<p>I am starting to look at these both for myself to get my heart rate in target range & for my D2. She is training for a triathlon & she also is on various meds that make her dehydrated.
There seems to be an overwhelming number of choices.</p>
<p>I need suggestions & it has to be idiot proof because I don’t read manuals.
:o</p>
<p>Definitely go with Garmin. The 305 is available at great prices right now and has the HR function and GPS. I have the 310 which I like better, but it is pricey. Look around online for 305 prices.</p>
<p>You can often find the HRM attachment on Ebay for a lot less than if you buy it with the watch.
Garmin is great - based on my experience, though, I’d buy one locally so if there are problems it can be returned/exchanged. The one I received as a gift was purchased at a really good price on line, but it had obviously sat too long (issues with the batteries). Two sisters have the 305s and love them.</p>
<p>I just bought my husband the Garmin 210 forerunner. It was highly recommended by a guy I just flew with. Who happens to be one of the top runners for his age (mid fourties) in the United States. He said he’s been waiting for this one to come out. And to stay away from the 305, because it is square, big and bulky. Not good for someone who wants a fairly lightweight item (particularly a woman who might have a smaller wrist). He also said the Garmin 410 is nice, but probably not worth the extra money. I bought the 210 with Heart rate monitor from Roadrunner sports. If you join their VIP club for $1.99, you get free shipping and a 10% discount. There are only a couple of states they charge tax in (Washington is one). Holabird sports may be cheap too. It cost $225 ($249- 10% discount). Forget buying the bundle, apparently it’s not worth it.</p>
<p>I got this advice from a world class runner, who averages 200 miles/week, so I completely trust it. I’ll let you know how my husband likes it, he’s going to try it tomorrow on a long run. He’s been wearing a square, bulky Garmin for the last 3 years.</p>
<p>I doubt that your friend averages 200 miles a week. The marathon record holders peak at about 120.</p>
<p>I am an elite runner and very petite and wore the 305 for years. It is what most of my friends have, too. Yes it looks big ( we joke about wearing a laptop on our wrists) but the actual “feel” is fine. There are also optional Velcro bands you can get. The plus of 205/305 (and my 310) is that the display is easy to see while you are running/biking. If you really want swimming use, too, spring for the 310.</p>
<p>That’s what he told me, 200 miles per week. Perhaps I didn’t hear him right, but that is what I thought he said. I could be incorrect, of course. That seems like alot of distance.</p>
<p>I know that many people like what they have had for years, and are comfortable with. Perhaps the choice is figuring out what is more important to you. Is most of her training running, or swimming? How is her eyesight? Does she have a small wrist? I have declining eyesight (time to spring for glasses), but a small wrist. I run but don’t swim much. For me, compact and light would be most important. I probably would get annoyed with one of those large bulky Garmins, and might not wear it. It might be best to actually go into the store and try things on, see how it fits for you and her, and how well you can read it.</p>
<p>hell I think 20 would be a lot for me- I am not a runner ;)</p>
<p>THis is one reason why I was thinking of a monitor for D
[Local</a> News | College athletes’ risk of sudden cardiac death found higher by UW study | Seattle Times Newspaper](<a href=“http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014677660_ncaacardiac04m.html]Local”>http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014677660_ncaacardiac04m.html)
I don’t know how much it would help to be aware of patterns, but it surely couldnt hurt.</p>
<p>I was looking at the 305, it looks like it has come down a lot in price since newer available- but I don’t need the latest thing.</p>