# Garmin Edge 200



## Major Glory (May 16, 2010)

Just got one of these. Looks like some really nice features on this unit for the price. I've always had a Cateye Miti - with a cord even! So this unit is all new to me. My question is: Has anyone mounted this unit to another place on the bike besides the stem or handlebar? How about a top tube mount on a mtn bike? Any reason not to go this route? The Edge 200 is a much bigger unit than my current computer so I'd like it out of the way. Thanks all.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Major Glory said:


> Just got one of these. Looks like some really nice features on this unit for the price. I've always had a Cateye Miti - with a cord even! So this unit is all new to me. My question is: Has anyone mounted this unit to another place on the bike besides the stem or handlebar? How about a top tube mount on a mtn bike? Any reason not to go this route? The Edge 200 is a much bigger unit than my current computer so I'd like it out of the way. Thanks all.


the top tube is somewhat uncommon, but it is used, usually by roadies as best I can tell.

hate to break it to you, but the Edge 200 is not good for mtb use. You cannot change the recording interval. it only records on the "auto" setting, which is insufficient for twisty trails. there are some examples posted in here and it's just not capturing points frequently enough to adequately show the trails on a map.

it really seems like this one is intended for the basic road fitness rider that's doing mostly straight rides.


----------



## ziscwg (May 18, 2007)

Major Glory said:


> Just got one of these. Looks like some really nice features on this unit for the price. I've always had a Cateye Miti - with a cord even! So this unit is all new to me. My question is: Has anyone mounted this unit to another place on the bike besides the stem or handlebar? How about a top tube mount on a mtn bike? Any reason not to go this route? The Edge 200 is a much bigger unit than my current computer so I'd like it out of the way. Thanks all.


To add to this
You will also find you will sweat all over that thing on the top tube on climbs. That makes it harder to read as the sweat dries. If it's dusty, the dust sticks to the sweat etc.

I've had no problems with my 800 on the stem.


----------



## Major Glory (May 16, 2010)

hmmm. not good about the auto recording interval.

Anyone else with comments on using the Edge 200 for mtn biking?


----------



## Pedalfaraway (Jan 19, 2004)

*Well.*

I have used the edge 200 as well as an edge 305 with smart (auto?) record and have no problem with its accuracy. I am able to see what trail I was on on a map, and upload rides without issue to strava map my ride. I live in utah and the trails are pretty spread out so they are not the tightest ones but there are switchbacks etc and the 200 handled it fine. The Edge 200 worked great for me both road and mtn.

As far as the mount goes the stem is a good place for it. It offers some protection in a fall and makes it easy to reach.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Here's a guy's experience with the Edge 200 compared to the Edge 500 for the same ride. This is a moderately twisty trail. My local trails are much moreso. This level of inaccuracy would not be adequate.

http://forums.mtbr.com/9099279-post25.html


----------



## Pedalfaraway (Jan 19, 2004)

*Here are two files*

Mountain Bike Ride Profile | Columbus street to city Creek BST Loop near Salt Lake City | Times and Records | Strava

The first one was recoreded with my edge 305.

Mountain Bike Ride Profile | Columbus street to city creek near Salt Lake City | Times and Records | Strava

The second one with an edge 200.

You can see that both devices put me either right on or very close to the trail. They are also pretty close when it comes to distance and elevation change. My point is the edge 200 is likely accurate enough. Its not as accurate as a 500 but its a good device. Personally I think its one of the best cycling computers avalible, just takes a beating on this forum because its not a true GPS


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Pedalfaraway said:


> Mountain Bike Ride Profile | Columbus street to city Creek BST Loop near Salt Lake City | Times and Records | Strava
> 
> The first one was recoreded with my edge 305.
> 
> ...


like you said, most of your trail is wide open. in your examples, most of it does look pretty good. zoom in to the switchbacks at the northeast corner of the map. this is where you see a big difference between the two. the trails I ride are this twisty...or more...all the time. I will do my next ride with my GPS on auto recording for one lap, and then at 1sec for another. on my trails, that little difference is huge. because of the significant variations from case to case, I cannot recommend any GPS that ONLY offers auto recording for a mtb. 1sec needs to be at least an option for those trails that warrant it.


----------



## MotoJeff (Sep 10, 2009)

I'm hoping that eventually Garmin will offer an Edge 200 firmware upgrade that adds an optional setting for more frequent point gathering. I've already put in a request into Garmin for this added feature and hope others do as well. This feature was just recently added to the 500, so maybe it will make it to the 200.

The data displayed on the 200's screen seems to be very accurate and is updated frequently. It's the saved data that suffers from the "auto" setting's lower point gathering. Other than that, I've been very happy with the unit.


----------



## Major Glory (May 16, 2010)

Would you all say the Edge 200 shows pretty reliable total miles then? I looked at your route on the 305 then the 200 and both showed the sames total miles, elevation, etc. I can maybe live with a not so accurate map for the trails I ride, but total miles ridden in a ride is important to me.


EDIT - what i mean is does the Edge 200 calculate total distance accurately? for example, if I start a ride that is already measured at 10.5 miles from point A to point B will the 200 measure that accurately.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Major Glory said:


> Would you all say the Edge 200 shows pretty reliable total miles then? I looked at your route on the 305 then the 200 and both showed the sames total miles, elevation, etc. I can maybe live with a not so accurate map for the trails I ride, but total miles ridden in a ride is important to me.
> 
> EDIT - what i mean is does the Edge 200 calculate total distance accurately? for example, if I start a ride that is already measured at 10.5 miles from point A to point B will the 200 measure that accurately.


If you look at the garmin connect activites on the link I posted, you will see that they are much farther off than the strava activites posted because they are twistier. It sounds like the stats reported on the device are good but the problems I have described occur when examining the saved data


----------



## Pedalfaraway (Jan 19, 2004)

*Yes*

it will give probably give you more accurate distances then your old wheel magnet set-up. Its a great computer. Now go get some KOM's while Strava is still alive.


----------



## MotoJeff (Sep 10, 2009)

*Some More Observations*

I have around 40 15-50 mile (2000-6000 ft. gain) MTB rides on my Edge 200 and this is what I've learned over my travels. I'm going to break it into 2 areas; what the 200 "Screen Displays" and what you get when the "Saved Data" is uploaded to Strava or Garmin Connect.

1) Screen Display:
Mileage and elevation gain seems to be very accurate and appears to be updated quite often. Mileage matches very well with my carefully calibrated and checked non-GPS Cateye Computers. Typical mileage differences between the two are less than 1/2 mile over a 50 mile MTB ride. I feel the screen display is totally acceptable on both mileage and elevation gain. Very happy here and wished these totals were reflected in Strava.

2) Saved Data:
Uploads to Strava and Garmin Connect produce different mileage and elevation gain than what is on the Edge 200 screen. Due to the recording interval's mandated "auto" setting, the intervals are quite far apart so if you ride a lot of tight twisty trail, your low resolution "saved data" translates into reduced mileage. Elevation seems to be even more affected than mileage. Riding in a straight line but going up and down lots of moderate hills, seems to not add much elevation gain to the "saved data". My typically rides I feel I'm losing about 1-2% mileage and 10-15% elevation gain. I know there are huge variances with elevation numbers, but comparing my rides with others using different gps devices, seem to produce the above reduced percentage.

If only we could get Garmin to update the firmware to add a maybe every-5-second recording option, the Edge 200 would become stellar, especially at its price level. I wouldn't want or think we need every-1-second recording, especially if it used up the memory too fast and not allow for all day (12+ hour) rides.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

MotoJeff said:


> If only we could get Garmin to update the firmware to add a maybe every-5-second recording option, the Edge 200 would become stellar, especially at its price level. I wouldn't want or think we need every-1-second recording, especially if it used up the memory too fast and not allow for all day (12+ hour) rides.


that may or may not happen, depending on Garmin's intentions for the device.

with that said, my Oregon auto-archives my tracklog if I am on a long ride and overrun the track point limit. it can be a pain to splice together multiple segments after the fact to get the whole ride reflected in a single file, but the data is all there. pretty sure other edge models do that, too. I think the 705 I used to have did it. would be worthwhile to see if the Edge 200 does.


----------



## MotoJeff (Sep 10, 2009)

NateHawk said:


> with that said, my Oregon auto-archives my tracklog if I am on a long ride and overrun the track point limit. it can be a pain to splice together multiple segments after the fact to get the whole ride reflected in a single file, but the data is all there. pretty sure other edge models do that, too. I think the 705 I used to have did it. would be worthwhile to see if the Edge 200 does.


Below is from the Edge 200 manual. If it has enough memory to save at least 130 hours of ride data, then an algorithm that captures maybe 50-100% more data points (incorporating a hi/lo data capture toggle) would probably eliminate most of the 200's short comings. This would still allow for 65 hours of ride data. For me, that would make the economical Edge 200 near perfect. I can dream.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

maybe if it had 3 options:

Auto High - 60hrs
Auto Med - 120hrs
Auto Low - 180hrs

would be better than what it's got now. and still set it aside as a basic GPS


----------



## Major Glory (May 16, 2010)

Good info MotoJeff and NateHawk. Thanks


----------



## fondoo (Sep 5, 2012)

do you guys still recommend the garin edge 200? im thinking about picking one up but i hear there are multiple problems with recording. what do you guys recommend that is better than the garmin edge 200?


----------



## zombinate (Apr 27, 2009)

fondoo said:


> do you guys still recommend the garin edge 200? im thinking about picking one up but i hear there are multiple problems with recording. what do you guys recommend that is better than the garmin edge 200?


with gps, for the price, nothing is better. That said, if you want to ensure distance accuracy, the 500 coupled with the cadence/speed sensor is a better solution, just notably more expensive.


----------



## scanny (Feb 21, 2012)

fondoo said:


> do you guys still recommend the garin edge 200? im thinking about picking one up but i hear there are multiple problems with recording. what do you guys recommend that is better than the garmin edge 200?


It depends what are you expecting of it. I bought it mostly as a speedometer / trip odometer which doesn't have any wires after my wireless cycling computer died for some unknown reason. GPS tracking was a nice addition for me - I mostly need it for mapping trails I found by exploring area and it works fine for that. It appears that it's also satisfactory works when I upload a route on it and follow that route. Garmin connect was nice addition for me too as is helps to keep track of activities. Folks here say that edge 200 is not as accurate in tracking when you run twisty trails fast, but I don't compete on Strava so I don't really see it as big shortcoming, more precision is good of course but personally I'm not prepared to pay additional money for it. Just my opinion : )


----------



## D animal (Sep 26, 2012)

Hi fellas, this is my first post here on mtbr and I'm looking for a little advice on the edge 200. I am in the market for a new computer, not necessarily a gps unit and I came accross the 200.

For the price point (can get it for $125) it is in the neighborhood of the computers I was looking at and the fact that it is completely wireless and easily transferable between different bikes really got me interested in it. However after reading just about every review I can locate I am still unclear on it's exact performance.

As a whole what I am gathering is it's stored data is fairly inaccurate but displayed info on the unit itself is. Am I correct in this deduction? If so I think it would fit my needs very well.

This is my first foray into the gps world and as a whole am not very technologically savvy so I would like it to be somewhat simple to learn and use. I do not plan on (not now at least) downloading or uploading trail info but I do need the displayed info (speed, mileage, etc.) to be very accurate.

Is the 200 capable of this or should I just stick with a standard computer? Thanks in advance for any advice and insight!


----------



## D animal (Sep 26, 2012)

Also, if it matters the majority of trails I ride are tight and twisty. I know this is an issue with saved data as NateHawk has pointed out but I don't know if it will effect displayed info.


----------



## fondoo (Sep 5, 2012)

after reading dc rainmakers review for the garmin edge 200.

i picked it up and i am loving it so far.


----------



## D animal (Sep 26, 2012)

Thanks for the response fondoo. How accurate is the displayed info?


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

D animal said:


> Also, if it matters the majority of trails I ride are tight and twisty. I know this is an issue with saved data as NateHawk has pointed out but I don't know if it will effect displayed info.


On tight and twisty trails, the Edge 200 is not accurate. The sampling/recording intervals are too far apart so it "straight lines" your course. Used side-by-side with an Edge 305 on tight twisty wooded trails, I have had the 305 display and record 15.2 miles while the 200 displayed and recorded just 12.5 miles.

Saved data and displayed info all comes from the same source.

A traditional magnetic wheel sensor is still the most accurate for distance, when properly calibrated and the wheel remains on the ground (no carrying the bike).


----------



## scanny (Feb 21, 2012)

I think that displayed info is quite accurate, let's say when I walk my bike i got 5km/h speed and distance is consistent with google maps, I'm not sure how else I can tell exactly if it accurate or not : )


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

scanny said:


> I think that displayed info is quite accurate, let's say when I walk my bike i got 5km/h speed and distance is consistent with google maps, I'm not sure how else I can tell exactly if it accurate or not : )


how are you comparing it with Google maps?


----------



## D animal (Sep 26, 2012)

Thanks greatly for the input Shiggy. Accuracy is a must so it sounds like the 200 is not for me.
I have been looking at the Cateye Adventure also. Does anyone have any experience with that computer or a recommendation on another?


----------



## scanny (Feb 21, 2012)

NateHawk said:


> how are you comparing it with Google maps?


You can measure distance in google maps. So if you ride on a trail/road you can see on Google map you can measure distance using small ruler icon and compare it with your Edge trip information.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

scanny said:


> You can measure distance in google maps. So if you ride on a trail/road you can see on Google map you can measure distance using small ruler icon and compare it with your Edge trip information.


And so how frequently are you clicking points along the trail? That frequency will make a difference in the end result. That is the problem the Edge 200 suffers from. Not to mention, stuff that appears in Google maps is already a few years old. so the trail is likely to have changed in the intervening time. That method is not an adequate accuracy check.

A properly calibrated wheel sensor is the best "accuracy check" you're going to get.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

scanny said:


> You can measure distance in google maps. So if you ride on a trail/road you can see on Google map you can measure distance using small ruler icon and compare it with your Edge trip information.


Sample rate comparisons.

The tracks below are from the ride I detailed in a reply above.
The black grid is 1-mile squares.
Edge 305 and Edge 200 mounted side-by-side on the same bike on the same ride. Very twisty trails in the trees.

Edge 305








Edge 200








Which do you think has recorded the more accurate route and distance?


----------



## scanny (Feb 21, 2012)

I was takling about distance I see on display, I didn't measure gpx files. I understand that gpx recording isn't too precise on edge 200, it doesn't bother me too much though. For those of you who compete accuracy is more important and you might want to get somehitng more accurate of course.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

scanny said:


> I was takling about distance I see on display, I didn't measure gpx files.


your comparison method does not give you an adequate comparison to say if the distance on the display is accurate or not.

shiggy is saying that the .gpx reflects what's on the display and giving you pretty convincing visual evidence that the Edge 200 is not for the mtb.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

scanny said:


> I was takling about distance I see on display, I didn't measure gpx files. I understand that gpx recording isn't too precise on edge 200, it doesn't bother me too much though. For those of you who compete accuracy is more important and you might want to get somehitng more accurate of course.


The display uses the same data as the downloaded files. As I stated before, while riding the 200 displayed less distance than the 305 displayed, as well as when downloaded. The more than 15% difference is ridiculously inaccurate.


----------



## dvn (Apr 6, 2011)

I wish I had seen this thread a week ago before I bought the 200. I ride a lot of tight twisty trails as well and the accuracy is way off. For example, on tonight's ride, my buddy's calibrated magnetic computer recorded 9.95 miles while my Edge 200 recorded 8.15. Unacceptable. I think it's going on eBay.


----------

