|  | | | Customer Reviews: | | | Average Customer Review: ( 41 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
105 of 117 found the following review helpful:
 A GPS that cannot tell you where you are! Feb 17, 2006
By Michel4388
Starting with some positive comments, the unit itself (hardware) is nice, it's slightly larger (thicker) than a standard mobile phone and feels sturdy. The screen is clear (but small) and buttons feel nice and are well placed. The unit has the new SirfStarIII technology for increased sensitivity, e.g. under tree cover, and my limited experience until now is that the reception is indeed good.
So not a bad unit, but it should be understood that this unit is set up as a trip computer, and not as a navigation unit (although it does have some navigation options). It has some nice options like racing a virtual partner, which are well documented on the Garmin web-page. What the web-page does not make very clear though is:
- It cannot give you the current position!!!
- It does not have WAAS/EGNOS for better location precision
- It does not have the "Upcoming turn feature" that the Geko has
As a trip computer it has the following limitations:
- The speed it gives fluctuates significantly more than with a normal (simple) cycle computer with a wheel sensor.
- The height fluctuates so much that the grade it gives is completely useless (note that the Edge 305 should be better as it has a barometric sensor as well). Also, the total ascent and descent will systematically be too high. In a test I left the Edge for two hours in the same place, and had it record every second. Minimum height was 51m, maximum height 84m, total ascent 215m, total descent 218m, and maximum speed 3.5km/h.
The included Garmin training center software works okay, but is very limited:
- You cannot combine tracks (to upload to the Edge e.g.).
- You cannot compare more than two tracks.
- It only exports data in Garmins own (and uncommon) .hst file format
Also note that if you want to overlay your track onto a map, you will need other software. The user manual (printed out) isokay but also very limited.
The Edge comes with a rechargeable battery that is not user exchangeable (tip: instead of using the car-charger, it may be possible to use a universal USB car charger and the supplied cable at a fraction of the cost. Note however that I have not yet tested this).
I mainly bought this unit to map mountainbiking tracks in order to be able to combine the best trails into some nice routes, and then use the Edge to find the routes. Using some third party software, this is possible, but it should have been much easier. I assumed I would be able to use it together with a map while hiking, and was very (and unpleasantly) suprised to learn that I bought a GPS that cannot tell me where I am.
I am still hoping that Garmin can do an update of the firmware (I am using version 2.30 now) such that the unit gives the current location (ideally with an option for different grids). Without this option, two stars is all it gets from me.
28 of 28 found the following review helpful:
 Addressing accuracy concerns... Jun 11, 2007
By D. Morrison
I got my 205 this weekend, and after reading reviews here, I was concerned about the accuracy, especially when elevation is involved. To this end, I left my Cat Eye Mity 8 on the bike for the first ride so that I could compare the two. Before I actually used the Edge on the bike, I updated the software from the Garmin website. There are two updates you need to install - the GPS firmware, and the device firmware. The ride I went on was a 33 mile road loop, 5000ft to 6150ft, with a 6 mile, 3% average grade hill.
Speed: I was worried that the speed of the GPS would lag, but it updated as fast as the Cat Eye, and was more precise, since the Cat Eye only shows speed in increments of 0.5 mph above 20 mph.
Distance: The GPS recorded a distance of 33.32 miles, and the Cat Eye recorded 33.66 miles. I think that matching each other within 1/100 of a mile per mile is pretty amazing. On the open road (in NM roads can get pretty open), GPS accuracy was reported as 8ft to 10 ft - that's less than two bike lengths.
Elevation: The elevation seemed more or less accurate, and the curve drawn in the software is very smooth. The percent grade seemed very accurate, and matched percent grade that I calculated using TOPO! elevation profiles.
Calories burned: Without a heart rate monitor, I think this estimate is bunk. It's unclear if it uses percent grade in the estimate, and I have a hard time imagining that I burned 2000 calories on that 33 mile ride. On the other hand, it's a great excuse for a post ride burrito.
Software: The software (on my Mac) is easy to use, and displays information in a useful manner. It is a one step operation to make a route into a course, and one more step to put the course on the GPS. When you "Do the Course" (Garmin's term), it shows you a map, a compass, your virtual riding partner, or an elevation profile. Note that there is no elevation profile when you are not "Doing a Course", but that seems OK to me - after all, you can look behind you to see what you just climbed up. You really want a profile to show you how close you are to a summit or flat, and that is only possible when the entire route is known ahead of time (i.e. a "course").
Issues: There are some issues. Just like my old ETrex, the map never centers itself well on the screen. The Lap and Start/Stop buttons are sensative, so you need to be careful not to hit them if you do something like stretch over the stem while riding. The USB port cover is indeed a pain to get fitted correctly. The screen is harder to see, especially in dim light, than my Cat Eye is.
Other Notes: The Edge 205 comes with two bike mounts, so don't order two extras for three bikes, like I did. Also, the water bottle that comes with the 205 is twist open to drink, so it's not a bike bottle. Sort of dumb, but then who buys this thing for the bottle?
Bottom Line: I have no regrets about buying the Edge, and no regrets about getting the 205 rather than the 305. I'll be taking my Mity 8 off the bike tonight.
40 of 44 found the following review helpful:
Very cool, very useful, and very informative Mar 26, 2006
By Andrew Kent
I was a bit dubious about swapping out my regular cyclocomputer, especially for the extra dollars. Could something like the Edge 205 really give me that much more than the distance, speed, and time information I usually acquired with my $30 computer? Well, after a few rides with the 205, I can say that I'm a fan. The thing went on in a jiffy, works like a charm, and gives me all sorts of information I didn't have before. Wonder why that hill is so tough? Well, dummy, it's 13% grade. Didn't know that before. Wonder how much of that ride was spent ascending? Oh, about 1/3. Didn't know that before. How much climbing did I do on that ride? Oh, about 2,500 feet. Didn't know that before. And all this from a ride I've done at least a dozen times, and one I consider to be a "throwaway" training ride. A very cool, useful, and informative device. Well done, Garmin.
15 of 15 found the following review helpful:
Great for what it does May 11, 2007
By Kevin Mackie
This is a great little gadget. There are things it does really well, things it does not so well, and some things it doesn't do at all. I won't bother repeating all the features you can see on their web page. Instead, I'll stick to those things that I really like about the unit.
*Configurable data fields - there are dozens of fields you can display at any one time, both at the overall and lap level, and you can display from two to eight at a time. Showing five, for example, allows you to select a single field to take up the upper half of the display (I use this for Grade) and the remaining four fields take up the lower half.
*Multiple screens - There are two main display fields that you can easily toggle while you're riding, and there are numerous other screens when you are in other modes.
*Virtual racing - This has to be my favorite feature. You can save a route as a course, and race yourself against it. The unit will guide you along the course, but the real benefit is seeing how far ahead or behind you are of your previous ride. This is great for improving times on hills or routes that you take often.
*Viewing someone else's course - The free version of Garmin's MotionBased website lets you see others' routes, which is great if you're planning a ride with someone. You can run through the route and watch the map and hill profile while viewing the telemetry. Knowing that your riding partner consistently does 13mph on 6% grades makes it easy to judge if you can keep up.
What this unit isn't is a full featured GPS device in the sense that it has maps and will guide you nicely to your destination. It has no maps, nor any provisions to download them. The closest thing it has is the virtual races, which will guide you along your route, but it's not terribly helpful. The software that comes with the device is serviceable, but it is limited in its capabilities and looks like it was written in 1995. Still, it does present the data its gathered in a useful and understandable way.
I have not experienced the location or speed fluctuations of other users, although accuracy does diminish when I'm cycling in steep valleys or under heavy tree cover.
I chose the 205 over the 305 because I already have a Polar 720, which has a heart rate monitor and a cadence sensor, and the other differences were too subtle to shell out the extra money for. If I didn't already have an HR monitor, I would definitely go for the 305. I should also note I'm a recreational cyclist that tries to get in 75 miles a week for the purposes of getting into shape and losing weight. I'm not sure how valid these comments would be if I was doing serious cycling, so bear that in mind.
To be sure there are things I wish it had or did better, but for the price I'm really happy with it.
11 of 11 found the following review helpful:
Good for exploring, but information is inaccurate Oct 04, 2006
By David Bigl
I purchased this item because I am new to mountain biking and I go a lot of places that i'm not familiar with. This unit is great for mapping out trails. It's also nice because it's pretty much impossible to get lost. Me and my father went for a ride and our legs were dead so all we wanted to do was get back to the car so we just pointed our bikes to the starting point and 15 minutes later we're at our car. However, as an everyday cycling computer this unit is simply terrible. The speed is erratic (if you're going 12 miles an hour it'll say 10.5, 14, 11.5 and so on). The elevation is even worse. When standing still in my backyard it would range from 105 feet to 210 feet. On a five hour ride (that was hilly but not terribly hilly) it said that my elevation gain was 30,000 feet (or the equivalent of climbing Mount Everest). The overall distance is inaccurate. On a ride i have mapped out and I know is 20 miles the distance shows I travel 17.5 miles one day and 22 miles the next. What I do is I have a cateye wireless computer mounted on my bike for my local rides and when i go somewhere I'm not familiar with I bring the Garmin.
See all 41 customer reviews on Amazon.com
|
| | |
