Garmin Forerunner 201 wrist GPS

[OttrottAZ]

Has anyone tried the small wrist (or handlebar) mounted Garmin GPS's such as the Forerunner 201 or 301 instead of using a standard cyclocomputer or Polar unit? I'd appreciate any feedback as I'm intrigued by these little units.

[huey]

I have not used these units, but I do sell quite a few of them at REI. The feedback that i have heard is very positive. If you purchase it at REI you can return it if you are not satisfied with it.

huey

[OttrottAZ]

That's exactly where i saw one today at my REI in Phoenix. The guy told me many folks like them. Do you sell more of the Forerunner series or Foretrex and are AAA batteries or lithium rechargeable better in your opinion.

[jartzt]

We have the Forerunner 201 and use it primarily as a bike computer in the stoker position on the tandem (no setup). Pro: Coolness, accuracy, lots of available data options, download options, very cool pace feature (perfect for training), 11-14 hour battery life single overnight charge. Cons: Handle bar mount is optional, handle bar mount accomodates 26.0 diameter bars only, as a GPS device doesn't work inside (on rollers for example).

[pbbob]

I have a 101. I use it primarily too see how far I walk. I use it occasionally on the bike to see how far I've gone . I took off all the other computers. battery life is 12 hours or a bit less on aaa battery. it works well.

[TriJim]

pbbob --

I used a Forerunner 201 for a year and replaced with a 301 last month when I accidentally left the 201 in a hotel room. The Forerunner very closely matches my Flightdeck for speed and distance. However, the 201 and 301 will also map your ride -- a great situational awareness tool when you're riding new roads or just need to know how to get home. Other features include heartrate and logbook support.

Just tie-wrap a short length of pipe insulation on your handlebar for a quick on/off mount using the Forerunner velcro wrist strap.

Hope this helps. :)

[97CSI]

Ride occasionally with someone who uses the 301. Wasn't particularly impressed until we got onto roads that we didn't know that well. As we approached each intersection he could tell us exactly which road we were approaching. Excellent little device. If they would just put cadence in them. :D Tres chic.

[huey]

The Foretrex series is basically a Garmin Gecko that is on your wrist. They are popular with hunters. I work at the Tempe store and we sell way more Forerunners than Foretrexs, probably 6:1.

huey

[Louis]

A buddy of mine a work has one. He says "It works fine, except under heavy tree cover." He also uses it to get % grade, and it seems to do that fairly well.

[Onno]

I got one this past Christmas and use it mostly for running and x-c skiing. It is very cool to have precise distances and average pace. Its instantaneous speed reading doesn't seem to be that accurate, and disappointingly, its elevation and grade readings don't seem very accurate either.

Onno

[Orin]

Has anyone tried the small wrist (or handlebar) mounted Garmin GPS's such as the Forerunner 201 or 301 instead of using a standard cyclocomputer or Polar unit? I'd appreciate any feedback as I'm intrigued by these little units.

I've compared a Garmin Etrex against my bicycle computer. As others mention it's fine unless you ride under heavy tree cover or downtown areas where it doesn't have line of sight to the satellites.

Expect the GPS to under-report distance for this reason. The speed display would also freeze when it lost signal.

Altitude data is essentially useless from GPS units that don't include a barometric altimeter. An eTrex Summit is a better bet if you want meaningful altutude data... a bit bigger than the Forerunners though.

Another thing is that the GPS will need time to acquire the signal when you start, not to mention feeding it batteries all the time, even if they are rechargeable.

I took the GPS mount off my bikes...

Orin.

[spiderlake]

I've compared a Garmin Etrex against my bicycle computer. As others mention it's fine unless you ride under heavy tree cover or downtown areas where it doesn't have line of sight to the satellites.

Expect the GPS to under-report distance for this reason. The speed display would also freeze when it lost signal.

Altitude data is essentially useless from GPS units that don't include a barometric altimeter. An eTrex Summit is a better bet if you want meaningful altutude data... a bit bigger than the Forerunners though.

Another thing is that the GPS will need time to acquire the signal when you start, not to mention feeding it batteries all the time, even if they are rechargeable.

I took the GPS mount off my bikes...

Orin.


I had the same experience as Orin. Tree cover was a major problem for accurate reporting and I ended up removing it from my bike. Of course, I love GPS and use it geocaching, hiking (does take awhile to get a good signal), boating and the like but it just didn't pan out for biking. However, if you are in an area with minimal tree coverage or out on wide open roads then you'll probably have much better results.

[OttrottAZ]

Thanks for all the experiences. I may try the 301 for Christmas. I'll have to ask Mrs. Ottrott to talk to Santa for me.

[OldDog]

I've used an Etrex for mapping routes and making cue sheets through map-to-cue. Because line of sight to three satilites is important, somtimes th distance is off a bit. I found my head and body getting in the way. Imagine any gps would have this problem. Though being extreamly goofy, I once velcroed the unit to the top of my helmet, reaching up and hitting the buttons at waypoints. It worked. If you want the gps feature, find a unit with an antenna input.

[700 x 23c]

Along the same lines, ever look at www.endlesspersuit.com ?

[spiderlake]

There is an article on GPS in this month's issue of Bicycling. Yep, I read it every month! : ) Anyway, they mentioned a piece of software that is developed by a cyclist and looks very cool. It is called topofusion and is available at the following site:

http://www.topofusion.com/

I am tempted to give GPS a go again on my bike after playing around with the demo.

[Rusty Luggs]

...but would say so far, I think it's entertaining.

I agree with other comments that tree cover or high terrain adjacent to road affects accuracy of instantaneous speed, elevation, and grade readings. At times, speed was identical to regular cycling computer, while at other times it seemed to have a response lag.

Even on a ride where there was some tree coverage, after 35mi., agreement to "conventional" cycling computer on total distance was surprisingly within a few hundreths of a mile and average speed was identical.

It's easy to use, and the manual is clear enough and in English, so you don't have to flip through 500 pages in other languages to get to the one you read.

Works better than the wireless computer I tried a few months ago, which seemed to work about 50% of the time, had me endlessly fiddling with its sensor position, and eventually got itself returned to manf. before I smashed it with a 10 lb hammer.

Lots bulkier than a conventional bike computer (2x size) and the bike mount is clumsy and cheesy.

[alembical]

Do people who use the Forerunner find that the distance measurement is less accurate for hillier rides?

It would seem to me that the smaller and less accurate GPS (like those that fit on your wrist or bars) would have a more difficult time getting an accurate distance reading as they would be more likely to miss the minor ups and downs and elevation gains and therefore would seem likely to report the distance as less than was actually travelled.

Alembical

[oldguy00]

Anyone use the Forerunner 301? Do any of them work reliably in terms of the included heart rate monitor? I see mixed reviews on google...
What about the times gps/heart rate computer?

[TriJim]

You can now export the map of your latest ride! :beer: