Garmin forerunner 245 for cycling?

Thinking about getting a Forerunner 245 after returning my Edge 530 due to crappy buttons not working. I know the 245 is advertised as more of a running watch and wont have a lot of the cycling features that the edge 530 has but how does it stack up when used for mainly cycling?

What features do you find beneficial and would you buy the watch again?

Is Body Battery any good and how well does it judge recovery?

Prior to a couple of rides with a 530 I’ve been using a edge 45.

Cheers

i used to use a 235 and it was absolutely fine but it was more of a log than a real-time feedback. synced 95% of the time with garmin connect seamlessly. the other 5% of the time it was a git.

moved to an apple watch as wanted smarter features.

It’s fine, depending on what you want to do with it.
Just for recording distance and speed, etc. then it’ll be fine, no issue at all.
For heart rate, it’s OK, the bumping around on a bike can can means it’s a bit hit and miss and so you’re better off pairing it to a chest strap.
Body battery is not bad, it’s a useful guide but I tend to listen to my body rather than the watch.

My eldest has a 245 and I have a 735. The 245 is good for cycling as long as you have a chest strap. It does all the basics and means you can monitor/train to Hr zones. The 735 is better because it can link to speed/power/cadence sensors which gives that much more info (The Garmin speed and power sensors swop between bikes in a couple of minutes. I’ve only ever used power on gym bikes but I’d love a power meter but its on the wish list for the lottery win or when IQ2 ever get their act together).

The body battery thing consistently over estimates recovery times but like Lunge said listen to your body.

I never had much of an issue with optical HR on the 235 or my AW4 now.

others have very strong opinions on them…

Have you looked at used options?
Do you run more than you cycle?

I have sort of come at this from the other direction I’m much more into bike riding, and as such having a device specifically for that on the bars makes sense to me (I currently own four, which might be too many), but I ended up trying the odd run with my edge 25 strapped to my wrist which wasn’t ideal.

So I decided I wanted some sort of running GPS that could measure HR (with a strap) and ideally work indoors on the treadmill. So I ended up buying a 2nd hand FR25 off ebay, it works well enough for what I want, has Ant+, an accelerometer and it was so cheap that if it fails/breaks/gets lost I won’t cry…

You can use a cycling GPS for running or a Running GPS for cycling, but I’d argue it’s worth buying a used device for your “Second sport” just to have the right specific tool for each job.

If cycling is your main thing I’d spend more on a device for that and look at some of the Garmin alternatives like for example Wahoo, as well as maybe seeing if any of the older model Garmin’s firmware is now stable enough to trust…

I have a 245 music, when cycling I log my rides on both this and my wahoo bolt.

Works completely fine for cycling, obviously it’s not as easy to look at when riding, and I’d suggest a HRM strap (for any exercise, the optical sensor won’t be as accurate for the majority of people).

You can customise the screens with different data fields, and if you have a garmin GPS head unit you can do some sort of screen extension thing with it.

I use my 245 as my overall health and fitness tracker, as it does VO2 max, training status, load, sleep tracking, 24/7 heart rate, etc etc etc

I log rides on both as there’s no easy way to get cycle rides into the garmin connect app when logged on a wahoo bolt, but I prefer to use the bolt for riding as it’s easier to see/navigate etc.

I never had much of an issue with optical HR on the 235

Been experimenting a bit with fit recently, tried it higher up, ie above the wrist bones if that makes sense, and it definitely works much better, both running and cycling.

I’ve a Forunner 245 a Polar m400 and an Edge 1030.

For running I had the Polar first and really liked it. I thought (think) the Polar app is better than Garmin’s and the watch does everything I wanted from a running watch. The only issue I have is, I get through the elastic chest bands pretty regularly as my sweat must be toxic…

I then got the Forunner and did a few weeks of back to back comparison as I didn’t trust the optical HR. Above ~100 bpm it’s very similar to the m400 with a strap, below it’s a bit off.

I tend to use the Forunner now and also as a backup to the 1030 when out. The Edge is obviously loads better for nav than a poxy little watch when riding but they’re both similar for recording stats. I might be wrong on this but I’m sure you can link any Bluetooth sensor to the 245 which should include modern power, cadence etc.

If I had to buy one unit for recording cycling and running metrics but NOT for nav, the Forunner 245 is fine.

I’ve a Forunner 245 a Polar m400 and an Edge 1030.

For running I had the Polar first and really liked it. I thought (think) the Polar app is better than Garmin’s and the watch does everything I wanted from a running watch. The only issue I have is, I get through the elastic chest bands pretty regularly as my sweat must be toxic…

I then got the Forunner and did a few weeks of back to back comparison as I didn’t trust the optical HR. Above ~100 bpm it’s very similar to the m400 with a strap, below it’s a bit off.

I tend to use the Forunner now and also as a backup to the 1030 when out. The Edge is obviously loads better for nav than a poxy little watch when riding but they’re both similar for recording stats. I might be wrong on this but I’m sure you can link any Bluetooth sensor to the 245 which should include modern power, cadence etc.

If I had to buy one unit for recording cycling and running metrics but NOT for nav, the Forunner 245 is fine.

How do you find it judges recovery? One of the reasons I was thinking of getting one instead of another 530 was the sleep/recovery features, are they worth using?

I want a better judge of when I’m actually over doing it or I’m just being lazy. Quite often I feel crap for 2-3 days after a ride but if I actually get out the door I’m fine.

I might be wrong on this but I’m sure you can link any Bluetooth sensor to the 245 which should include modern power, cadence etc.

No power on the 245. It does have ANT+ and Bluetooth, but the sensor type limitation is one way Garmin differentiate their “running” watches from “multisport” watches and edge units (there are a few others, even more niche than power – like electronic groupset stuff).

I find the training status quite useful, it gives you an optimal training load and where you are in that, plus a status – maintaining, productive, recovery etc etc.

All based on training load, fitness level, EPOC, etc.

The recovery thing after each run seems OK too, my lighter runs/cycles it normally gives me a 22hrs recovery – train as ususal. Whereas a bigger 10k run for instance will show 40+ hours which would indicate I need a rest day afterwards.

Sleep stuff it uses with the stress and workouts to calculate your body battery, basically how much energy it thinks you should have left.

There’s no altimeter on the forerunner ones. That sucks for mob especially as your climbing is massively understated. The vivoactive range are fantastic, I’ve had a couple, although I’m currently wearing an Apple Watch, I’ve decided not to get rid of my VA3 music because it’s worth more to me than anyone else.

I’ve had a 245 just before Christmas. Prior to that I had a Fitbit charge 3.

Garmin is worse at sleep tracking – a lot worse, and is also less driven the charge 3 for general lifestyle tracking. Identifiable sport activities much better though.

I mostly got the 245 for GPS tracking.I never use it on the ride, but do you use it to assess my ride afterwards either in connect reporting the ride across to Strava.

Heart rate tracking seems to be almost exactly the same as the charge 3. Also I don’t use a strap with it when I’m writing because I’m not so concerned with the fitness metrics, beyond trends, and it’s more than capable of doing that. I know from gym interval training on static machines with direct contact heart rate sensors that at the top end it underestimates my heart rate by about 10 bpm,

The recovery thing seems a bit random and doesn’t really accord with what my body is telling me. I generally take more notice of how my resting hr is moving about rather than the recovery advisor.

The sleep thing is also a bit of a waste of time, a couple of times it has told me I got seven hours sleep when I’ve been up most of the night with one of the kids being sick. I believe the 945 has a slightly more complicated Hr metric which might be a bit more accurate.

Aye that’s true, there is no altimeter. Having written that, the Edge 1030 has one and the only thing they have in common is they both seem to be random number generators when it comes to metres gained…

I like the data presentation in Polar Flow both recorded and recovery stats but that’s just personal preference. I wanted all recovery data in one place which is why I ended up going Garmin for both. I still have the m400 and a Vantage M as it happens which is very like the 245 but in Polar flavour…