Campag4life

I am thinking about and would appreciate feedback on upgrading to a Garmin 500 or 510. Currently on a couple of bikes I use the comparatively modest Cateye Strada Wireless without cadence for speed, mileage etc and thinking about replacing one with a Garmin.

So a couple of questions please:

If I don't feel a compulsion to spring for a power meter, is a Garmin really worthwhile?...or is a Garmin really only worthwhile as a basis to monitor power output while riding?

Cadence isn't that big a deal...I tend to spin versus mash anyway so this wouldn't be a big help to me..

But how about heart rate? Do you guys without a power meter use the heart rate monitor function on your Garmin to train within particular zones? Is this a good reason to get a Garmin if no plan for a power meter?

Lastly...the display for aging eyes. Can font size be increased on the display such that you only show maybe, speed and heartrate on one screen with a larger font?
Thanks

bonz50

depends on your budget. you can get the 500 head unit for $159 all day long right now, the 510 is still over $300. if budget isn't a concern get the 510

ftr - I have an 800 i got on sale plus a rebate around this time last year for like $225ish, i have no interest at ALL in a power meter, but i feel its worth every penny, I like it a lot, but i'm kind of a data junkie and I like knowing what i do and being able to take a look at my rides and see where i'm improving and etc.

Campag4life

Bonz...what makes the 510 more desirable?
Thanks

bonz50

in my eyes, the live tracker is the only reason to get the 510 over the 500 and you'll have to decide how much that's worth to you. DC Rainmaker has a good indepth article on the 510

Garmin Edge 510 In-Depth Review | DC Rainmaker

down at the bottom of the page there is a feature comparison list.

cvall91

For me I'd say its purely aesthetics. I have the 510 and it doesn't even compare to the 500 in looks. I really like the nice screen size of the 510 and the way it looks. Especially with an out front mount, the bike looks really clean. I only use HR/Cadence so I can't say I use all the features, but I know the 510 does have tons of features which I should take advantage of but don't.

If you're short on money then the 500 will be more than enough. But yea if budget isn't a concern, I'd get the 510.

merlinextraligh

I just went through whether to buy the 500 or 510. The significant difference is that the 510 has cell phone integration that allows live tracking. It also has touch screen and a few other features the 500 doesn't have.

I don't care at all for the live tracking, am nuetral on the touch screen, and therefore went with the much cheaper 500.

If you're not tracking power, I think neither the 500 or 510 offers that much utility above a simple cyclecomputer. But with the 500 below $200, its starting to not be that much more expensive than some full feature cyclecomputers without GPS.

DCrainmaker.com is an excellent resource for Garmin reviews. Also you can click through his site for a discount on Garmins.

bbeasley

A bit off topic:

I made the switch from Cateye Strada to a Garmin 800 last year when the rebate offer was out there. I don't have a power meter but can tell you the Garmin is just way more fun.

Other than the fact that I'm a data junkie, I find myself using the lap feature quite a bit. Anyway, good luck with your choice.

gadabout007

Garmin has a huge update to garmin connect coming that will directly compete with Strava segment system. Along with this update will be a firmware update to the 510 and 810 which will allow you to see when you're coming up to segments as well as real-time data on the segment as you're going.

This feature will only be on the 510, 810, and 1000 head units paired to a smart phone.

bahula03

Like bbeasley said, it's just neat to have the data in one easily accessible place. I have a 500 with cadence/speed sensor and HR monitor, and my use case domes down primarily to tracking my heart rate during rides and making sure I'm not overexerting myself when I don't want to be. Beyond that, the accompanying computer app is great to see what you've done on a larger scale; looking at totals over weeks/months/years, analytics for particular loops/rides and that sort of thing.

On the 500 or 510 question, I'd lean towards the 500. I got all excited when the 510 was announced, but was fairly disappointed when details and reviews came out. The touch screen isn't a selling point for me and broadcasting my rides seems like a great way to annoy friends on social media The edge has to go to the 510 on the display since it's a bit bigger IIRC...but it also isn't *as good* as the 500 in direct sunlight. As for readability, you can configure the 500 to display 1-8 data fields, the more data...the smaller everything gets. That should be well documented in reviews and photos, if it's not let me know and I'll take some photos of mine.

SpeshulEd 

If this is true, this is the best news I've heard about the garmin units in quite sometime.

OP, the other nice thing about the 510/810, other than the live tracking, is the automatic uploads to garmin connect. It syncs with your smart phone via bluetooth and uploads at the end of your ride. The only time you need to take the unit off your bike is to charge it. I then use copymysports.com to upload to Strava automatically.

RollCNY

I have a 500, and if it broke, I would not replace it. For the first six months it was grand, and I used the HR monitor and cadence to "train". But I don't race, am not really training for anything, and now use it essentially for cadence (since I am on an SS it equates directly with speed) and a clock. Yes it was fun for a few months, now I could care less.

Bacciagalupe

I've used the 500 for about 3 years, and just got an 810.

500 is cheaper, a little smaller, is significantly easier to read in bright sun. Switching pages is a PITA -- it's slow, only goes in one direction, and only allows one set of pages. So if you have 4 pages set up, and you're doing a course, you'll have to go through 7-8 pages to get back to the 1st. It's not the end of the world, but again, it's a pain.

The 510 is basically a little easier to use, a little harder to see in bright sun. Courses work much better.


As to why Garmin vs a basic cycle computer, that depends on your uses. In my case, I uses courses extensively, and like tracking where I've been so I can develop routes. HRM is handy, but only if you really plan to use it when riding.

xjustice09x

I have a 500 and it works great. Sometimes it takes a while to sync up with satellites though. The 510 should find satelites faster since it supports GPS and GLONASS.

I use heartrate with all my bikes, and cadence only on my road bike. I am considering buying a cadence sensor for my cyclocross/commuter bike.

On the 500 the more information you have displayed the smaller the boxes that contain that info get. So if you display speed and heart rate they will be in larger font than if you display more things like distance, time, and cadence.

velocity

I own the 510.
1) bigger /color screen
2) garmin connect and firm wear updates when available
3) turn by turn capabilities
4) GPX and TCX capable
5) My wife can follow me real time so she can check up on me....

SirHustlerEsq

I spend a lot of time on the bicycle and appreciate the touch screen, better quality display, and cell-phone integration for transferring data when I travel without a personal computer (USB lock-down on work computer). It's a pain, but I can get a GPX file from Strava, send it to Garmin connect through my phone, then send the file from Garmin Connect to my 510 through the phone.

kv501

I would have loved to see this 4 or 5 years ago. Too many people are married to Strava and I don't think they'll switch. Waaaaay to late to the party on this one.

kv501

I have cable internet and would have loved this feature last spring. Had an ice storm take out a bunch of poles in town and it was about 2 weeks before I had web access back.

Campag4life

Thanks a lot everybody. Really appreciate all your good advice.

bikerjp

I love my 500 and I don't do power (yet...). It's small, gives me the in-ride data I want (like road grade, speed, HR, distance, etc.) and then I can delve into the data later at home. I thought about "upgrading" to a 510 but in the end it just didn't seem worth it. I don't really care about live tracking (my phone can do that too if I really care) and the larger size was a turn-off. It does look nice but I don't have any issues with looking at the 500.

SpeshulEd 

I agree with this, but I have a feeling I'll just match up the garmin segments to the strava segments (at least the main ones I ride) and that should do the trick.

the_tool_man

I've been using a Garmin 500 for about a year now. I upgraded from a Cateye wired computer to ditch the problematic Cateye wiring and eliminate the need to use my phone to track my route & performance (big battery killer on long rides). I already used cadence with the Cateye, and needed it for the Garmin, as well.

At the time, I looked at the 510, but it was about twice as much money. I decided the touch screen and color weren't worth the extra money. I paid $130 on Ebay for an Asian-market one, with a cadence sensor. It came without an English manual. So I just downloaded one for free. The menus can be set to English, of course. You can set up the screens in a variety of ways, and get the characters to a pretty large size. So daytime reading is easy. You can program the backlight to come on automatically when you press a button, so it's useful when I commute in the dark, as well. I switch it between two bikes. So I set it up with two bike profiles, and tell it which one it's on when I start out. I upload the data to Strava when I get home.

Overall, I think it's a great unit at that price point. I wish I'd switched sooner.

Gramercy

I'm not sure what people are talking about; I ride with people that have the 500 and they say it directly uploads their ride to strava. Maybe they have to plug it into a computer first, I'm not exactly sure, but I haven't heard of any complaints about connectability.
@RollCNY, @Bacciagalupe, I'd be willing to buy the 500 off either of you.

bahula03

That's exactly what they're saying- to get anything off of the 500, you have to plug it in. With the 510, it automatically sends the data to the app on a phone, which in turn uploads the data.

And a small correction on the 500 display options- you can turn off the pages you don't use, so you don't have to cycle through all 8 of them.

Dunbar

One advantage of the Garmin units is they are highly customizable. If you want a giant HR field at the top of the screen you can do that. On my 510 I can have like 6 pages with 8-10 fields per page if I want them. Without a power meter it's hard to justify a 510 IMO. If you pick up a cheap 500 on ebay for $200 with the sensor and HR monitor that's not too expensive. Keep in mind that you need to charge them every 8-10 ride hours which is a bit of hassle.

RollCNY

I thought about selling this, but I already have GSC-10's mounted on several bikes, so the sell price of ditching my used unit wouldn't get me set up with any replacement over multiple bikes. Thanks though.