC Rainmaker. |
| 2014-02-24 4:32 PM in reply to: davidfedez |
Master 1433 Calgary, AB Silver member | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Originally posted by davidfedez I was about to buy a Garmin 910xt when I read DC Rainmaker's review about the latest Garmin gadget, the Fenix 2: http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2014/02/garmin-fenix2-multisport-triathl... I had a 910 and I was very happy with it until it broke. I know this watch is one of the top choices for triathlon and I quite honestly think it gave me all I needed; however, I like a lot the following capabilities than the Fenix 2 offers: a. Running dynamics like the Garmin FR620 b. Bluetooth connectivity and integration with phone c. I can use it as an everyday watch Would you buy again the 910xt or would you go for the Fenix 2? My 310XT was stolen a few weeks ago, and I was waiting for this press release. Been limping with a 410. Fenix has 3 fields instead of 4, but has all the run metrics of the 620 (which 910 does not), has all the new power metrics (which the 310 does not), and looks nice as a day to day watch. The smart messaging is going to work with android in Q2. I would not replace a 910 but if I had anything less I would be tempted. I just placed a pre-order for the Fenix 2! |
| 2014-02-24 8:11 PM in reply to: strykergt |
Master 1858 Salt Lake City | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Originally posted by strykergt Originally posted by dfroelich Originally posted by Blastman Originally posted by JZig Originally posted by strykergt Comparing Fenix vs. Garmin 910XT In general regarding Triathlons I would say it provides everything the 910XT does but better. 1.) The Fenix 2 can be used in indoor and outdoor swimming. 2.) Can detect powermeters now ,but exclusively for the Vector, so not a good choice for non Vector users. In general if i am a mountain biker and loves Xterra Triathlon or a trailrunner , I would buy this watch in a heart beat. Since for now i am just doing Vanilla triathlons wont be enough for me to switch from 910XT. I would wait for the new 910XT. Garmin is good in enticing customers with new products. DCRainmaker's preview says pretty clearly that any Ant+ PM will work with the Fenix2 Also, the 910 can be used for indoor and outdoor swimming as well, so I don't see that being a a perk over the 910. It looks like a neat watch but if I were to get one, I'd wait about a year after release. No product is perfect when it initially comes out. Let other people find and deal with the bugs and then buy the thing after these are sorted out. Those two features, indoor/outdoor swimming and power meters, were both lacking in the original fenix but are now present in the fenix 2. He was saying that these were two things making the 910 batter than the Fenix which are now no longer an issue. So...not a perk, just leveling the playing field. Just to discuss. I am just curious DCRM is a very meticulous technical triathlete. He probably owns every advance equipment out there. Why did he only test it on the Vector PM? why did he not test it with the other PMs. just an observation. I really would wait as mentioned above. I know when the Vector came out alot of bugs happend pairing it with 910XT. Have to wait for an update. Garmin also made sure that the Vector will never pair with the 310XT. "I would not want to fix whats not broken" It was just a preview, not the full product review.. The bike portion seems to have been written when he was in Madrid cruising around the city on a rented commuter bike. My interest is definitely piqued. Its a good looking watch, that actually seems to be small enough to consider for everyday wear so thats a huge plus for me. My biggest concern is practicality on the bike with no quick release option. I'm worried that it might be a literal pain in the neck to constantly have to look at a 90* angle to see my numbers while riding. |
| 2014-02-25 1:09 PM in reply to: 0 |
| 928 | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? The only think I thing that the Garmin 910xt is missing is blue-tooth uploads to my phone. I would almost want the Fenix 2 just for that, but otherwise I really like the 910xt. I don't wear a watch normally. Edited by jennifer_runs 2014-02-25 1:36 PM |
| 2014-02-25 1:25 PM in reply to: davidfedez |
| Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? I wouldn't get the Fenix 2 over the 910. The Fenix 2 is not designed to be a triathlon watch. It's a trail running watch that they added some multi-sport features to. With ANT+ sensors hooked up, along with 1 second data recording with GPS, I doubt the battery would last a full IM. The 50 hour battery life is for ultra trac mode where the GPS is not constantly on and not recording at a 1 second rate. |
| 2014-02-25 5:04 PM in reply to: Jason N |
Master 1433 Calgary, AB Silver member | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Originally posted by Jason N I wouldn't get the Fenix 2 over the 910. The Fenix 2 is not designed to be a triathlon watch. It's a trail running watch that they added some multi-sport features to. With ANT+ sensors hooked up, along with 1 second data recording with GPS, I doubt the battery would last a full IM. The 50 hour battery life is for ultra trac mode where the GPS is not constantly on and not recording at a 1 second rate. It's not going to be less than the 310XT/910XT even on 1 sec recording. I will return it the next day if that's the case. It also has all the running metrics from the 620 like cadence, ground contact time, vertical oscillation that are not in the 910. Also being able to get messages/texts/emails from the phone while running/riding is nice - only need to pull over for super important stuff. I hope they add the ability to control the music - next/prev etc. The two things that went back to the 910 were the 4 fields instead of 3 and the quick release additions (though since i want to try torpedo bottles this year I don't want my garmin on the aerobars anymore) What REALLY blows my mind is the new model is the same price at the 910. I was expecting at least 100$ more. |
| 2014-02-25 5:09 PM in reply to: Khyron |
Expert 3145 Scottsdale, AZ | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Originally posted by Khyron Originally posted by Jason N It's not going to be less than the 310XT/910XT even on 1 sec recording. I will return it the next day if that's the case. It also has all the running metrics from the 620 like cadence, ground contact time, vertical oscillation that are not in the 910. Also being able to get messages/texts/emails from the phone while running/riding is nice - only need to pull over for super important stuff. I hope they add the ability to control the music - next/prev etc. The two things that went back to the 910 were the 4 fields instead of 3 and the quick release additions (though since i want to try torpedo bottles this year I don't want my garmin on the aerobars anymore) What REALLY blows my mind is the new model is the same price at the 910. I was expecting at least 100$ more. I wouldn't get the Fenix 2 over the 910. The Fenix 2 is not designed to be a triathlon watch. It's a trail running watch that they added some multi-sport features to. With ANT+ sensors hooked up, along with 1 second data recording with GPS, I doubt the battery would last a full IM. The 50 hour battery life is for ultra trac mode where the GPS is not constantly on and not recording at a 1 second rate. Wait, what, huh, seriously? Man, and I thought it a bit absurd to need a watch for swimming. Trumped. |
| 2014-02-25 5:31 PM in reply to: Khyron |
| Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Originally posted by Khyron Originally posted by Jason N It's not going to be less than the 310XT/910XT even on 1 sec recording. I wouldn't get the Fenix 2 over the 910. The Fenix 2 is not designed to be a triathlon watch. It's a trail running watch that they added some multi-sport features to. With ANT+ sensors hooked up, along with 1 second data recording with GPS, I doubt the battery would last a full IM. The 50 hour battery life is for ultra trac mode where the GPS is not constantly on and not recording at a 1 second rate. Source? You might want to check out DC Rainmaker's review of the original Fenix (which also claims 50 hours battery life) and what type of experience he had with various GPS and ANT+ settings. http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2012/10/garmin-fenix-in-depth-review.html The Garmin Fenix lists an active battery life of 50 hours. But does it actually achieve it? Battery life is one of those things that’s about as easy and enjoyable to measure as stepping on spit out chewing gum on the sidewalk. The challenge is, it’s actually extremely difficult to measure due to the significant number of variables – especially with a watch as complex as the Fenix. For the last 2+ months I’ve been trying to get a solid handle on battery life with the Fenix, and quite frankly – I can’t. Not for lack of trying. Some days I manage to really go the distance – close to 24+ hours in continuous tracking. Yet other days, I can barely get 8 hours of tracking. Virtually every day I’m trying different battery life experiments, and if there’s a clear-cut pattern – it’s not terribly obvious to me. He goes on to more detail about the battery tests, but you can read it on his site for yourself. |
| 2014-02-25 5:42 PM in reply to: davidfedez |
Pro 5361 | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? "better" depends on what features you're interested in. Nice that it has bluetooth, but note that it doesn't work at the same time as ANT+. So, if you're wearing a HR monitor or using a power meter- sorry, you don't also get to use bluetooth at the same time. Other than that- yes, I like the 'potential' of the Fenix 2 better than the 910xt, in part due to its nicer packaging. that said- I've been pretty happy with my Suunto Ambit2. Unlike the Garmins, the firmware isn't buggy. Seems to be far more reliable and everything really works well on it. Plus- Movescount (the Suunto web site) has better features than Garmin connect. It's getting a firmware upgrade in the next month or two as well, plus a slew of new useful apps. |
| 2014-02-25 6:04 PM in reply to: Jason N |
Regular 606 Portland, Oregon | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? To be fair, he didn't do those extensive battery tests with the 910 to compare. I believe my 910 would get at least 15 hours without the light on...but certainly not with it on full brightness. |
| 2014-02-25 7:25 PM in reply to: dfroelich |
| Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Originally posted by dfroelich To be fair, he didn't do those extensive battery tests with the 910 to compare. I believe my 910 would get at least 15 hours without the light on...but certainly not with it on full brightness. I don't think backlight was part of Ray's test where the Fenix only lasted 8 hours with 1 second recording. I could be wrong though. It would seem silly to test the watch that way. It's pretty obvious that any watch would get less than optimal battery performance if you leave the backlight on...especially since most athletes would never leave the backlight on in real world use. After his test of the Fenix, it seems pretty clear that Ray was less than impressed with the performance of the Fenix using 1 second recording as compared to the Edge and Forerunner series of Garmin products. Yet, on shorter trips in regular tracking mode (frequency 1-second), I’m barely getting 8 hours of tracking – far less than most of the Garmin Forerunner or Edge lineup. If this is simply due to keeping the backlight on with the Fenix, and no backlight on for the Edge/Forerunner, then that would be an unfair comparison, and very out of character for someone like Ray who seems to take these comparisons very seriously and detail oriented.
|
| 2014-02-25 7:59 PM in reply to: Jason N |
Master 1433 Calgary, AB Silver member | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Yep if it's less than 15 hrs of solid power meter/running with ant+ accessories, I'll have no problem taking it back and grabbing a 910. But if it's good then the run metrics will be a nice bonus (and wearing it a bit more often). |
| 2014-02-26 7:57 AM in reply to: Khyron |
| 5 | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? My main draw to the Fenix 2 is it seems like a watch I could all the time. Also the notifications are a huge bonus. Although I don't think anyone has mentioned it yet but, the notifications do not work when connected to any ANT+ device. This is the major down side to this watch. I would want to recieve text/emails while on the bike, which won't work if using a speed/cadence or power meter. I'm currently using a 310xt and I had a 405 before that. I'd love a size comparison between the Fenix 2 and the 405. Latley I've been considering getting a Pebble Steel as my everyday watch, and 310xt as my training watch, but now the Fenix 2 seems to combine the two. |
| 2014-02-26 9:11 AM in reply to: DatGrapeDrink |
Member 388 Miami | Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Originally posted by DatGrapeDrink My main draw to the Fenix 2 is it seems like a watch I could all the time. Also the notifications are a huge bonus. Although I don't think anyone has mentioned it yet but, the notifications do not work when connected to any ANT+ device. This is the major down side to this watch. I would want to recieve text/emails while on the bike, which won't work if using a speed/cadence or power meter. I'm currently using a 310xt and I had a 405 before that. I'd love a size comparison between the Fenix 2 and the 405. Latley I've been considering getting a Pebble Steel as my everyday watch, and 310xt as my training watch, but now the Fenix 2 seems to combine the two. Not sure how it compares to the 405, but I went to the REI store in Austin to try the current Fenix model since the hardware is the same and the watch is bigger than what I expected. The screen size is perfect, but it is thicker than what I was imagining. It does look very nice though. |
| 2014-02-26 1:01 PM in reply to: DatGrapeDrink |
| Subject: RE: Garmin Fenix 2, better than 910xt? Originally posted by DatGrapeDrink I would want to recieve text/emails while on the bike, which won't work if using a speed/cadence or power meter. Really? To each their own. If my Edge 500 had a text/email feature (even while still taking in ANT data), I'm about 99.9% cetain I would turn the feature off. |
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Garmin 910XT purchased through heartmonitors.com -- Ship date | ||
 | |||
| First Look: Garmin 910XT Pages: 1 2 | ||
| Garmin 910xt released today Pages: 1 2 3 4 |
| ||||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK