Can anyone see, or know of, any advantages of the new 410 over the 405? I splashed out on the 405CX over the 405 but found no difference in performance between the two.
Both go a bit crazy in wet or sweaty conditions.
It looks like they are trying to market it as a training/everyday watch. Turning off the GPS extends that battery life to 2 weeks!....that being said, if I were in the market for a new training watch, I'd still go for the 310XT. I played with it at the Boston Expo this past April and it really felt comfortable on my wrist....the 405 actually felt bulky.
I've been using the 310 for almost a year now and really love it. I used a 305 for 3 years prior to that. The GPS receiver is much better than the 305 and the battery life is really the 20 hours that is advertised. Plus you don't have to plug it in to download, no problems with corroded metal contacts. I just bought the foot pod for some expreimenting with my turnover rate. Pretty interesting that its an average of 86 on the TM but 89 on the streets. But, if you want an everyday watch don't buy the 310.
Marathon Maniac #530
I really liked the wireless data transfer of the 405 but it was useless for me who sweats alot and likes to manually hit splits (the bezel is way too sensitive for me). For run and go it's ok, I guess. It was as accurate as the 305 but not any better like the sales guys claimed. I then looked at the 305 vs 310 (my 305 died) and went for another 305 at $149. Sometimes its just plain price.
Let us know how the 410 works out.
I just don't get all the angst with the 405CX. Since I run in the rainforest, all I need do is either (1) change the sensitivity and/or (2) lock the bezel. You can still manually hit the split button or on/off with the bezel locked.
My only complaint is the battery life. Wasn't able to get a complete map of the R2R2R.
Not training for anything in particular right now, so it's nice just to leave it at home.
The bezel is a real problem down in here in CC too as humidity and sweat rendere the bezel pretty much useless. I read on the updated watch that they have corrected the problem. Should be a great watch with that improvement.
The bezel if better in the 410. They have built up the strap a little and the bezel sensitivity has been reduced. Unfortunately there is no way of increasing the sensitivity. In fact, when I'm wearing gloves I have to wet the tip of my finger for the bezel to work. I haven't tried it in wet weather yet.
The accuracy is a lot better. It tuned in to 28 feet inside my apartment despite the fact that I am surrounded by larger buildings. It also tuned in to less than 30 feet on a New York cross street versus 50-100 feet with the 405. And it reported 12 feet accuracy in park, about 10 foot better than the 405.
There is an auto power save (time displayed only) and a power off capability, both of which extend the battery life.
The soft strap is no better than the old one in cold weather. I tend to dress lightly which means I don't start sweating for about a mile. Before that it shows a ridiculously high heart-rate.
Accuracy (note I was in fact running on the side of the path nearest the river.
FYI - the strange heart rates at the beginning of a run in the winter are due to static. It's much worse with synthetic compared with cotton and worse if you have multiple layers. Dampening the outside of the strap with a little water before the run solves this problem.
I currently have the 210 and love it. I am looking into different models to get my wife for her birthday. I'm not sure if the 405 or 410 are really worth the additional cost. I also looked into Suunto t6d and t3d but it seems like those are better for triathletes but not for runners.