# Best GPS?



## donn12 (Mar 25, 2012)

I am partial to Garmin products and I would like a good GPS for mountain biking. I would like one that shows cadence. what is the best unit or the best value?


----------



## asphalt_jesus (Aug 13, 2010)

donn12 said:


> I am partial to Garmin products and I would like a good GPS for mountain biking. I would like one that shows cadence. what is the best unit or the best value?


You can have the best unit, but it's not cheap. You can also get a cheap unit that won't be the best. I use a blackberry and GPSLogger. Totally Free. (as in Software Freedom) Don't even need a SIM chip in the phone. No cadence though. That's a great value.

Give us a budget you are actually willing to spend for the device. Please be specific.


----------



## f_rele (Apr 27, 2011)

Garmin Edge 500. Collects all data you need, battery life long enough for long long rides.


----------



## donn12 (Mar 25, 2012)

If a really good model is 500 I am willing to spend that much. At first i thought I might be ble to get most of what I need from an iphone app but i would rather have a dedicated unit for cadence etc. Right now I am switching back and forth on my running watch and that is a pain in the rear.


----------



## R74NN (Apr 1, 2012)

If you don't need maps, then yes, Edge 500 is a good device and it provides much more info then you currently might need.


----------



## ghettocruiser (Jun 21, 2008)

Happy with the Edge 500 and the garmin speed/cadence sensor.

The Garmin HRM.. nosomuch. I'd advise getting something else, any brand HRM with ANT+ will work.


----------



## canuck_tacoma (May 1, 2011)

Garmin 405 with HR, Cadence and bike mount around $250.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

The best gps is the one that does what you want


----------



## donn12 (Mar 25, 2012)

I bought a Garmin Edge 800 and I highly recommend it. it does all I want and more! I dont know how accurate the calorie counter is. Today I rode a tough 3 hours and it said I burned 2000 calories!


----------



## Call_me_Tom (May 26, 2008)

Right now you can find some killer deals on Edge 705's. Dealers & techno geeks are dumping them in favor of the Edge 800.


----------



## mazspeed (Oct 17, 2004)

The 800 is unbelievably good.


----------



## f_rele (Apr 27, 2011)

Calorie counter on edge 500 and 800 uses hearth rate as a base for calculation and is pretty accurate which is not the case with 705.


----------



## ibikeslow (May 5, 2012)

Edge 500 has been pretty good for me. My old 305 finally gave out. It always had problems when I traveled, anyway...always searching for satellite... Ugh...


----------



## gbwilliams (May 6, 2012)

what about if you needed maps?


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

ibikeslow said:


> Edge 500 has been pretty good for me. My old 305 finally gave out. It always had problems when I traveled, anyway...always searching for satellite... Ugh...


Any gps has that response to travel. You have to account for it and give it time to realize that it's moved


----------



## Wherewolf (Jan 17, 2004)

*705 inflated elevations*



f_rele said:


> Calorie counter on edge 500 and 800 uses hearth rate as a base for calculation and is pretty accurate which is not the case with 705.


Agreed. I have both the 705 and 800. The climbing elevations on the 705 are way over inflated too.


----------



## GarryB73 (May 27, 2012)

I've got the garmin edge 705 and all good


----------



## GarryB73 (May 27, 2012)

Just remember to load the maps.


----------



## ToddM (Feb 3, 2004)

After years and years of using GPS's even those costing thousands of dollars none of them are every perfect 

If you just want cadence, HR, speed, laps etc. then the 500 is hard to beat if you feel you need GPS but no mapping, but you're really paying $250 for just a cycling computer with an HRM at the end of the day. I personally don't see the point, if I'm mountain biking I want the mapping capability, if I'm road biking I want the routing capability when I'm biking in new areas, traveling etc. If I'm a serious training racer/athlete there are better options for pure fitness data and software analysis of that data and accuracy of that data (such as the polar units) 

As for mapping I've used the 705 and the 800 and both are fine, and neither are perfect, but you can get the 705 for the price of a 500 now and I'd take the 705 in a heartbeat. I tried out a buddies 800 for a couple trips to compare to my 705 and the only reason I would consider upgrading would be that I ride in a lot of remote places and being able to download satellite images into the unit would be really nice in some areas for navigation. My 705 had a brighter screen, it's beeps were louder, and I felt the 1 second track recording option gave more accurate trail recording. I also missed the "compass" page on the 705 where it would simply show you a big directional arrow to get back on the trail if you left it, I couldn't find that page on the 800. The 800 has much better track management, and some neat features as well. 

The Etrex 30 is also pretty nice, if you don't want the detailed exercise functions such as average HR, min/max HR, racing against yourself, etc. but it has all the normal cycling computer functions, min/max/ave speed, HR, elevation changes, cadence, lap times, it's just not quite as convenient (no auto start stop, you have to press the lap button etc.) So it's not as nice as the Edge series for cycing, but it's a great hiking gps with mapping for under $300 and it runs forever on simple AA's. Honestly it's the first non-cycling garmin I've used I think could use for hiking/field work and my biking and be okay with it. A lot of the edge features as far as racing myself, and the detailed HR info is interesting but I don't really use it.

I thought about the Montana to use for everything (car, bike, motorcycle, hiking) but $600 is kinda crazy for a unit that's still a compromise for both cycling and use in the car. Plus you still have to spend $120 for the city nav software, $60 for a window mount with speaker to use it in the car, then you need to spend $100 in cycling sensors to use it on the bike, so by the time you are done you spent $900 for a unit that's still a compromise. For that you could by an etrex 30, edge 800, and a nice nuvi with lifetime map updates. 

I don't think we'll ever see garmin make a true versatile unit with all the features. It's how they make sure that people that want a good car GPS buy a Nuvi, a good bike gps buy a Edge, and those that want the hiking features buy a handheld unit. It's the same way that if you want a water resistant Nuvi for a motorcycle you are going to pay $700-800 for an Zumo with the exact same software/program options as a $150 Nuvi just in a water resistant case. 

The only way that might change is now so many people are using their phone gps's instead of buying garmin units especially as the software apps for phone gps use keep improving. Most people can't survive without their phones on them now days anyway so it's one less thing for them to carry around. So as more cars come with GPS units in them, and more people use their GPS phones, garmin might be forced to add more features if their market share is reduced on the less versatile units.


----------

