Frontpage Deal
BuyDig Discounts, Deals and Coupon Codes

Refurbished: Garmin Forerunner 610 GPS Watch $66 or w/ HRM EXPIRED

johnny_miller 3,777 4,700 July 6, 2016 at 03:18 PM in Smart Watches & Wearables (5) More BuyDig Deals
Sorry, this deal has expired. Get notified of deals like this in the future. Add Deal Alert for this Item
Deal
Score
+30
22,986 Views
See Deal
$85

Deal Details

Promoted 07-18-2016 by Randy71 at 11:22 AM View Original Post
BuyDig.com has select Garmin Forerunner 610 Touchscreen GPS Watch (Factory Refurbished) on sale for the prices listed below when you apply promotion code TRAINMORE at checkout. Shipping is free. Thanks johnny_miller

Prices listed below after promotion code TRAINMORE

Editor's Notes & Price Research

Written by Randy71

A 1-year Garmin warranty is also included w/ this purchase.

Share

Original Post

Edited July 19, 2016 at 07:08 AM by jersharocks
BuyDig.com

Use promotion code TRAINMORE for the prices below:
If you purchase something through a post on our site, Slickdeals may get a small share of the sale.
About the OP
Give Rep Send Message
johnny_miller Pro Deal Editor
Minnesota Joined May 2014 Slickdeals Editor L8: Grand Teacher
4,700 Reputation Points
508 Deals Posted
810 Votes Submitted
3,777 Comments Posted

Community Wiki

35 Comments

1 2 3

Featured Comments

I followed the Garmin forums for several months after buying a 235 at launch, and from what I've read the optical monitor still has a ways to go to catch up to the accuracy and consistency of current heart rate straps. Factors such as how tightly you strap on the watch and where you position it on your wrist/arm can result in wildly different readings. It is also generally agreed that readings from the optical monitor are nearly useless during high intensity training. It just isn't able to keep up with the rapid changes in heart rate and Garmin has been quiet on whether that is a software or hardware issue. Garmin has been updating the firmware and sensor software to try and improve consistency and accuracy, but I haven't been on the boards lately to see if they've made any progress. Some people also say they've had better luck with other brands such as Mio and Scosche.

That said, for serious running/training where you need your readings to be accurate and consistent, and if you're doing activities where your wrist moves around a lot, a heart rate strap is still the way to go. I'm a casual runner so I'm ok with the the optical monitor on the 235, mainly because I feel straps are a hassle, but most serious runners do not appear to be happy. This is probably why their top of the line running watch, the 630, does not have optical as an option.
Xheryk 5

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

#3
is this an optical hrm or a chest strap?
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#4
Quote from skrypj View Post :
is this an optical hrm or a chest strap?
This uses a chest strap. The Forerunner XX5 models have optical monitors.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined May 2009
♦ illuminatus ♦
8,029 Posts
13,888 Reputation
Pro
#5
Quote from Xheryk View Post :
This uses a chest strap. The Forerunner XX5 models have optical monitors.
chest strap hrm is said to better and recommended by more professional personal trainers. thoughts on that?
Reply Helpful Comment? 1 0
#6
Quote from purificada View Post :
chest strap hrm is said to better and recommended by more professional personal trainers. thoughts on that?
I followed the Garmin forums for several months after buying a 235 at launch, and from what I've read the optical monitor still has a ways to go to catch up to the accuracy and consistency of current heart rate straps. Factors such as how tightly you strap on the watch and where you position it on your wrist/arm can result in wildly different readings. It is also generally agreed that readings from the optical monitor are nearly useless during high intensity training. It just isn't able to keep up with the rapid changes in heart rate and Garmin has been quiet on whether that is a software or hardware issue. Garmin has been updating the firmware and sensor software to try and improve consistency and accuracy, but I haven't been on the boards lately to see if they've made any progress. Some people also say they've had better luck with other brands such as Mio and Scosche.

That said, for serious running/training where you need your readings to be accurate and consistent, and if you're doing activities where your wrist moves around a lot, a heart rate strap is still the way to go. I'm a casual runner so I'm ok with the the optical monitor on the 235, mainly because I feel straps are a hassle, but most serious runners do not appear to be happy. This is probably why their top of the line running watch, the 630, does not have optical as an option.
Reply Helpful Comment? 5 0
Last edited by Xheryk July 7, 2016 at 10:39 AM
#7
Mio and Scosche are pretty much the only optical sensors that are comparable to chest straps, except they don't do some advanced metrics (HR variability, used by some watches to determine the training impact and recovery time -- but not the FR 610 here). My wife used a Scosche and the few times I borrowed it and compared to my Garmin strap on the same run, I was getting almost identical charts, +- 1-2 bpm, including with intervals. Now she got a Forerunner 235 and the built in optical HR is definitely iffy and jumps around a bit. I guess it is ok for a casual runner as a ballpark guide, but you can't really depend on it 100%. Not sure if she is on the latest firmware or not.

My point is, Scosche Rhythm+ is optical, relatively inexpensive ($50-$60?), can be worn on your forearm or bicep (less obtrusive than on your chest) and if you don't care about HR variability, it is as good as any chest strap.
Reply Helpful Comment? 2 0
#8
Quote from Xheryk View Post :
I followed the Garmin forums for several months after buying a 235 at launch, and from what I've read the optical monitor still has a ways to go to catch up to the accuracy and consistency of current heart rate straps. Factors such as how tightly you strap on the watch and where you position it on your wrist/arm can result in wildly different readings. It is also generally agreed that readings from the optical monitor are nearly useless during high intensity training. It just isn't able to keep up with the rapid changes in heart rate and Garmin has been quiet on whether that is a software or hardware issue. Garmin has been updating the firmware and sensor software to try and improve consistency and accuracy, but I haven't been on the boards lately to see if they've made any progress. Some people also say they've had better luck with other brands such as Mio and Scosche.

That said, for serious running/training where you need your readings to be accurate and consistent, and if you're doing activities where your wrist moves around a lot, a heart rate strap is still the way to go. I'm a casual runner so I'm ok with the the optical monitor on the 235, mainly because I feel straps are a hassle, but most serious runners do not appear to be happy. This is probably why their top of the line running watch, the 630, does not have optical as an option.
Considering the complaints and class action lawsuit that was brought against Fitbit regarding inaccurate readings from their Charge HR during high intensity activities, I believe it is as you stated; optical monitors on fitness bands/watches are typically not as accurate as chest strap monitors. I'm not sure why optical monitors have these inaccuracy issues, but I would imagine it's a hardware issue and not software considering it's not just Garmin. This is just my observation, but please don't quote me if I'm way off base!
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#9
Looks like its dead, price went up to $89 and $105
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 1

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

#10
Not dead. Need to apply code at checkout "trainmore"
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#11
Quote from purificada View Post :
chest strap hrm is said to better and recommended by more professional personal trainers. thoughts on that?
Makes sense.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#12
For 99% of runners this is a terrific value especially if you use the heart rate monitor.
Reply Helpful Comment? 1 0
#13
FYI. I have had a 610 for two years and done maybe 1500 miles in that time(was trading for a marathon). This is pretty slow to acquire gps, and are known to have battery charging issues. I'd look for something more recent. The Tomtom runner cardio have been on close out and include optical HR. I agree that chest straps are more accurate (and battery's last a long time), but the wrist ones are much more comfortable, and when I compared accuracy was close enough for me uses.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined May 2009
♦ illuminatus ♦
8,029 Posts
13,888 Reputation
Pro
#14
Quote :
The bottom line is this: if you want pinpoint accuracy, get a chest strap. If you're just after more colour in your workout, and aren't interested in spending your sessions at specific bpms, a wrist-based monitor will do.
source [wareable.com]
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#15
Quote from purificada View Post :
chest strap hrm is said to better and recommended by more professional personal trainers. thoughts on that?
if you are professional, yes, it is definitely better. but if you are not, I doubt how much more helpful the chest strap can be.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Page 1 of 3
1 2 3
Join the Conversation
Add a Comment
 
Copyright 1999 - 2016. Slickdeals, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Copyright / Infringement Policy  •  Privacy Policy  •  Terms of Service  •  Acceptable Use Policy (Rules)  •  Interest-Based Ads
Link Copied to Clipboard