Thanks Alexandra - I actually had a 310XT before the 610 - so I was mainly interested in information about the 110 which your link to Rainmaker has provided - it would seem the 110 will not give a grid reference nor a spot height, so that, together with the longer battery life and waterproofing means it is another 310XT if my 610 cannot be sorted out.
I am with Alexandra. I have a 310 and it does everything i need it to, running and the bike (not used it swimming) very useful for putting old courses on and very good for navigating on. always got to remember that we are talking about a watch here. I think sometimes people are expecting the same features/ screen etc as a handheld and I have think Garmin have got it spot on with the 310Originally Posted by Mike T
A shame they no longer make it and are pushing people towards the 910 and 610 models, one of which looks like you have a TV stuck to your arm and the other with a far shorter battery life.
*a very happy 310 owner.
Not sure I follow what you mean regards the TV - are you saying the 910 looks like a TV ?? It's about half the size of your 310, so what does that make the 310 look like ?
Really? I thought it was way bigger. A friend's got one and he looks like he's wearing a telly on his wrist. That could be because he has small wrists, but I have to admit that I have not measured them.
I have a 910XT, it replaced my 310 and I'm generally happy with it. I do triathlon so its great as it covers all three disciplines - the swim function is especially impressive. It counts your lengths, no. of strokes, works on open water etc. I have found it a bit buggy - freezes, won't download data straight away. Also the height gain - i think it can be on the ambitious side. It's smaller than the 310 and the hrm chest strap is definitely more comfortable. It's overkill if you just use it for running of course and expensive.
A very big TV. Possibly 55" flatscreen.
I love my 310XT...just wish it was a bit, about 40%, slimmer.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote