Hi all,

New to the forum and recently started running again, 12 years in the Army and I hated running with a passion. Now I don't 'have' to do it I can't get enough. lost nearly 4 stone and started to transition into barefoot (well minimalist- midfoot strike) running.

I've been using the endomondo app but now changed to the Nike+ app which I like, but now the glorious sunshine is going I don't want to carry my phone out with me in the rain. I know there are numerous threads about GPS watches but the ones I have seen for the Nike+ GPS Watch seem to be quite old and refer to Firmware updates.

Is anyone using one that could give an up to date review or views of it??? 

Thanks and nce to meet you all. image



  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭

    Have a look at the various products offered by Garmin.  

    I think they are due a new one out soon, too.

  • I use the Nike Sportwatch (the GPS one) and really like it. There are occasional software updates, but that's true of pretty much all of them and indeed any gadet (iPads etc.) these days.

    It's a great watch - very simple, easy to use, reliable, reasonably priced and the Nike website you upload runs to is well designed, intuitive and motivating. I'd strongly recommend it.

    Downsides are heart rate monitoring is not much good. The watch doesn't come with a heart rate strap and the Polar one that works with it is expensive. You can't set limits/alarms so it's all pretty pointless. I don't use a HRM so not an issue for me.

    Garmin are another option and their range is wide, good quality and has a wide range of prices. I have used a Garmin in the past and don't like them as much - I find them almost over-specced. Lots of data I don't use, dull website, not particularly intuitive to use. It's a personal taste thing though and Garmin are easily the market leader.

    Could also look at Polar or Timex (and may be others). No experience of those.

  • DMaxDMax ✭✭✭

    I had a problem with my Nike GPS watch where my computer was not recognizing the watch as a USB device which rendered it useless when it came to upload info to the NIke+ site.

    The watch was out of warranty so I called up NIke for advice and they asked me to send my old one to them and they would send a new one. I thought that was really good of them.

    The watch can plug directly into a USB port but it now ships with a cable. Nike have obviously tried to address this problem and it looks like when a few slip through the net, they do the decent thing and replace the watch.

    I understand Garmin are the industry leaders and I haven't tried one. I imagine they will be excellent. All I can say is the Nike GPS watch works for me, looks great and is very easy to use.

  • Thanks everyone, i do like the look of them and not too bothered about a heart rate monitor.

    time to start saving the pennies i think and splash out i think.

  • Andy check this website out:

    he does good in-depth reviews of many running GPS watches, including the Nike GPS.

    My wife had a Garmin FR205 that I liked to use, after reading DC's reviews I bought a Garmin FR10 which I am very happy with. It's basic with no HRM & cheap (£89.10 from Start Fitness)

  • mrandyyumrandyyu ✭✭✭

    I too had a problem with my Nike GPS Sportwatch where it fogged up and the moisture eventually destroyed the watch from the inside-out. This was a replacement where the original unit had the USB problem that DMax above mentions. Nike also kindly sent me a new boxed retail unit as another replacement, but I couldn't rely on them anymore so I flipped it on eBay.

    Once, the Nike watch wouldn't switch on whilst I was en route to an important 10k race. Online support suggested I plug it into a computer or a USB port to restart and thankfully, my car has a powered USB port which kick-started it into life.

    Nice website, simple to use but so, so unreliable.

  • I have just traded up to a Garmin 610 from the Nike GPS so I have a good idea of both, plus points for the Nike watch: -

    Website is more fun, and has more of a motivating element.
    Watch looks better in my opinion.
    Very simple to use
    Although first time it tries to link to a satellite it's a bit slow each subsequent time if used regularly it is very quick
    Good clear display.

    Down sides: -

    Have had 3 dropped runs in about 6 months two in races, one of which was my first marathon where I spent most of the second half of the race restarting the watch.
    Corner of the screen steamed up when in cold or wet weather.
    Stats are ok, but a little limited if you are a stat junky.
    Turning the screen light on is a bit of a lottery and takes some getting used to

    Pros to the Garmin:-

    Much more in the way of stats and features.
    Wireless connectivity to transfer data
    Easy to change screens on the run.
    Solid build 

    Cons: -
    Website is dull
    Kind of fiddly going through some of the menus
    Can take an age to pick up satellites.

    I'd say they pretty equivalent in terms of accuracy which is to say a touch out from perfectly accurate, just try to avoid tunnels!

    Hope that helps

  • had a garmin 405cx and sold a year ago for the nike gps watch.

    Garmin - took ages to find a satellite (a lot longer than Nike on average), battery charge seemed unreliable - unit would occasionally die on me with no battery though indicated 100% when starting. There is a lot of stats but i didnt use most of them. Can sync the garmin to more of the online running sites (fetch etc), with the 405, never really took the touchscreen.

    Nike - imho looks better and can wear as everyday watch, charges through simple USB (and syncs), quick to pick up signal, Nike has better website from a 'social' aspect and for recording run info, easy to use/understand/set up..

    am pleased i got the nike (and recently added the HRM) - there are however some things i miss from the Garmin, such as the virtual pacer and alarms on speed/pace, and has more advanced sessions you can plan in advance and then perform these sessions on the run

Sign In or Register to comment.