Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets - Garmin 705 vs. Polar S725 Questions?

I have ridden over 15,000 miles over the last 4 years with the Polar S725. My main interest in the data, both during the ride and as PC stored info, from the S725 is my time, distance, and heart rate. I have been happy with the Polar S725; but, I am considering a move to the Garmin 705 just because it would be nice to have a new "toy" I may not need.

Does anyone have any comments about changing out their Polar for a Garmin?

Do the new Garmin GPS units like the 705 keep sufficient sateliite lock to provide an accurate distance record in the city and under trees?

Is the heart rate monitor function in real time as good as the Polar as I adjust my riding to my heart rate effort?

I am in the 50+ category and mainly ride for recreation and fitness at an average 17 to 18 mph pace. I probably don't need the Garmin 705 but I am considering the change.

All comments will be appreciated.

I have a 605 so i can't comment on the hr aspect but it does record distance and speed well enough in the city. it may take slightly longer to find its location though when you first turn it on.

With your 15,000 miles you have certainly "earned" the right to buy any toy you want. This is especially true if it helps to keep you interested and enthused enough for another 15,000. Go for the toy. If it makes you feel better, give your Polar to someone who is still working on their first 15,000 and needs a little boost.

I have a Garmin Edge 305. I ride up and down mountains and through cities and forests. The only time two places on my regular routes where it loses signal are in a long tunnel and in one narrow granite canyon with lots of tall tree cover. The GPS is very accurate most of the time. If you want even more accuracy, you can use the speed sensor, which records your speed/distance from your front wheel instead of from the GPS.

The HR on the Garmin Edge seems accurate to me, but I have no way to really test that. It is nice to be able to download a route to your PC and look at your HR and speed and gradient at various points along the map.

I have a Garmin Edge 305. I ride up and down mountains and through cities and forests. The only time two places on my regular routes where it loses signal are in a long tunnel and in one narrow granite canyon with lots of tall tree cover. The GPS is very accurate most of the time. If you want even more accuracy, you can use the speed sensor, which records your speed/distance from your front wheel instead of from the GPS.

The HR on the Garmin Edge seems accurate to me, but I have no way to really test that. It is nice to be able to download a route to your PC and look at your HR and speed and gradient at various points along the map.

Actually the sensor is a combination Speed/Cadence sensor and it works off the rear wheel. What this does is a number of things. It will allow for you to always have your speed and distance even if you lose Sat coverage. it will give you cadence as well. The other added benefit is if you use the bike indoors on a trainer/rollers you have your speed/distance/cad for that too!

I had a 305 for 2+ yrs and just switched to a 705. I've only ever lost Sat coverage in heavily tree lined roads or through very tight roads such as through mountain passes. Then the Garmin always found the Sat again pretty quickly. Wherever you'd lose a GPS signal in your car you'd potentially lose signal with the 705.

Get the 705, it works great. To your question about HRM, never had an issue with mine. I had tried a Polar F11 before selling it and getting the 305. The 305 worked so much better, the HRM also worked better for me. The Polar always had trouble getting a signal, needing to wet the sensors, etc. With the Garmin I have never had to wet the sensor in order for it to pick up a HR signal.

A guy on the REI reviews had issues with the 705 woefully underestimating distance, to the tune of ~30%. This seemed odd to me. Did anyone else have that problem? Haven't heard anything bad about Polar in that regard.

The "self-calibrating sensor" I assume uses the GPS signal to calibrate the distance/revs, then the unit can use the best of both worlds as a couple have suggested here. Perhaps REI man screwed that up.

A guy on the REI reviews had issues with the 705 woefully underestimating distance, to the tune of ~30%. This seemed odd to me. Did anyone else have that problem? Haven't heard anything bad about Polar in that regard.


My Edge 305 is always within 1% of the mileage computed by Google maps. I only use the GPS for speed/distance. That was accurate enough for me, so I never bothered installing the wheel sensor.

Guys in my club who use traditional bike computers often have mileage differences of 2% or more.

I've got a Polar 720i that I only use in the gym and just upgraded from a 305 that I used for about 2 years to a 705.

I believe the Polar HR monitor is less sensitive to interference than the Garmin units. But if you wear the Garmin chest strap a little tight and moisten the back of the sensor, it works well.

Originally, I got the Polar with the cadence sensor and mounted it on my bike. However, I was ultimately seduced by the richness of the data that you get with the GPS, and now the 705 adds real mapping capability.

If by any chance you use a Mac, you must check out "Ascent", montebellosoftware.com. Simply the best software anywhere for biking with a GPS.

Get the Garmin, you'll like it.

And, I forgot. The Garmins are accurate to under 1% on distance and elevation. I've passed elevation markets on Skyline Drive in Virginia at ~3500 feet and the usual accuracy on elevation is 10-20 feet. The only time I've ever lost signal on road rides was passing through tunnels.

A guy on the REI reviews had issues with the 705 woefully underestimating distance, to the tune of ~30%. This seemed odd to me. Did anyone else have that problem? Haven't heard anything bad about Polar in that regard.

The "self-calibrating sensor" I assume uses the GPS signal to calibrate the distance/revs, then the unit can use the best of both worlds as a couple have suggested here. Perhaps REI man screwed that up.

I suspect the poster of that nonsense had been used to an inflated indication of distance/speed that is easy to do if you specify the wheel size to be larger than it is. If you get used to that inflated mileage/speed and are then brought down to earth by the device that won't lie for you then you may be inclined to claim it inaccurate. If you actually ride at 16mph but you've been lead to believe you were doing more like 21mph then when the Garmin tells you you were going 16mph you may not be happy.

I'd say the Garmin, and EVERY other GPS unit out there can be expected to be better than 1% accurate at distance and usually speed.


Brian

There was a firmware bug in an earlier software version on the Edge 605/705. Garmin promptly fixed it and the issue with under reporting speed/distance was corrected. This was only an issue for people that were using the speed/cadence sensor and had had it set to auto-calibrate the wheel size.

I have used the Polars in the past. I made the leap to a 305 the year they were released and now the 705 back in this March. I love them both. There are many more features that you may find yourself using as you learn the abilities of the unit. Navigating you somewhere new if you buy the maps too, racing yourself using the virtual partner, displaying up to 8 data fields on the screen at one time (verses the Polars 3).

Buy it, you will not regret it!

Buy it, you will not regret it!

:thumb:

The polars tend to lose HR signals. I have heard that the HR on the Garmin 705 is not very accurate. How many hours will the Garmin run without a charge?

I ran a Polar 720i for 4-5 years when I racced. I then went to a Garmin 305 for a year (not racing). I used the Garmin 705 for the last year (still not racing).

I would recommemd all of them depending on what you want to use them for.

I think the Polars are currently better for serious training and competative athletes. The Garmins are great for touring and less serious stuff. Ths software on the Polars blows the Garmins away!

My Polar 720i stills works after 6?? years. They are really built well. My Garmin 305 crapped out after a year but I got my money back and upgraded to the 705. I hope the 705 lasts longer than than a year considering the price!!!

I am excited about Garmin sponsering a pro bike team. I am very anxious to see what they come up with.

I too have used Polars for MANY years prior to getting my 305 and now 705. The heart rate readings on the Polar and the Garmin are comparable in accuracy. The battery life on the 705 is easily 12+ hours even while using the GSC10 and heart rate.

I just recently swapped from a Polar 625 (with cadence and speed sensors) to the 705. At this stage I have had no performance issues with the 705, there have been small interference issues with both.

here are a few of the differences I've found in no particular order.

1. 705 backlight allows you to see the screen at night at the epense of battery life. the 625 has short backight time.

2. 705 elevation and grade can be seen while riding, while with the 625 it needs to be plotted

3.705 has a bigger screen and has more configuraton options

4.the 705 virtual training partner option

5. the 705 plastic hrm strap is not as comfortable as the Polar wearlink strap.

6. watch style 625 is easier if your running although polar foot pod is not as accurate as gps.

7. 705 has a better user interface, menu easier to navigate

8. 625 would have to be more waterproof

9. 705 has a single speed/cadence sensor as opposed to the 2 seperate polar units.

10. the 705 has the ability to import courses developed in mapping software like bikely, is the most significant feature for me.

12. 705 has sd card option

I can't comment on the accuracy of the hrm functions, the 705 does not claim to be ecg accurate like the 625 does.

I just switched from the Polar S725X to the Garmin Edge 705. The 705 is a great device, except the heart rate monitor does not appear to be accurate. I especially like loading rides into the 705 and the "go home" feature.

What makes you say the Edge is less accurate? I moved over from a Polar too and did not notice a difference. Have you run them side by side? I do know that the Edge HRM's suffer from some static interference in cool, dry conditions when you wear a loose fitting jeresey.

I am a bargain hunter and could not afford a 705. I do see some 305's for sale for $188. For basic GPS and HR and cadence is this a good buy?

I started this thread a while back when I was deciding on the purchase of the Garmin 705. Well, I bought one and have been using it side-by-side with my Polar 725. Here are some observations:

1. The Polar screen is MUCH brighter and easier to see in all conditions. Cloudy or Sunny. Yes, you can turn up the backlighting on the Garmin but it still isn't as easy to see. That being said, I have gotten use to the Garmin.

2. The maps are nice but I don't really use them. Given my usual routine, I don't need the map function. It is more fun looking at the maps on the Garmin when driving then when on the bike.

3. The heart rate function has been working just fine with no glitches.

4. I have yet to install the speed / cadance sensor.

5. I really like the ability to place 8 functions on the Garmin screen and I like the compass function.

6. I miss the calendar layout of the Polar dairy as compared to Garmin connect or Sports Track. With the Polar the calendar screen gave a very good and quick view of the days of exercise and miles per week. But, I will get use to the Garmin Connect and Sports Track. I am running them both at the moment to decide which one I like.

7. It was interesting to note that the Polar was within .1 mile of the Garmin GPS based distance and of course the mph were very similar.

Overall, I am glad I got the Garmin. Just today, I have taken the Polar off of the bike and gone solo with the Garmin 705.