It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
My three year old Garmin 305 recently started showing signs of its age, so I bought a 110 as back up.
I've been wearing one on each wrist for the last couple of runs just to check whether my suspicions that the 100 underecords distance are correct. And boy are they. This morning for instance my 305 showed I'd run 5:29 miles, whereas the 110 showed 5:06. This is a well plodded run for me (Peckham to Fetter Lane via Tower Bridge), so I know the 305 is more accurate.
Has anyone else found the 110 underrecords? I wonder whether it copes less well with built up urban areas and the occasional dip under railway arches?
I'm slow enough I don't need the watch to GPS watch to make me feel any worse about my lack of athletic prowess.