I require a GPS – what should I get?

[jabberwocky]

For the record, my best battery life from my 800 was doing the Kill Bill Century from Reston in 2011. I think I was out for 13 or so hours, and it was just about dead when I got home. Like anything that uses li-ion batteries, the capacity will slowly degrade over time, but mine is several years old and still works well enough on longer rides.

I think the battery life is good enough for 99% of normal rides. External USB batteries are readily available and inexpensive if you need to boost it for something crazy.

[Phatboing]

@jrenaut 108765 wrote:

I’ve been poking around a bit and I think I want a Garmin Edge Touring Plus. Does anyone think I’m crazy? I mean, for wanting this Garmin. If you think I’m crazy for other reasons you can start your own thread.

I have the Touring, and I like it plenty. I like the WSGFABR feature (round-trip routing), even though I haven’t used it much.

The battery life’s great, not in the least because I can navigate by actually looking at a map than letting the damn thing tell me what to do, or yelling when I’m off-course. I CAN GO OFF COURSE IF I WANT TO, GARMIN!

Sorry.

Anyway, I’m pretty sure that the 800 is a fair bit more functionality for not many more moneys, too.

[hozn]

The Touring Plus looks like a nice little device. I have a Garmin 510 and 1000 (and, as you know, also have a 300, though that’s just an increasingly redundant backup now). Reasons you may want to consider a 510:
– If you think you might get into racing or other training, having at least HR is pretty important. Or if you want to track your calories in a more accurate way.
– If you ever want to ride on a trainer (and monitor that riding for fitness reasons, etc.), you will need speed/cadence. Yeah, I know trainers sound awful but they are useful training tools. And Zwift is a blast. (To be fair, you might not need an ANT+ head unit for things like Zwift, since you’d have to buy an ANT+ USB dongle.)
– Automatic uploads are wonderful (it doesn’t look like the Touring supports this?). I will never go back to a Garmin that I have to plug in.
– Glonass satellite support is really nice. The GPS lock is almost instant with the 510. Maybe it’s gotten much better with other non-Glonass options, but the Edge 300 could take a minute to find satellites.
– You can still do routes and navigation with the 500/510 series, you just don’t have loaded maps. If you load routes from RideWithGPS, you’ll even get street names on the course points so that you know that you’re “Turning right in 200 ft onto ‘Van Buren St'”. I haven’t used the Edge 1000 (which has maps) yet enough to really comment on their value; I like having it as a safety net, but my phone also does maps pretty well if I actually get myself lost. I have done many unfamiliar rides with just a course in the 510 (or 300) and it works fine.

The battery life looks great. The battery life for the 510 is a little less (15 hours vs. 17) , but both are long enough for those all-day rides. I cannot say the same about the Edge 1000. The claim is that it lasts 15 hours too, though so far for me it has been much shorter. Perhaps navigation costs more on these mapping devices? (If that is a general truth, that may be worth considering for the Touring too.)

[Subby]

There are tricks to get more battery life out of the 1000 – the biggest one is probably the display and brightness. During the day you don’t need backlight anyway, so it’s good to have it off. At night, you can just touch the screen when you need to read it. You can also turn off GLONASS, but I like using anything pronounced GLOWIN’ ASS, so I’m not turning it off. Also – don’t stay on the map screen. Constant redraw drains the battery.

I am getting about 6-7% battery use per every 10 miles ridden. If I know I am going out on a long ride, I will bring an exterior USB charge pack (the one I have has two ports and can recharge my iPhone seven times on one charge).

[ctankcycles]

@consularrider 108799 wrote:

You can do navigation with the 500 if you have preloaded a route, it gives you a line to follow which has been fine by me.

This is also true of the 200. Differences are the 500 has a barometric altimeter (hence the more accurate elevation mentioned by Rob), displays temperature, has a speed/cadence sensor, and is compatible with heart rate monitors and power meters.

[kwarkentien]

@Subby 108911 wrote:

There are tricks to get more battery life out of the 1000 – the biggest one is probably the display and brightness. During the day you don’t need backlight anyway, so it’s good to have it off. At night, you can just touch the screen when you need to read it. You can also turn off GLONASS, but I like using anything pronounced GLOWIN’ ASS, so I’m not turning it off. Also – don’t stay on the map screen. Constant redraw drains the battery.

I am getting about 6-7% battery use per every 10 miles ridden. If I know I am going out on a long ride, I will bring an exterior USB charge pack (the one I have has two ports and can recharge my iPhone seven times on one charge).

Ditto for me on these recommendations for the 1000. Also, if you follow a course, that also drains the battery quite a bit. I carry a Mophie with me and a charging cable. Plus, whenever I stop for more than a minute or two, I put the device into “sleep” mode to preserve battery. But the display quality is excellent, far superior to the other Garmins I’ve used. I can actually read it in the sun without difficulty.

[hozn]

I like the 1000. I will try these tips; I am pretty sure I already disabled the backlight, but will confirm. I like Glonass too much to give that up. I might invest in an external charger/battery, but seems kinda dumb to have to so that.

[Subby]

@hozn 108945 wrote:

I might invest in an external charger/battery, but seems kinda dumb to have to so that.

The reality is you are only going to need it when you are doing centuries, and how many times a year are you even doing those?

[hozn]

@Subby 109010 wrote:

The reality is you are only going to need it when you are doing centuries, and how many times a year are you even doing those?

Yeah, exactly. Well, really only double centuries, which are even rarer!

[Rod Smith]

@ctankcycles 108915 wrote:

This is also true of the 200. Differences are the 500 has a barometric altimeter (hence the more accurate elevation mentioned by Rob), displays temperature, has a speed/cadence sensor, and is compatible with heart rate monitors and power meters.

Only courses you have ridden and tracked with the device (I think). Unless I’m reading the owners manual wrong you CAN’T enter a course from a file that you or someone else has created on Mapmyride, Ridewithgps, etc.

The Edge 200 doesn’t have a barometer but it shows accurate elevation on the screen. It’s only when I upload to Strava that I get a lower number. I THINK the barometric data only comes into play if you click on “correct elevation” after uploading (this feature is grayed out if an Edge 200 was used because there’s no barometric data available to make the correction).

The Edge 500 has the ability to display a LOT of metrics, Edge 200 only basic cyclocomputer info, (speed, time, distance, average speed) plus elevation.

[Rod Smith]

@Subby 109010 wrote:

The reality is you are only going to need it when you are doing centuries, and how many times a year are you even doing those?

Oh snap! I thin hozn just got pwned!

@hozn 109016 wrote:

Yeah, exactly. Well, really only double centuries, which are even rarer!

True

[hozn]

@Rod Smith 109068 wrote:

Oh snap! I thin hozn just got pwned!

It is ok Subby is right. Realistically I may do 5 rides that are 5+ hours and probably only a couple that are 9+ hours, which might get close to exhausting that battery. I have few opportunities to be gone all day; I usually take vacation days for those rides. And this year I am focusing on road racing, so may do zero epic-length rides.

[Rod Smith]

Sure, you know I’m joking. You ride a lot. Quality miles!

[hozn]

Yes, I know. it is ok; I ride a lot less than many of y’all. I don’t think the fewer miles makes them higher quality, but I certainly do enjoy them and I do try to squeeze a lot out of them.

But, on the GPS question, it does seem like you would want at least one of the models that allow you to load a route from rwgps, etc. (even if no map data). That is a truly invaluable feature. And if you are the sort off person who likes to just go of riding and figure the ride out as you go, then maps sound like a great idea. I look forward to using the 1000 more this year when I do start doing the longer rides.

[Rod Smith]

I want one of those but I don’t want to spend more than $150 for a cycle computer, so I plan ahead and use handwritten notes on the back of envelopes or I use dead reckoning. I don’t think I would get much help from the small Garmin screen for just heading out and figuring the route as I go. I have a smartphone with Google Maps and larger screen. I don’t use it for route FINDING but I think it would work better for that. Garmin with mapping would be better for route FOLLOWING no doubt.

Quality miles = squeezing a lot out of them = same thing.

[Author]

Posts