*** Update: The next generation Forerunner 945 has since been released. For the latest information on this watch series click the link for the Forerunner 945 In-Depth Review***
Today Garmin announced their latest triathlon/multisport…and running-specific focused watch, the Forerunner 935. This watch follows almost a year after the FR735XT was announced last spring, and only 3 months after the Fenix 5 series was announced in January (which just started shipping last week).
So what’s the FR935 all about? Well in a nutshell it’s a cheaper version of the Fenix 5, with a plastic shell as opposed to metal. Basically – it could be named the Fenix 5P – for Plastic. It’s got a barometric altimeter (and WiFi!) that the FR735XT lacks, and also adds in things like the new Training Load/Recovery features found in the Fenix 5, as well as Bluetooth Smart sensor support. Not to mention support for the also just announced Running Dynamics Pod (RD Pod). Finally, it also adds in the just announced TrainingPeaks workout synchronization app, allowing you to sync workouts from TrainingPeaks to your watch (including other devices).
I’ve been using the FR935 for a fair while now, and thus have had the chance to use it across numerous sports and workouts. While the first few weeks were on beta software, the last few weeks have been on what is considered release candidate/final production firmware. As always, once done with this review, I’ll send the loaner/test unit back to Garmin and go out and get my own through normal retail channels.
With that – let’s dive into it!
What’s new:
As noted in the intro, in many ways the FR935 is basically a Fenix 5 in a different skin. It’s got a near-identical user interface, save a few minor tweaks the company is experimenting with to simplify the user experience (but more on that later). In terms of functionality though, it’s basically a Fenix 5. I’ve gone through the menus side by side (see video below), and everything is identical to a Fenix 5. Everything.
Still, there are some notable features that are new to today, which are also coming to the Fenix 5/Chronos series, these are:
Running Dynamics Pod: Sensor pod compatibility added (basically the Garmin Running Dynamics metrics, but in a small wearable pod, also to be compatible with FR735XT/Fenix 5/Chronos) TrainingPeaks pre-installed on the FR935, now available on numerous other devices via Connect IQ Training Status/Load/effect metrics: These are new, provided by FirstBeat, also seen on Fenix 5 series and includes split of aerobic and anaerobic training effect.
Still, what if you’ve been sleeping the last few months and skipped the whole Fenix 5 series? How would the new features look compared to the FR735XT of last year? Well, everything above, plus the below:
Barometric Altimeter: Added it, 735XT didn’t have it and only had GPS-based elevation WiFi: Added it to 935, 735XT didn’t have it, and only half of Fenix 5 series has it Display: Up to 240×240 pixels, same as the Fenix 5 Display: Went from 16 colors on the FR735XT to 64 colors on the FR935 Display: Now supports Emoji, right to left languages (Arabic and Hebrew) Charging Cable: Identical to Fenix 5 series, can charge mid-activity, but wrist blocks it a bit Connect IQ: Fully supports CIQ 2.2.3+, as well as a full 2MB for apps or 32 installed CIQ apps/items, whichever comes first. Battery: Increased battery life up to 24 hours in GPS at 1-second sampling Battery: Increased UltraTrac battery life to 50 hours Gyroscope: Added Gyroscope to all models, used to increase track points in UltraTrac mode User Interface: Slight tweaks to UI to match Fenix 5/Chronos series User Interface: Added new quick access controls menu, to access apps/widgets, to match Fenix 5 series. Strava: Added Strava Live Segment support for Bike & Run Sensors: Added support for Bluetooth Smart sensors (Cycling Power/Speed/Cadence, Running Footpod, Heart Rate) Sensors: Added Varia Vision Heads Up Display Support (all ANT+ remote displays technically) Sensors: Added Varia Bike Lights (all ANT+ lights technically) Sensors: Added Varia Bike Radar Sensors: Added Shimano Di2 Shifting, ANT+ Gear Shifting Support (SRAM RED eTAP & Campagnolo EPS) Sensors: Added ANT+ Muscle Oxygen Sensors (MOXY/BSX) Optical HR Sensor: Revamped tech, now records 24×7 data every 1-2 seconds Optical HR Sensor: Flattened out even more, virtually flush with back of unit Training Data: Added FTP Estimation for cycling Training Data: Now supports swimming PR’s (along with previously added Swim Structured Workout support), like the FR735XT/Fenix5, but unlike some older tri watches Live Group Tracking: Added like the Fenix 5 models, à la the Edge 820 group tracking Straps: Compatible with the QuickFit straps, specifically the Garmin Fenix 5 ones (not the 5S/5X), such as leather/metal/etc… Golf: Added TruSwing, Greenview, and Autoshot features Other Sports Added: Mountain Biking, Treadmill and Indoor Track separated, Ski and Snowboard separated, Navigate app, and Track Me app Navigation Functions: Full navigation identical to that of the Fenix 5 series. That includes things like proximity and navigation alerts (for distance to waypoint, and time/distance remaining to destination). Note, there are no maps like the Fenix 5X units.
Phew – got all that?
Good.
Still confused? Sorry, it happens to the best of us. The good news is I’ve got a video below explaining it all! Go forth and enjoy!
Oh – and you may be wondering why they dropped the ‘XT’ off the end of the official watch name (i.e. not the FR935XT). The reasoning is twofold. First they didn’t want to put off the running side of the house, thinking it wasn’t for them (since it’s basically what people wanted in a fabled FR635). They feel like it’s an equally good option for runners or triathletes. Second is that they figured most triathletes would know from the initial ‘9’ in the series (i.e. 910/920/935), that it was still a triathlon watch. And if you didn’t know about the ‘9’ part, you probably didn’t know about the XT part anyway. 😉
With that, let’s move onto some sizing!
Model and Size Comparisons:
Like the FR735XT, the FR935 comes in one size, but a few two-band variants. There’s the base unit, which is black with a barely visible silver trimming/button, and then there’s the bundle unit which is also black but with a neon yellow trim/button and a secondary yellow strap. Throughout the review you see the bundle variant, with the yellow strap since I was mostly too lazy to change it to the black strap. So, the two options are:
Base unit ($499USD): Black watch face with silver accent and black band, charging cable Bundled unit ($649 USD): Black watch face with yellow accent and black band, additional yellow band, charging cable, HRM-TRI HR strap, HRM-SWIM HR strap, quick release kit.
Note that I don’t have an unboxing to share at the moment, since the unit I was sent came in a simple plastic baggie with just the charging cable and an extra band. Plus the charging cable.
Once I get a proper box, I’ll add the unboxing back into this review. Given what Garmin included in the Fenix 5 boxes, don’t expect anything more than what you see above, plus a few pieces of legal paper telling you not to do anything stupid with it, as well as how to put the band on. Pretty standard stuff.
What is notable here is the band though. Within the box it doesn’t include Garmin’s new QuickFit bands seen on the Fenix5, but rather a standard screw-in band.
That’s a bit of a bummer, the good news is that the QuickFit bands are still compatible with the FR935. Specifically with leather, metal, and other silicone band colors. Basically, what we saw on the Fenix 5. Note, that I tried the Fenix 5 bands (the middle-sized ones) and they fit just fine. The 5X bands would be too big, and the 5S bands too small.
With that, let’s look at sizing between the FR735XT, the FR935, and the Fenix 5 series (plus a Fenix3 thrown in):
As you can see, sizing-wise the FR735XT and FR935 are pretty similar, however the FR935 is slightly larger – by a few millimeters in diameter, albeit identical in depth.
Finally, the FR935 comes in at 49g, whereas the Fenix 5 starts at 84g (depends on which bands you use). The Fenix 5S starts at 67g.
The Basics:
I’m going to mix things up a little bit in this review from past reviews. Partly because I get bored writing things in the same structure each time, and partly because I think at this point there’s some things that are considered ‘base’ knowledge. Meaning that I’ve often split up into separate sections swim/bike/run, with there being so much overlap between all three sections. For this I’m going to round-up the watch basics into this section, then sports into the next, and then talk about newish FR935 pieces like the new Training Status/Load/Recovery components, RD compatibility, and Training Peaks integration. Then I’ll separately dive into accuracy of GPS and optical HR sensor.
To start off with, you’ve got the watch face. This uses a bit more of a traditional plain Jane watch face with just the basic elements on it by default.
However, you can easily customize the data elements on it, as well as the style. And that’s before we even talk Connect IQ watch faces.
Like the Fenix 5, you’ll now have a quick controls option, which can be accessed by holding the upper left button down for a few seconds.
This allows you to quickly lock the screen, put it into do-not-disturb mode, as well as save your GPS location and sync data. You can lightly customize some of these options in the menu as well. You rotate through the options on the controls screen like a rotary telephone.
While the watch face can be customized with your daily activity tracking – such as steps or stairs climbed (it has a barometric altimeter to help track that), you can also iterate through the different widgets by pressing the up/down buttons. For example, here’s the daily activity tracking widget (followed by the detailed views within it):
Additionally, you’ve also got the ability to quickly glance at your last sport/workout stats, along with the calendar, notifications, weather, and other widgets. You can customize these from both Garmin options, as well as 3rd party options.
Within the pile of widgets is one for 24×7 heart rate. This will show your continuous heart rate data, as measured by the optical HR sensor on the back of the unit. Since this unit shares the exact same sensor as the Fenix 5, it now too measures at a rate of every 1-2 seconds.
That optical HR data can be seen at any time from the 24×7 widget, allowing you to glance back at not just the last 4 hours, but also your resting heart rate over the preceding 7 days. I’ve talked about this a fair bit in this post, but in a nutshell I find resting heart rate a great indicator of impending (or current) sickness or excessive fatigue. It’s easy for me to plot that and know that I may want to adjust my training or recovery accordingly.
This data is also then available on Garmin Connect, either your mobile app (iOS/Android/Windows Phone), or on the web using your old Netscape-equipped computer. Below is a screenshot from iOS.
As part of the daily activity tracking, it’ll also automatically recognize and track certain sports, for example walking, running, or cycling. You’ll see these shown as little grey bubbles on your daily heart rate graph, as well as within the list of activities each day.
When it recognizes a sport, it’s not enabling GPS or other sensors. Rather, it’s just leveraging the accelerometer. Thus, the data quality is pretty low. I’d *never* use it to track a run, but it’s useful for tracking quick errand trips on a bike around town that you probably wouldn’t otherwise bother to track. Or for that romantic evening walk on the beach. All important things to properly capture. The data shown is pretty minimal, as seen below. Just start time, type, and duration.
On the left is a simple bike-sharing bike ride home from a party, and on the right is a short walk around town.
Next, with all this fancy phone integration you’ve got the ability to of course sync workouts via Bluetooth Smart (or WiFi), as well as receive notifications from your phone. The FR935 supports standard notification centers on your phone, meaning that any app can take advantage of it. It’s not just texts or calendar notifications like some watches. Anything from your favorite sexting app to Instagram, or Ikea kitchen cabinet planner to GoPro’s action cam app. If it does notifications and normally alerts on your phone, it can alert on your watch.
You can open up alerts to get more detail. Or you can dismiss them, which will also clear them from the phone. For dismissed alerts, you can view them within the notification panel on both the watch, as well as your phone (for example, on iOS just swipe down from the top).
Note one handy little feature is that the FR935 and Fenix 5 series now support many emoji, so you can see those directly on the watch. This is helpful if certain individuals in your family (not pointing any fingers at the Newfoundland contingent or anything) use an astounding amount of emoji icons. Impressive really. I mean, just saying, in theory they do.
Finally – as hinted at above, the FR935 does have WiFi on all units, which means when you walk into your house after a workout is completed, it’ll quickly upload via WiFi. In most cases it’ll do so before you even get your shoes off. If you’re running barefoot then…umm…before you take your pants off? I don’t know. It’s quick.
You can configure numerous WiFi networks using the Garmin Express app:
The inclusion of WiFi in all FR935 units is interesting. Mostly because at $499 it’s less expensive than the base Fenix 5 units at $599, which don’t actually include WiFi (for reasons that make no sense). Only the Sapphire Fenix 5 units include WiFi. In any case, it’s really only used for syncing fitness data. It’s not like you’re going to browse the web with it. Also, it only works for networks that don’t have proxy/filters on them. So it won’t work at Starbucks for example.
What’s that? Something in the basics section not covered? Well, chances are that I’ll cover it throughout the rest of the review. But…if you’re the type of person that wants to press every button on the watch – then the below video is for you! It’s exactly that: I go through all the menus screen by screen!
With all the basics (and more) covered – let’s head onto using it for a workout.
Sport Usage:
Let’s talk about how it works in sport, or rather specifically workouts. When it comes to sport modes there are numerous to choose from here. They are:
Running: Run, Trail Run, Treadmill Run, Indoor Track Hiking: Hike, Climb, Walk, Navigate Cycling: Bike, Bike Indoor, Mountain bike Swimming: Openwater Swim, Pool Swim Triathlon: Triathlon Mode, Swimrun, +general multisport mode Skiing: Ski, Snowboard, XC Ski Other water: Stand Up Paddleboard, Row, Row Indoor Other: Golf, Golf TruSwing, Strength, Cardio, Jumpmaster, Tactical, Other (make your own up)
In order to keep things simple, I’m going to start with explaining the basics of sport mode using the running mode. But the key thing to understand is that by and large these sport modes share the same core functionality. Meaning that things like alerts, structured workouts, data field customization are the same across the board. Where you see differences is in nuances related to each sport, for example in cycling you can enable power meter metrics – but those aren’t seen in golf or swimming. Or in swimming you’d get stroke metrics that aren’t seen in running. But the way you interact with each mode is largely the same.
To begin a workout you’ll press the upper right button, which immediately goes into a newly designed sport menu. This single menu is the only tangible difference between the FR935 and the Fenix 5. In this menu the watch will actually immediately start acquiring GPS signal and your optical HR – even before you choose a sport. The logic here being to simply jumpstart that process while your brain decides what to do next.
You can scroll down in the list of sports to find any of the above mentioned sports, or, you can customize and add your own sports/names.
You’ll notice that as you’re pondering your sport name, the unit will finish up finding GPS and change the color of the outer ring from red to orange, and then to green. Green is good, everything else is bad. So definitely wait for green. Additionally, you’ll see the HR icon stop blinking and go solid, which means HR has been locked. Wait for that too. All of this usually only takes a couple seconds, so it’s pretty quick.
Once that’s done, you can hit the upper right button and you’ll see your data pages that you’ve configured. This hasn’t started recording yet, and you can still see satellite status around the edge of the watch.
Since we’re here, let’s talk data fields and data screens. This basically applies to all sports. Essentially, you can customize the living crap out of data fields and screens. No device on the market gives as much customization as this. You’ve got customizable data pages (screens), that can have up to 4 fields each. That can be one field, two fields, three fields, or four fields. And then within both three and four fields you can arrange them two different ways each (technically three ways for three fields – one without field titles). Here’s a gallery of how that looks:
You can create numerous custom data pages (each having customizable data fields), I haven’t reached the limit because you can create so many and I’m lazy. But you can also select from standard data pages that can be lightly customized as well. These include: Virtual Partner, Map, Compass, Elevation (Graph), Music Controls, Running Dynamics (x2 pages), plus a heart rate zone page. Lots of pages.
The only minor downside is you can’t customize/save these from your phone or Garmin Connect, but rather they must be done on the device. On the bright side, that means you can customize them on the fly during a workout or standing at the start line. Or…at Chipotle. Whatever floats your boat.
Once you’ve started your workout (by pressing the upper right button), the unit will start recording your data. This also includes displaying your data, such as distance and pace/speed. There’s literally gazillions of data fields, and they’re listed in the manual. I used to write them out, but it was silly because it’s so massive (and is always changing). Plus, you can use Garmin Connect IQ to download zillions more data fields.
I tend to keep mine somewhat basic. Essentially I’ve got a page focused on workout totals (i.e. total distance, total time, etc…), and then another focused on laps (i.e. lap distance, lap pace, lap time, heart rate). Btw, you can select either automatic laps based on a preset distance or manual laps based on pressing the button.
Note that you can also customize the lap banner, which allows you to specify which data fields are shown when you press the lap button, or when auto-lap is triggered.
This functionality is handy, though I’d give Suunto the nod for a better overall lap implementation with their lap summary page (a function that was ironically copied from Garmin’s Edge devices). That Suunto lap summary page allows you to quickly glance at all your last laps with various data like average pace or HR next to it. Maybe we’ll see something like it in Connect IQ or similar someday.
In any event – let’s run. While running you’ll get data on your data fields however you set them up. You can change data pages by simply pressing the up/down buttons. Alternatively, you can use auto-scroll to have it iterate through them (I personally never like that, since I want to know what I’m going to see when I glance down). But choice is good.
Note that the FR935 mirrors that on all Garmin running wearables over the last 2-3 years and will show your current/instant pace rounded to the nearest :05 seconds. For example 7:35/mile or 6:45/mile (not 6:46/mile). A few other companies have followed in these footsteps, as ultimately all GPS data is smoothed one way or another. Either it’s smoothed more behind the scenes to give you a false 6:57/mile number, or it’s smoothed more visibly into a bucketed 6:55/mile number. But fear not, lap average pace and average pace are exact number (i.e. 6:57/mile). So you can always use those for pacing.
Once done with the run you’ll get workout summary and PR (personal record) information – such as longest run, or fastest 5K run, etc… You’ll also get recovery time metrics (more on that in the next section), and workout benefit details.
At this point the watch will then sync that workout via Bluetooth Smart to your phone, or if you’re within range of the WiFi networks you setup – it’ll use that instead (it’s a bit quicker). And that’s again an important differentiator between the FR935 and the Fenix 5: All FR935 units have WiFi, whereas only some of the Fenix 5 models have WiFi.
Once it’s done syncing to Garmin Connect, you can go ahead and look at the data via the Garmin Connect Mobile app (iOS/Android/Windows), or just via web browser on Garmin Connect. Here’s one of my runs, utilizing the FR935 and the RD Pod (and the optical HR sensor):
Next, we’ll touch on cycling. As noted this is largely the same as running from a generality standpoint, but there are notables such as power meter support in cycling (both ANT+ & Bluetooth Smart power meters).
While riding you’ll display any data from sensors as well as GPS (i.e. speed and distance), and you can also utilize the unit on your wrist to re-broadcast your heart rate to secondary devices via ANT+. So if you’ve got an Edge device (or an app like TrainerRoad or Zwift) – then you can have those apps pair to your wrist heart rate and record them there too.
One other difference of note between the Fenix 5 and the FR935 is that the FR935 has a quick release kit available for it. This means that if you’re doing a triathlon and want to quickly remove the watch from your wrist to mount onto your bike, you can easily do so. This quick release kit is still a bit early in production, so there’s only renders (and some bad cell phone photos) available at present. It sounds like that’ll start shipping in late April. Still, that’s a definite bonus point for the FR935 over the Fenix 5.
Alternatively, for those doing just cycling you can certainly mount the FR935 onto one of the $11 watch mounting blocks to put on your handlebars. That works just fine (though, the optical HR sensor wouldn’t be usable then).
Once all is said and done your ride, you’ll get the ride data on Garmin Connect just like other sports. Also, this will happily transit over to Strava, TrainingPeaks, Xert, and many other apps automatically using Garmin’s Auto Sync system. That process usually takes forever…ya know…like 1-2 seconds in total.
Since we’re talking cycling, let’s talk triathlon mode. Triathlon mode enables you to quickly iterate from sport to sport with little more than a key press. This is useful for going from the swim segment of a race to the bike segment, and then onto the run. Further, it can capture transition times as well.
Within the triathlon mode you’ve got the aforementioned transition time option, but you can also use the little known option to automatically lock the buttons after you change sports each time. This helps to prevent accidental key presses – in particular pressing the ‘lap’ button, which would move you onto the next sport (a really bad thing if it happens at the wrong time).
In addition to triathlon mode you can make your own multisport mode options – such as combining stand-up paddle boarding with skiing. Or two or more other totally compatible sports. Further, you can do a bit of a free-style multisport mode by pressing the left-center button at any time to simply switch to another sport. This is helpful if you’re going to repeat something like bike/run over and over again until a predetermined time (common brick workout strategy).
Speaking of swimming, the unit supports both openwater and pool swimming modes. In pool swimming mode it’ll use the accelerometer on the watch itself to determine each time you hit the wall at the end of a length. It then uses the preset pool length that you specify in the watch to do simple math on your total distance (as well as pace).
You can use either flip turns or open (non-flip) turns, it doesn’t much matter. However, keep in mind that like all swim watches, it’s essentially looking at changes in direction and shifts in acceleration. So here’s a few tricks you can use as well to get better accuracy:
A) Obviously, ensure your pool length is right
B) The key to swimming watches is remembering it’s looking for a ‘cue’ as to when you’ve reached the end of the length. So, push off forcefully each time
C) It doesn’t matter if you do flip turns or open (non-flip) turns, I mix and match depending on the craziness at the end of my lane
D) Again, just push off sharply, no matter what you do
E) Avoid stopping/starting mid-lane, since it’ll confuse things
F) If you have to pass someone mid-lane, it’s best to ramp into that pass as evenly as possible. Versus just instantly sprinting mid-lane, since it may think you’ve just done a new length. I realize that’s easier said than done – but just giving some general advice
G) Don’t do the YMCA song at the end of the lane, even if at the YMCA. Also, if you go the bathroom, pause the watch.
Speaking of pausing, note that the FR935 does include an inverted display color when you pause it – so you can know whether your mid-set or not. Also, you can use drill mode for things that don’t involve your wrists (i.e. kickboard drills). That allows you to simply enter in the total distance for that drill set at the end of the set.
Next, let’s talk openwater swim. Within openwater swim mode it’s going to leverage the GPS within the device to determine distance.
The challenge here though is that every time the watch goes below the surface of the water (basically, every other second), it loses that signal. So the goal with openwater swim mode is to try and string together these generally poorly conceived points into a rational swim track. Meaning, it’s rarely perfect – I usually aim for accuracy +/- 10% as a rough yardstick of success. Sometimes you’ll get better (like spot-on better), and sometimes it’ll be crap.
There are things you can do to improve your success rate though:
A) Always get signal above water before starting
B) Always press the start button above water, and then wait for 2-5 seconds before your first strokes
C) If making a sharp turn somewhere (such as a buoy), I find it helpful if you slightly slow down your stroke rate at the turn buoy – giving the unit just an extra split second of your wrist above water to try and find GPS
D) Always wait until out of the water to stop the GPS track, ideally waiting 5-8 seconds for it to ensure it has a clean lock on GPS
If you do those four things, I find substantial improvements in GPS tracking during swims (across all device vendors). None really impact your workout.
Note that in neither openwater swim mode or pool swim mode does the FR935 capture heart rate via the optical HR sensor. For both you’ll need either the HRM-TRI or HRM-SWIM. This is due to the challenges associated with optical HR sensors in the water.
With all that background, I put together this openwater swim video with the FR935 – showing you how it works from start to finish.
As shown in the video – once done you’ll get a GPS track showing your particular route. In this case, the GPS track was pretty good actually.
Last but not least, let’s talk structured workouts and intervals. These come in two varieties. First are structured workouts that you can download from Garmin Connect. These can be ones that you’ve created, or that you’ve downloaded from their free training plans. Doesn’t much matter, they show up in the device in pretty much the same way, under Training > Workouts:
It’s here that you can then view the steps (i.e. targets) of the workout, as well as start the workout.
Once started, the workout function will warn you of upcoming segments, as well as display to you the specific target for each segment. It’ll also count-down the time left in each piece. For example, it’ll show you that you’ve got 93 seconds left and that your target HR zone is 165-172bpm. It’ll even show a nifty little target HR indicator.
Now to demonstrate this, I used the new TrainingPeaks app (you’ll see a separate post shortly on that). That app essentially transfers the structured workout from TrainingPeaks and then lets the native workout functionality on the FR935 take care of processing.
Just to be clear though, you don’t need TrainingPeaks for anything of this. The above simply shows how it works if you did use TrainingPeaks to download the workout, but the downloading can also be done natively purely using Garmin Connect Mobile (or your desktop computer).
Next, if you want a more simplistic experience you can use instead the native interval workout function on the watch itself. This function allows you to configure a warm-up, a work portion (plus repeat count), a rest portion, and then a cool-down.
For example you can specify a work portion of 1 mile, with a rest of 90 seconds, and then do 5 repeats. You can customize any given portion of that.
Once started, it’ll run you through the workout in more or less the same manner as a full downloaded structured workout. The only difference though is that you’re not going to get a specific target (i.e. pace, heart rate, etc…). Note that these functions work the same regardless of which sport you’re in (running/cycling, or also swimming for structured workouts).
Finally, we’ll wrap up with a brief talk through of navigation and courses. I dive into this a bit more in my Fenix 5 In-Depth Review a mere 6 days ago, and that watch functions identically to this in that respect.
In any event, the FR935 includes the ability to navigate on both downloaded courses, as well as past activities. This can be used either for simple directional assistance – or to even race against courses/activities that are configured with specific timing. Further, you can also just use the FR935 for basic navigation back to a saved point, or to backtrack your way to wherever you started from.
You can launch navigation from within any given sport (i.e. hiking), or you can launch it on its own. The net result is basically the same, except that you’ll get data fields customized for that sport if you launch it within that sport. Plus, you’ll get a few extra data pages from the navigation side of the house.
To begin, you’ll select a course. For example, here are ones I’ve downloaded from Garmin Connect to my watch via Garmin Connect Mobile.
Once selected you can then view a breadcrumb trail map, or the elevation plots of it:
From there you can start navigation, which allows you to follow that breadcrumb style navigation based on the route of the course. The watch will also show your times against any pacing within the course/activity file (such as racing against a past activity). You’ll see the direction of travel using the internal compass, which is displayed as a small red arrow on the edge near the bezel.
Note that unlike the Fenix 5X, the FR935 doesn’t contain any actual map like you’d find on a car/phone GPS. Meaning, you won’t see streets, lakes, or rivers or anything else. You’ll simply see where you’re going and where you’ve been (identical to the Fenix 5/5S).
The core difference here in this realm between something like the FR935 and the slightly older FR735XT is that the FR935/Fenix5 contain barometric altimeters, which are lacking in the FR735XT. That’s a big deal for folks hiking (or doing anything) in the mountains. As I showed in my FR735XT review last year, the altitude readings left much to be desired, whereas with the FR935/Fenix5, it’s far better. You can see that in the GPS accuracy section in particular (below), on the March 9th mountainous ride.
Finally, note that in order to create courses that at this time you need to use a desktop web browser of some sort, as the Garmin Connect Mobile app doesn’t allow creation there. You can however sync/specify saved routes from Garmin Connect using the mobile app, and send them to your watch wirelessly.
Training Load & Stress:
When Garmin introduced the Fenix 5, that introduced new training status and load features that have now carried into the FR935. These metrics are built by FirstBeat and licensed by Garmin. That’s the same company that has powered much of the training and recovery features on past Garmin watches, as well as other companies in the wearables industry. These specific new features were previously offered in FirstBeat’s pro athlete training suite, and have now been squeezed into the FR935.
One really important thing to point out is that these metrics take time to adapt to you. Realistically FirstBeat says it takes about two weeks in total to get to the point of having truly valid data. That also assumes that you’re able to get two workouts that trigger a VO2Max estimate (either running or cycling, but two of the same sport type). It’s those two key items that allow it to really hone in. It’ll reach its ‘full potential’ once it has about a month’s worth of data on you.
To start, when you finish a workout you’ll be given a split of anaerobic an aerobic training effect, in terms of a number between 0.0 and 5.0. While Training Effect used to be a single number, now it’s split:
This data is presented for any workout where a heart rate sensor of some sort was used (be it optical or HR strap). This training effect number is also saved to Garmin Connect, where it can be viewed at the bottom of any workout:
The exact number corresponds to a much longer explanation of what those data points mean, which can be found in these two sheets that FirstBeat has sent over.
Next, after some activities (if a change has occurred), you’ll receive a VO2Max estimate. In the case of cycling this requires a power meter. The VO2Max estimate won’t necessarily show on every workout, and may take a few weeks as well to really fine tune itself (in particular it’s best to have a hard workout).
Moving right along, the unit will give you recovery hours – similar to before on a number of Garmin devices. These recovery hours can be checked at any time, and will slowly count down to zero hours as time passes. If you do another workout, it’ll increase correspondingly.
Then we’ve got training load. This numerical number is specific/unique to you, and is based on trending over time. This is where that multitude of weeks of training data comes in play, as it allows FirstBeat to figure out what’s ‘normal’ for you. They noted that they reach their full analytic potential after a month of data.
Keeping it in the green means your load is appropriate for your capabilities. Whereas overtraining puts you into the red, and undertraining the blue.
Finally, we’ve got the general training status page (accessible anytime as a widget by just pressing the down button a few times). This is a way to look at the specific load you’re applying, and whether the load is contributing to fitness.
In general, I’ve found this particular page has been pretty accurate when it comes to judging what my training load/etc is in relation to what I’m actually feeling. As long-time readers know, I tend to be pretty critical of these sorts of technologies, but this one does seem to be getting it right the vast majority of the time.
The FirstBeat folks initially shared with me a massively long presentation and supporting documents that outlined how this tech works. They were able to pull together a bit more finessed/polished version of that over the weekend, which they said I could share/post here. You can find the full PDF here, and I’ve put all the slides into a single gallery for quick clickage below. Note that this applies to the FR935, Fenix 5, and Fenix Chronos units.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t sound like the older FR735XT or Fenix 3 variants will be getting this update.
Heart Rate Sensor Accuracy:
The FR935 includes Garmin’s Elevate optical HR sensor built into the bottom of it, which is used both in workouts as well as in 24×7 continual HR monitoring mode. Just like the Fenix 5, the FR935’s optical sensor got a slight overhaul/upgrade, most notably when in 24×7 mode. Previous to this, Garmin’s Elevate sensor would sample rather infrequently (outside of workouts), at rates from every few seconds to every few hours. It was all over the map.
But with the new lower-power FR935/Fenix 5 optical sensor, it now samples every 1-2 seconds. Basically, it’s always on. In addition to the change in sampling frequency, they’ve also reduced the sensor bump. Of course – my goal is to find out if there were any undesired repercussions from this, specifically in sport mode. When it came to 24×7 mode, the new data looks much better, and the accuracy seems spot on for casual activities like watching TV, walking, or just living life.
Thus with each subsequent new unit released I re-visit sensor accuracy. While it’s the same physical hardware, one can see the impact that firmware updates make. Additionally, each watch has a slightly different form factor (exterior design), which can impact accuracy in terms of external light getting into the sensor area (which degrades accuracy of optical HR sensors).
Before we move on to the test results, note that optical HR sensor accuracy is rather varied from individual to individual. Aspects such as skin color, hair density, and position can impact accuracy. Position and how the band is worn are *the most important* pieces. A unit with an optical HR sensor should be snug. It doesn’t need to leave marks, but you shouldn’t be able to slide a finger under the band (at least during workouts). You can wear it a tiny bit looser the rest of the day.
Ok, so in my testing I simply use the watch throughout my normal workouts. Those workouts include a wide variety of intensities and conditions, making them great for accuracy testing. I’ve got long/steady runs, hard interval workouts on both bike and running, as well as tempo runs and rides. Not to mention skiing and hiking. Night and day, sun and snow. I’ve got it all!
For each test I’m wearing additional devices, usually 3-4, which capture data from other sensors. Typically I’d wear a chest strap (usually the HRM-TRI), as well as another optical HR sensor made by Scosche and in some cases also a Suunto Spartan Wrist HR that I’m also testing. I generally consider the Scosche sensors to be the most accurate optical HR sensors for fitness/workouts today. Note that the numbers you see in the upper right corner are *not* the averages, but rather just the exact point my mouse is sitting over.
Let’s dive into the first data set. Note all this data is analyzed using the DCR Analyzer, details here.
First up is some intervals from this Saturday. You can see that I’ve got a pretty even warm-up phase, building intensity. Then I go into 3xintervals, followed by four much shorter sprints.
As we start off there’s a bit of disagreement between the optical side of the house (all three sensors), and the chest strap. It’s hard to say who is correct, though I’d likely place it on the optical side of the house this time (FR935/Scosche). The Suunto unit is a bit off there, bouncing around. But at the 5 minute marker they all merge.
At they largely stay pretty darn close together for the three interval sets. You see a little bit of lag on the 2nd interval from the FR935 in the first 30 seconds or so, but it’s not horrible.
As we transition to the four short sprints at the end, things actually match really well. Except the last one. What’s going on there? In that one I was filming the TrainingPeaks video showing the sprint – and it definitely seemed to impact things. That’s logical – given that I’d have been trying to hold my wrist up for the camera, and thus dorking with the cadence readings.
So overall, pretty good there. And I know why certain ones were offset compared to others – which is important.
Here’s another interval workout with the 935, and then a Fenix5 paired to an HRM-RUN HR strap. Also, the Suunto Wrist HR. In this you can see that outside of the first few minutes (again), the FR935 and HR strap track quite closely.
Which is again, the experience I saw over and over again (and also shown in the data). When it came to running – there wasn’t much of an issue here, outside of occasional warm-up type oddities in the first few minutes. Which of course is also common in HR straps.
Next, let’s look at some cycling. I’ve got some indoor trainer rides, but those are all honestly kinda boring as the sensor works just fine and dandy there. Just like the Fenix 5 – indoor trainer rides no problem.
Instead, let’s look at this outdoor ride from Sunday as one example of HR data. This ride actually turned out quite good for HR data from all three units, at least for the first portion of the ride. The different sensors by and large agreed quite nicely, minus some minor quirks. I removed the Suunto Spartan Wrist HR data from this plot, because it was too distracting. You can find that down below in the table if you want.
We do however see around the 2hr marker that things go sideways a little bit. This seemed to be a lower intensities, mostly when I was coasting downhill along some occasionally rougher terrain through a park of sorts.
We this same decoupling towards the end of the ride as well – also at lower intensities.
Thus the pattern seems to be a bit where as long as I was riding along with some effort, it was doing pretty well. But if I got into rougher roads with less intensity – then it fell apart a bit.
Which, is all roughly in line with what I saw for the Fenix5 as well. It works well enough for me during running – even through intervals. However, cycling is a mixed bag. Indoors it’s fine, and outdoors as long as there is some evenness within intensity (or roads), then it works out pretty well. But if I drop intensity and then combine that with rougher roads – it tends to struggle.
Lastly, here’s a table of all my activities on final or near-final software from the last 3-4 weeks:
(Note: All of the charts in these accuracy sections were created using the DCR Analyzer tool. It allows you to compare power meters/trainers, heart rate, cadence, speed/pace, GPS tracks and plenty more. You can use it as well, more details here.)
GPS Accuracy:
There’s likely no topic that stirs as much discussion and passion as GPS accuracy. A watch could fall apart and give you dire electrical shocks while doing so, but if it shows you on the wrong side of the road? Oh hell no, bring on the fury of the internet!
GPS accuracy can be looked at in a number of different ways, but I prefer to look at it using a number of devices in real-world scenarios across a vast number of activities. I use 2-6 other devices at once, trying to get a clear picture of how a given set of devices handles conditions on a certain day. Conditions include everything from tree/building cover to weather.
Over the years I’ve continued to tweak my GPS testing methodology. For example, I try to not place two units next to each other on my wrists, as that can impact signal. If I do so, I’ll put a thin fabric spacer of about 1”/3cm between them. But often I’ll simply carry other units by the straps, or attach them to my shoulder straps of a CamelBak. Plus, wearing multiple watches on the same wrist is well known to impact optical HR accuracy too.
Next, as noted I use just my daily training routes. Using a single route over and over again isn’t really indicative of real-world conditions, it’s just indicative of one trail.
When it comes to the data I’m focusing on for accuracy details in this review, I’m going to mostly limit it to the last few weeks, since earlier data was beta data. Though in those earlier beta builds, I had no issues with GPS accuracy.
First, let’s just start off with a run in/around the city. Note as with the optical HR data, all this data is analyzed using the DCR Analyzer.
This run passes under tunnels, over bridges, and right alongside 6-10 story buildings. Here’s the high level overview.
But let’s dig into some challenging sections – such as turning onto the bridge – did it handle that correctly?
It seems to – all units nicely cross the bridge without ending up in the water. They also correctly navigate exactly where I was on the path. Next, looking at the turnaround near Bastille, three of the four units correctly plot that turn, including the FR935.
However, as we get back down the other end of the canal, some units do go for a brush with the buildings. I ran right alongside the building and the Fenix 5 and FR735XT end up in the building slightly, whereas the FR935 doesn’t and correctly tracks.
It also correctly tracks through the tunnel that’s seen in the lower left of this image.
In short, on this run there’s no issues with GPS accuracy of the FR935. And that’s indicative of what I saw on other running activities as well.
So what about something trickier – like an openwater swim? Well, here ya go:
As you can see, all three units tracked actually quite closely. There’s maybe a brief moment of track oddity around the mid-point, which is roughly when I stopped to take some photos/video, which might explain that. Also towards the end the FR935 adds a little bit of distance as well:
Now, when it comes to cycling I largely see good results. There’s honestly not a lot to analyze. You can dig through the results below – but things are pretty darn clean, which is usually the case for most GPS units. The higher speed means that there’s less room for GPS to ‘wander’.
Lastly, here’s a table of all my activities on final or near-final software from the last 3-4 weeks. Note that in general I’m excluding activities where I didn’t have multiple devices, or excluding activities where GPS isn’t involved (i.e. indoor treadmill runs or similar).
All of the above link to the DCR Analyzer data, which you can then dig into the individual activities in more detail if you’d like. Further, you can download the original data at the bottom of each page.
Connect IQ & 3rd Parties:
Like almost every wearable Garmin has made in the last few years, the Forerunner 935 includes support for Garmin Connect IQ, which is Garmin’s app platform that 3rd party apps can take advantage of. Said platform has thousands of apps covering all sorts of things from Uber to watch faces to specialized apps for very specific race scenarios. Basically, it allows companies or hobbyists to not only integrate with 3rd party services, but also to bridge the gap where the base device may be missing a feature.
The FR935 includes the same support for Connect IQ version 2.2.3+, which is the latest version of Connect IQ. That will enable it to support newer apps over the next while. This includes 2MB for apps, or up to 32 individual apps – whatever you reach first. Additionally, it also has 64 color support, also the same as the Fenix 5 and Chronos series.
In the case of 3rd party support, you’ll see both apps that can be downloaded – as well as some that are actually pre-installed. For example, TrainingPeaks is now preinstalled as an app – which offers the ability for you to iterate through structured workouts directly from their platform.
In addition, you’ll see other pre-loaded apps like Strava Segments, which allows you to race Strava Segments in real-time. That works identically to how the FR735XT works, which I covered in this video.
Those Strava Segments are downloaded automatically to your FR935 based on Garmin’s connection to Strava behind the scenes. The watch will then give you updates for how you’re competing against the leaderboard in real-time as you race the segment (running or cycling):
Afterwards, it’ll update accordingly on the Strava site (once you upload your activity upon ending it). Again, nothing super new here when it comes to these features.
In many ways, what’s most notable is beneath the covers and came in the form of updates last fall during the ANT+ Symposium. These updates have given app developers far more connectivity to the watch. For example, the Training Peaks integration isn’t some sort of special secret back door between the two companies. Rather, it’s just TrainingPeaks leveraging the new capability to hand-off files (workouts) to the watch via your smartphone connection. It’s the exact same functionality that Xert uses on the Garmin Edge lineup. The only difference? Garmin simply placed the TrainingPeaks app on your FR935 by default. Just one file placed there, that’s it. For everyone else – you can simply go to the Garmin Connect IQ app store and download it for free.
Still – all of these apps are cool. Be it ones that Garmin is highlighting as part of partnerships, or smaller apps from hobbyist developers that you’ve never heard of. In fact, sometimes the smaller ones are the coolest ones.
Sensor Support (ANT+ & Bluetooth Smart):
The Fenix 5 series was the first Garmin unit to not only support a slew of ANT+ sensors, but also now supports Bluetooth Smart sensors. The Garmin FR935 then followed along in those same footsteps. Previously Garmin would only utilize the Bluetooth side of the house for connecting to your phone via Bluetooth Smart. Now however, you can connect to both ANT+ and Bluetooth Smart sensors, assuming both follow published standards.
At present, the FR935 supports the following sensor types:
ANT+ External Heart Rate Sensor
ANT+ Cycling Power Meter
ANT+ Cycling Speed-only, Cadence-only, and Speed/Cadence Combo Sensors
ANT+ Running Footpod
ANT+ Gear Shifting Profile (SRAM RED eTAP/Campagnolo EPS)
ANT+ External Temperature Sensors (Tempe)
ANT+ Lighting Systems (Garmin Varia/Bontrager lights)
ANT+ Radar Systems (Garmin Varia Radar)
ANT+ Remote Display (Varia Vision heads up display)
ANT+ Muscle Oxygenation Sensor (i.e. Moxy/BSX)
ANT Shimano Di2 Gear Shifting Profile
ANT Garmin VIRB Action Camera Control
ANT Garmin RD (Running Dynamics) pod
Bluetooth Smart External Heart Rate Sensor
Bluetooth Smart Cycling Speed-only, Cadence-only, and Speed/Cadence Combo Sensors
Bluetooth Smart Cycling Power Meters
Bluetooth Smart Running Footpods
Phew! Lots of sensor types!
Now, the most important wording I noted above was ‘follow published standards’. On the ANT+ side, this means either following specific adopted ANT+ profiles (i.e. the heart rate sensor or gear shifting profile), or in a few limited cases, following company-specific standards. For example, Shimano Di2 doesn’t technically follow the ANT+ gear shifting standard, rather, they’ve done their own thing. But they were the first to do that thing, so everyone supports it anyway.
Where things get messy is private/extended variants of standards, especially on the Bluetooth Smart side. For example – running dynamics. There is no standard on either ANT+ or Bluetooth Smart for running dynamics type data (i.e. vertical oscillation, ground contact time, etc…). Instead, Garmin uses private-ANT (just like Shimano does for Di2). And other companies like Wahoo with the TICKR series use private methods over Bluetooth Smart. Though, these aren’t compatible. Meaning that you’ll get base heart rate data – but you won’t get any running dynamics stuff when using a non-Garmin strap. Maybe some day, but today is not that day.
The same is true of offline data, meaning the ability for a heart rate strap to cache/save data when not connected to a watch. Garmin uses this with the HRM-TRI/HRM-SWIM heart rate straps to save data while you swim, because it can’t send that data to the watch through the water. When connected again, Garmin uses the standard ANT+ ANTfs offloading capability to allow a watch to download that data. This is a published standard (and has been for more than half a decade).
However, others don’t follow this standard, and there is no equivalent published standard for offloading fitness data on Bluetooth Smart. Thus other companies do it differently. For example, both Polar’s new H10 and Wahoo’s TICKR-X can save data offline, as can Stryd, Suunto and 4iiii heart rate straps. But none do so the same way on Bluetooth Smart, let alone utilize the ANT+ ANTfs standard for offloading.
Said more simply: You’ll need a Garmin HRM-TRI/HRM-SWIM strap to download data. And you’ll need either a Garmin HRM-TRI/HRM-RUN/RD Pod to get running dynamics.
Of course, folks could pressure both sides of the equation to support other standards. For example, folks could pressure Garmin to open up Running Dynamics to be an ANT+ standard for a variety of efficiency metrics (nobody has tried harder to pressure them to do so than I). And inversely, folks could pressure companies like Wahoo and 4iiii to support ANTfs offloading of data from the strap for offline access.
Finally – some might wonder if you can use Polar’s H7/H10 and other like straps that transmit heart rate signals underwater live, to do so to the FR935 (underwater). The answer is no. That’s because while underwater the Polar device doesn’t use Bluetooth Smart to connect to these straps, but rather an analog frequency (the same one used for gym treadmills and such), which Garmin doesn’t support.
Here’s a simplified FAQ section, since I’ve seen about 1,291 questions about this:
Will the FR935 support running dynamics from my Wahoo TICKR strap?
No, see above for details. It will read the heart rate data just fine.
Will the Garmin FR935 connect to my PowerTap P1 pedals via Bluetooth Smart?
Yes, they can. You’ll connect both sides (Left/Right) and the Garmin will properly track left/right balance. However, because there is no standard for Torque Efficiency and Pedal Smoothness on Bluetooth Smart, you won’t get those unless you connect via ANT+. The general guidance of *every* power meter company I talk to in the industry is given the option to connect your power meter over ANT+ or Bluetooth Smart, always choose ANT+.
Will my power meter work flawlessly over Bluetooth Smart?
I’m just gonna be straight about this now: This will continue to be a mess. Garmin has done a pretty good job in getting compatibility working for the dozen+ ways that power meter companies have adopted the Bluetooth Smart standards in power meters. In the few BLE power meters I’ve tested, they’ve worked. But I haven’t tested every firmware version of every unit out there – and I can guarantee some don’t work. It sucks. A lot. Garmin isn’t the only one shaking their head. Everyone is. Different companies handle it differently. Suunto has tried as well to just ‘make it work’ as quickly as possible, while Polar seems to drag its heels on making things work. Everyone I talk to in the industry here about this topic truly sighs and puts their head in their hands in frustration.
Who to blame is a mixed bag, but either way, the consumer is left holding said bag. The good news is that every power meter out there except the Polar power meters support dual ANT+/Bluetooth Smart, so just use ANT+ and don’t worry about it.
Will the FR935 connect to my Polar strap underwater?
No, said Polar strap uses analog signals to broadcast underwater. Garmin doesn’t have that hardware in the Forerunner series to connect to that.
Does this mean the end of ANT+?
Not likely. I do think it applies pressure to ANT+ though to maintain relevance, but I think they can do that through things like standardizing running metrics and stuff – thus encouraging companies to utilize the platform. But until the day comes where I can look back on the preceding 6-12 months and say that every Bluetooth Smart power meter (or cycling sensor) has worked flawlessly with every head unit (from a connection standpoint), then ANT+ will likely continue to do quite well.
Can I connect multiple Bluetooth Smart sensors?
Yes and no. You can connect multiple sensors to an FR935 – no issues there. However, you cannot connect multiple devices to a single Bluetooth Smart sensor. So if you’re connected to your Bluetooth Smart heart rate strap with the Zwift app (on your phone), then the FR935 will be unable to connect to it as well. That’s because Bluetooth Smart at this time cannot accept multiple master device connections.
Bluetooth 5.0 does resolve this (upcoming), but so did Bluetooth 4.1 – and nobody has adopted either from a sensor standpoint in the sports industry yet. ANT+ does not have these limitations, a key reason it’s used in gym/coaching scenarios today.
Bugs & Quirks:
I often include a section in my review about specific bugs and quirks seen in the product. From a software development standpoint, there’s often a fine line between a bug that needs fixing – and what the software industry calls ‘by design’. Meaning it’s not technically a bug, but rather something that’s designed that way (however sucky that might be). In my case, I’m going to call those ‘quirks’.
In general, I’m drawing the line that I’m only going to cover bugs seen in the final production version of things. After all – that’s somewhat the point of beta – to rid itself of bugs. I have however been tracking bugs I saw during beta, and specifically validating those have been fixed in the production version.
Also, note that I’m specifically looking at issues *I’ve encountered* during swim/bike/run/ski/hike/daily use/etc… This isn’t designed to be the end-all-be-all of bugs that may exist in the product.
What’s interesting here though is that with the mostly shared code based on the Fenix side, bugs I’ve been finding have been taken care of there first. Plus any bugs I’ve found on the FR935 they’ve resolved within a few days. So my ‘bug list’ if you will is incredibly small, nitpicking items at best. For example one of the last sport type widgets doesn’t quite seem to be pulling the correct workout type by default (but can easily be changed), but even that’s only something I happened to notice because I was taking a bunch of photos for this review this weekend.
If there’s anything that falls into this category, it’d be that optical HR sensor accuracy while cycling certainly leaves something to be desired. A complaint I echoed in my Fenix 5 in-depth review.
As with all companies, it’s not so much having bugs in a product that’s concerning (as every company/product has bugs) – but rather, it’s how quickly a company responds to unexpected bugs. Both in terms of initial triage via support channels, as well as then, of course, issuing a fix in short shorter via updated firmware. Generally speaking Garmin is pretty good about earlier issues in new products, usually fixing most oddities pretty quickly in the first few weeks/months. Given that the codebase is shared with the Fenix 5 series, that helps in having a broader number of people and getting updates out quicker.
Product Comparison Tool:
I’ve added the Garmin FR935 into the product comparison tool, allowing you to compare it against numerous other products I’ve reviewed and/or hands-on time with. For the purposes of the below chart, I’ve placed it against the Fenix 5 and Suunto Spartan Sport Wrist HR. But you can easily mix and match to compare it against any products in the database, here at the product comparison tool.
Again – remember you can make your own comparisons using the comparison tool here.
Summary:
The FR935 is a very solid and capable product – and one that builds nicely on last year’s FR735XT, while offering a slightly lower priced option compared to the more fashion-focused Fenix 5 series. The tech and features inside it work just as well as the Fenix 5. And while the benefits are minimal over recent products, they are more substantial when comparing it against older watches like the FR920 or much older FR910XT, 310XT, and so on.
But I suspect there will (probably rightly), be some disappointed people with one area: The size/form factor. Specifically that for triathletes, many have actually enjoyed the larger/rectangular display seen on the FR920XT and the umpteen generations before it. On the flip-side, runners will likely be happy since they’ve now got an upgrade option for those that want all the fancy features in a slimmer running focused unit.
The benefit though to Garmin’s consolidation on watch formats (i.e making it round) is that they’re also consolidating on code bases. That has a very real-world impact to stability of the product. The fact that this product will be available immediately, and likely with few visible bugs is a testament to the software being the Fenix 5 codebase that’s been used for many months by hundreds of testers. It also means that going forward, it won’t end up an orphaned product since it’s tied like a conjoined twin to the hip of the juggernaut in Garmin that is the Fenix product lineup. Sometimes there’s safety in numbers.
If you’re looking for a great little triathlon watch that has all the features of the Fenix 5 without the price tag of it – then the FR935 is a very solid option. Especially since it ships starting…today. Just in time for the season.
Found This Post Useful? Support The Site!
Hopefully you found this review useful. At the end of the day, I’m an athlete just like you looking for the most detail possible on a new purchase – so my review is written from the standpoint of how I used the device. The reviews generally take a lot of hours to put together, so it’s a fair bit of work (and labor of love). As you probably noticed by looking below, I also take time to answer all the questions posted in the comments – and there’s quite a bit of detail in there as well.
If you're shopping for the Garmin Forerunner 935 or any other accessory items, please consider using the affiliate links below! As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. It doesn’t cost you anything extra, but your purchases help support this website a lot. Even more, if you shop with TPC (The Pro's Closet), you'll save $40 on purchases over $200 with coupon code DCRAIN40! The Pro's Closet has been a long-time partner of the site here - including sponsoring videos like my cargo bike race, as well as just being an awesome Colorado-based company full of good humans. Check them out with the links below and the DCRAIN40 coupon!
And finally, here’s a handy list of accessories that work well with this unit (and some that I showed in the review). Given the unit pairs with ANT+ & Bluetooth Smart sensors, you can use just about anything though.
This is a dual ANT+/Bluetooth Smart cycling cadence sensor that you strap to your crank arm, but also does dual Bluetooth Smart, so you can pair it both to Zwift and another Bluetooth Smart app at once if you want.
This is one of the top straps I use daily for accuracy comparisons (the others being the Polar H9/H10). It's dual ANT+/Bluetooth Smart, and in fact dual-Bluetooth Smart too, in case you need multiple connectons.
Seriously, this will change your life. $9 for a two-pack of these puck Garmin chargers that stay put and stay connected. One for the office, one for your bedside, another for your bag, and one for your dog's house. Just in case.
This speed sensor is unique in that it can record offline (sans-watch), making it perfect for a commuter bike quietly recording your rides. But it's also a standard ANT+/BLE sensor that pairs to your device. It's become my go-to speed sensor.
This wifi-connected scale will track your weight and related metrics both on the scale display and in Garmin Connect (plus 3rd party apps like TrainingPeaks). It'll also then sync your weight to your watch/bike computer, to ensure accurate calorie data.
The HRM-PRO Plus is Garmin's top-end chest strap. It transmits dual ANT+/Bluetooth Smart, but also transmits Running Dynamics & Running Pace/Distance metrics, stores HR data during a swim, and can be used without a watch for other sports. Also, it can transmit XC Skiing Dynamics as well.
And of course – you can always sign-up to be a DCR Supporter! That gets you an ad-free DCR, access to the DCR Quarantine Corner video series packed with behind the scenes tidbits...and it also makes you awesome. And being awesome is what it’s all about!
Thanks for reading! And as always, feel free to post comments or questions in the comments section below, I’ll be happy to try and answer them as quickly as possible. And lastly, if you felt this review was useful – I always appreciate feedback in the comments below. Thanks!
Received my 935 from Clever Training this afternoon. Haven’t worked out with it yet, but first impression is that this is a home run for Garmin. Makes my 920xt look and feel like a cinder block on my wrist. Build quality seems good. Software is reasonably intuitive (at least by Garmin standards). All good.
Hey, when did you place your order? I’m trying to establish an ETA for mine. I preordered on Amazon. I’m thinking I should have ordered with Clever Training.
From what I can tell, it is pre-order everywhere – nobody seems to have it – I tried Clever Training, Amazon, REI, etc. Even called the Garmin store in Miami and they told me they did not have it yet, that it will take a couple of weeks. So, these people that got it already might have been very lucky, the beneficiaries of an early batch. Or please, explain better you secret for ordering the watch. Otherwise, I have to think amazon is as good as any other channel.
I ordered mine at 8am EDT from CT on the morning it was released. It shipped the next afternoon (3/30). I received it yesterday (4/1). No secret. Just unusually decisive for me. 😉
I’m confused by this statement,”QuickFit bands are still compatible with the FR935″. So I understand, you can’t clip them on like you would do with the Fenix 5 bands, right? You’d have to use the tool set to put them on, right? Thanks in advance.
Thanks. Do you know if that tool comes with the watch as well? Or, is that a separate expense? Do you need to get new pins as well? I assume the quickfit 22 bands would not come with the pins or the tool.
Good question. Looking at Garmin and CleverTraining websites, my understanding is that the screwdivers only come with the 935 replacement bands (or the quick release kit), not the 935 itself, not the quickfit band. If confirmed that would mean that if you want to go from a regular 935 band to a Quickfit band, you need to find the screwdivers at your favorite tool store (or buy a quickrelease kit on top).
Anyone who received the 935… Do you confirm?
I ordered a standalone QuickFit 22 watch band (amp yellow) on amazon (certified garmin product) for when my 935 comes in so I can switch to the quickfit bands. The quickfit band that was delivered actually came with the 2 screwdrivers you are referring to in the box actually. I wasn’t worried since I still had the tools from my old 910xt but good to know that if you don’t have the tools already, it WILL come with your order of separate watch bands! Just FYI
I did the same but unfortunately the Fenix5 bands will not be as tight on the wrist as the 935 original band (thats only if you have tiny wrists like mine).
I’m a competitive runner, and having given this a lot of thought, this would be the perfect running watch if it was:
1) Slightly smaller, the same size as the 630 / 735 – for small wrists the F5 and 935 is a bit too big
2) Had a lightweight aluminium or titanium body, to give it a premium feel whilst keeping it lightweight
3) Was the same price as 735 was on launch – why should a plastic watch cost £469? Apple Watch Series 2 42mm is only £399, and it’s made entirely of lightweight aluminium
I am a competitive runner too and am happy to go forward with the 935. I have been wearing a 735 as well as the 935 since got it to compare. I don’t notice any real difference between the two in wearability.
If looks are important, looks better than the 630/735 to me.
Price probably reflects the amount of effort that goes into the overall product relative to the number of likely buyers. Apple can undoubtedly pitch their stuff less due to huge sales but that is a very very basic as a running watch. Vastly overpriced for that alone.
Touchscreen – take it or leave it. Fraction quicker to change data screens, frustrating to work through the menus.
Also I’m not a big fan of the exclusivity deal they’ve struck with Wiggle. Nothing against Wiggle really, I’ve placed a few orders with them and I’ve been happy with the service. It’s just the principle of the thing that makes me want to wait until it’s available from a different retailer. CleverTraining UK would be great with your discount if they hadn’t priced it over RRP!
I ordered one from Wiggle for £422 with 10% discount. If you’ve spent £100 in the last 12 months you get 10% and if spent more than £500 I *think* it’s 17% – so those prices are pretty reasonable after the discount.
I notice you have been wearing both 735 and 935, I have been looking at the 735 for a while and now the 935 is out I cannot decide. Quite a big price difference, is it justified? I also have small wrists so would the 735 be better?
I’m trying to find the stand out tech differences that accounts for the price jump and maybe they will be lost on me! Current set up is vivoactive and an old 310 for race day for tri mode which has had its day!!
Any help appreciated!
Thanks
I currently have the 235, and was going to upgrade to the F5, I think the 935 will be better suited for me.
One question, I tend to use connect to load my workouts. One thing that really annoyed me with the 235 was that the alert beeps were very low, so if I was running nerar cars I could barely here the beeps.
Can you turn off the optical HRM? I like wearing my watches over long sleeves or over my wind breaker. I also think that the more exposed the watch is, the better track you can get. If you do pair it with a scoche, can you force the watch to only use that?
Hi Ray (and anyone else who might be able to answer this question),
I have an old Fenix, I think it’s a 2? It had a bunch of “outdoor” specific features, such as warning about approaching storms, displaying sunrise and sunset, moonrise and moonset, and other stuff like that. It had a compass screen, a barometer screen, etc. Do newer Fenixes (i.e. 5) still have this stuff? And if so, when you say the 935 is just a Fenix 5 in a different case, does that mean the 935 has it all too? I’m sure this info is in your comprehensive reviews somewhere, I apologize for having to ask.
BUt doesn’t´t it look like a 735, no wait a fenix 5s, no maybe a 235 or….
same case and same chip, same morons buying the same watch over and over again
Garmin sure is milking the same cow over and over again
Ray,
It would be helpful if you would include a size comparison picture that includes the previous generation, in this case the FR920XT! I can’t see how the 935 compares to the 920 on my arm. You only show a comparison to the round Fenix/735 models.
Sorry for the off topic in advance and don’t know if you have talked about it elsewhere (if so, point me in the right direction) but how do you compare the Sailfish with your older and defunct blueseventy?
Really like the design for the 935. The size of the 235 with the design of the 935 would be the perfect everyday watch for me. But as a casual runner it’s hard to justify buying a 935.
That’s pretty much how I feel. I can’t justify getting a 935 to only track my runs and casual bike rides. If I did get it,I’d still be using my vivoactive to track my soccer games.
I’m hoping a 235 replacement will come out soon. Hopefully a forerunner 935 varriable with less features. Time will tell.
@D, how is the vivoactive for tracking soccer? GPS effective? I’ve been using a basic vivofit 2 and now 3 with HR strap, but considering a watch with GPS and built in HR. Honestly thinking about this 935 as well, very tempting.
Did you have any issues with the P1 pedals on ANT+ with the 935 and drop outs of one pedal (or at least showing a ‘half’ power value)?
I seem to be getting this on occasion – although if I wake the pedals up and connect and calibrate with an 820 first (and leave that connected) the 935 behaves ok?? Trying to work out where the issue is???
Aerobars or regular road bike? The 935/Stages works ok on my road bike (wrist/hands out to side and closer to Stages sensor), but dismal on my TT/Aerobars where my wrist/hands are out in front and further from Stages sensor. I end up having to record my bike segment during Tri/Du with my Garmin Edge and overwrite the crappy power data from the 935.
Thanx for the review, this is definitely the watch to go for, for me, as coming from the 920XT.
I have a question about the OHR vs HR strap. For which functions besides the Lactate Threshold, the HR strap is required? Not for VO2 you state, but any other values/functions?
– The Stress Score is also based on your HRV and in the maual of the 935 at it states you have to perform a 3 minute test with a HR chest strap.
– In the manual at “Getting Your FTP Estimate” it states that you must pair a chest heart rate monitor besides the power meter (in your review you already suggest to wear a HR chest strap due to accuracy issues of the OHR)
Playing around with the settings on my 935. Noticed a setting for “3D Speed” and “3D Distance.” The manual says it’s what you might expect: “calculate your speed or distance using both your elevation change and your horizontal movement over ground.” The default (for running, at least) has them off. I can’t recall reading or hearing you say much (anything?) about this setting. Any thoughts on it? Thanks.
I’ve talked a little about them in the past in skiing and such, which is about the only place it really matters (or other falling of the side of mountain/airplanes/etc… type activities).
What are your thoughts on having the 3d speed/distance setting on all the time, or at the very least on for something like a trail run with significant hills? I just completed a 20k trail race but the 935 measured it about a mile short. Would the 3d settings make much of a difference?
I am currently looking to upgrade from a 910xt and was pretty pumped about the Fenix 5 BUT now here comes the 935. By comparison there is virtually nothing different about the two watches other than plastic and wifi. I’ve been looking around and it seems that the 935 is being labeled as a watch that you would want if you’re a triathlete and the Fenix looks like it is more adept at trail running/adventure-ing outside. Why? I primarily trail run but can’t see 100 dollars for for the Fenix. Any thoughts or perspective?
Bit of a blur now that the 935 has all the trail running/adventure features that the standard F5 and F5S has. Really I think it comes down to what you like the look of the most and balance that with the relative weights.
I believe the differences are
The 935 is plastic but also lighter
The 935 is easier to use if you plan to attach to you’re bike during the bike portion of a Triathlon
The Fenix 5 is a hgher quality metal material but weighs more however it has “Visual GPS”
I hope this helps and I also have a question regarding the last item Imentioned. Can soemone explain how the GPS?Nav works on each watch?
Do they both offer turn by turn Nav that you can follow downloaded routes?
There are two types of turn by turn, fake turn by turn and real turn by turn. The 5 and 5S and 935 (and a lot of other watches) can do fake turn by turn. You get a course from somewhere like RideWithGPS with embedded cue points and a track and the watch knows 1) you’re supposed to be on the track, and 2) it’s supposed to display whatever message is attached to a cue point (“Turn right on Main Street”) whenever it gets within a certain distance of a certain point. But the watch itself has no “routable” maps (in the case of the 5 and 5S, not even a picture it’s supposed to show), and absolutely no idea that there are roads, trails, etc. that the course if following. With the 5X, which does real turn by turn, the device itself has a digital map. It understands that there are roads etc., knows where they go, and can follow them all by itself. It displays the appropriate map to show you your surroundings, and can generate routes along roads etc., including turn directions, (“Turn right on Main Street”, and it knows what Main Street is and where it goes) all by itself. For the vast majority of cases, where the course is followed exactly as you planned, you can’t tell the difference. But it helps in cases where you can’t follow the course as planned that the device itself can reroute you, navigate to a point off the planned course, etc. I’m not sure how well the 5X can do this type of thing because of the size, but in principle it can act as a full navigation device, unlike the 5, 5s and 935.
In Europe the Fenix5 glass and 5S glass are available with discounts and, in some cases, cashback. This renders them far cheaper than the 935.
I would have bought the 935 if it was substantially cheaper or had similar discounts, but it currently does not. The 5S feels solid, as does the 5. The 935 feels plastic and does not feel like it will last years and years. The battery life on the 935 is great, whereas my current 5S is, due to size, lacking. I’ll live with it.
I am just wondering with any of the Garmin products, but particularly the 935 or Fenix, if you know if there is a way to respond to a text (like quick reply) or answer the phone? I know these can be done on the Apple watch but do you know of any other athlete watch that can do it as well? or if the Nike Apple watch has a way to connect to Training Peaks easily? I’m torn.
Thanks for your reviews. They are extremely helpful!
You can answer/decline an incoming call and even dial back one you have received but you will actually need the phone to say/hear anything. Not seen a way to respond to a text. Otherwise Apple Watch and 935 is like chalk and cheese. Former probably best smart watch but with somewhat basic sport tracking capability and the 935 is a state of the art sports/outdoor/triathlon GPS watch with some smart watch features.
Aside from the swimming capabilities would there be any functionality lost from using an HRM-Run from Forerunner 620 with this watch? Or would it be advisable to get the bundle and upgrade to the HRM-Tri for running/biking?
I notice this with my FR235 too, pace is stable but for uphill / downhill seems I’m past it when it starts showing. Probably at least 30s smoothing going on. For bigger pace changes it’s near instant though so seems there is kind of multi stage filter going on.
Will be interesting to compare to newer generation watches, but probably foot pod still wins for pacing.
Kinda sad to read “fabled 635”. Does that mean “I don’t know”, or does it mean it won’t happen?
I’m not a competitive runner, but I run a lot, and I cross train, and I have a downtown office type of job.
When will those of us get a watch like the 935, trim the triathlon features and make the emphasis on running. Keep all the fitness features (save for FTP. That’s insecure) and add a bright screen that will upset android and sacrifice some battery life, while still able to run a marathon.
It means there’s no FR635. There’s logically no reason for it to be honest. This is a plastic unit just like a FR635 would have probably been (following in the footsteps of all past Garmin high-end running watches). It would have had these same features, etc…
Naive question- if I want to use the 935 for treadmill runs to see HR, distance, and pace, only, do I need to buy the bundle for the strap or use a footpod or is the watch by itself adequate for the basic stats? Thanks in advance for the answer!
If you use a treadmill quite a lot then a foot pod will give better results and would advise using one. For occasional use then the pace from the watch is generally in the ballpark especially on runs at your normal steady pace – important as the watch “learns” this from outdoor runs by modelling your armswing rates to pace.
Do you think, in general, that Fenix 5 series and FR935 are overpriced?
Is the increase in price compared to their predecessors justified or not considering their hardware and software characteristics?
Since Garmin is updating their watches on a yearly basis, we can expect enormous prices in a year or two.
I don’t think it’s overpriced per se. If we look at the FR935, basically in the past that line has been at $399 (310XT/910XT/etc…), though the 920XT went to $449 if I remember correctly. However, none of those had a HR sensor in it, so you plopped down another $50-70 for that. So prices have risen slightly (basically $100 more), but you do get an optical HR sensor. And you get a crap-ton more features than in the past.
As for the Fenix 5 series, to me it seems a bit high, but the market continues to purchase in droves. So in that sense it’s hard to argue with the pricing of a more stylish watch with non-plastic materials being more pricey.
The thing that bothers me is that they no longer give you a choice about HR. I don’t want an optical HR sensor in my watch. (I pay zero attention to the numbers my Apple Watch records, because they’re all out of context and meaningless. Why was my HR x at that time? Who knows?). I have two Garmin hardshell HR belts that I’ve been using for years. For much of the year, any watch I have will be worn outside clothing, especially for my primary use, cross country skiing, and so the optical HR won’t work anyway. If the HR is the thing jacking up the prices, I really wish they’d produce some models without it.
You certainly have a choice to still wear an external HR strap – I do for all my timed activities (and indeed for a few things like lactate threshold and stress test you actually need one) but OHR is handy as a backup and/or for resting HR observations. I think OHR is getting a bit like having GPS in a sports watch – it is now expected rather than a bonus that GPS was at one time. Anyway the OHR sensor is now so discreet that on a blind test I don’t think I tell if was wearing a watch with one or not.
All about supply and demand. My feeling, and that’s just that, a feeling, is that Garmin is raising prices because the bottom end of the market for “casual” sports is going to be occupied, sooner rather than later, by smartwatches. These are not there yet for “serious” athletes because of battery life, platform, and other reasons and thus, we must suck it up and put up with Garmin protecting their income by hiking prices.
Having said that, I think the price of the 935 is OK in the US, and terribly overpriced everywhere else. At £400 it would have been day-one purchase, at its current price of £470, no freaking way.
Agree on supply & demand although I could not resist. BTW you can get very near £400 if are “loyal” to one current UK retailer and somewhere between the two with a DCR discount just by entering it.
OK, I can ignore the oHR, and if it’s only adding, say, $10 to the price I don’t mind. If it’s adding $100 to the price, I’d rather not have it at all. A 5X without the oHR is preferable to me than a 5X with it. If they made the oHR as a pop in extra sensor, that would be ideal.
Thanks a lot for you review. It tells that there is a swimrun mode, but maybe you just copied it from the fenix. Can you confirm that there is a built-in support?
A) You can use the dedicated Swim-Run mode, which will iterate forever back and forth between openwater swimming and trail running
B) You can do a manual multisport mode, and use the lower left button to change sports manually on the fly during a recording. Also as many times as you’d want.
thanks for a great review! i have a few questions:
1) can the default sport mode changed to something else than running (when pressing the top right button)?
2) can the order of the sport modes be customized?
i’m wondering this as i’m doing more workouts at the gym, than running (or biking).
The Fenix 5 allows you to reorder at will, using Reorder App in the primary settings menu on any given sport. Not sure about the 935, but I thought it would be the same.
Ahh, good point, forgot you had to dig in one level deeper. I had thought it was there on other models. But yes, if you dig within a given sport on the FR935, it will do that as well.
> It defaults to the last sport you used
Not that I have seen – do a bike (or just go there) and then go back to LPM (clock screen) and it reverts to my “favourite” (and the default) of running. The 735 does what you say.
Thanks for the review.
I find the First Beat’s data very interesting.
Since Garmin has licensed its use, do you think that it will eventually come to all high end Garmin products such has the Edge computers?
I am still using my Edge 800, working just fine, waiting for something “major” to upgrade …
Fair enough, and if it only raises the price by, say, $10 I don’t mind just ignoring the oHR. But if it raises the price by $100, then I want a 5X without the oHR.
I would be confident in predicting that you won’t see a Garmin high-end watch without OHR going forwards. In fact you might not see any new Garmin watch without it.
Sorry if somebody has asked this already… basically i have the 935 but i also have the 520 bike computer. i prefer to use the bike computer on the bike as it is larger etc. i also use the chest hear rate monitor and wouldn’t generally wear the watch whilst out cycling. So my question really is that when i upload my cycle onto garmin connect, is there a way i can get this onto my watch? The widgets have weekly totals etc and last activity, which i’d like to see on my watch if possible? I like to look at these when i’m bored in the office!!
Im not sure this can happen or maybe I’m looking in the wrong place.
You can put activities on the watch (put the FIT files in NEWFILES folder when connected to a computer). However only stuff actually recorded on the watch will “count” for history totals and the Firstbeat stuff like VO2 Max etc
I use an Edge as my main unit for cycling but wear the watch anyway – partly for the reasons just stated and also good as a backup.
I wonder if after turning off the GPS and measuring the pace from the foot pod is it also rounded to 5 s? This was for previous Garmin models, which I consider to be a disadvantage.
Thank S to your review Ray I’m now the proud owner of a 935 having upgraded from my much loved 220.
My question is I’m looking for a screen protector for my watch, what other Garmin watches have the same dial/face size as the 935? There don’t appear to be any screen protectors out yet for the 935 so if it has the same size face as a different model I’ll pick some up for that model. The 220’s face is slightly larger for example.
Matt
I am using a glass screen protector for the 735. Fits almost perfect as the screen size is very similar. Can’t remember which brand of protector I bought but there are several on amazon available. For my 230 I really liked a brand called Rerii.
I rec’d my 935 from CT yesterday and have been wearing it since. HR and sleep detected quite accurately. Size is nothing short of perfect. The 230 had been my daily watch as I loved the size and weight, and I felt the 735 was too small for me while the F5 was just way too heavy for me. The 935 is attractive, the band is extremely comfortable especially without an OHR bump of any significance, menu is intuitive, it is clearly my go to device for the next several years. I believe this will be my first real replacement for good ole trusty 305 which I still have. For those wondering about a screen protector, I had an extra 735 screen protector (HD glass) that I put on the 935 and it fits almost perfect. The 230 screen protector I have is too big. Looking forward to my first few activities with this beautiful device beginning later this morning. Side note I do not go into an office on a daily basis, so for me the more luxury look of the F5 is not necessary. That being said I am in meetings regularly and won’t hesitate for a moment to wear the 935. Love it. Thanks Ray, and thanks CT, and thanks Garmin too!
First activity done, a short 5k training run. Zero issue with crossover of HR/Cadence, pace distance cadence were all spot on as compared to my usual route with my Garmin 230 both with and without Stryd, I felt the OHRM worked very well as I am in tune with what an effort and corresponding HR feels like. No spikes in HR during run, everything seemed super steady, notifications worked perfectly, audio prompts were excellent. No complaints, only Kudos.
Very interesting. Can you continue keep us informed? Maybe sometimes wearing also a chest strap with another watch for comparison? thank you for the feedback
How does the screen of the 935 compare to the 735xt? Does the extra resolution and 64 colours add to the clarity? Is there a major improvement, or is it slight?
I FIND THE SCREEN TO BE PLAIN AWESOME, THAT SIMPLE. I just received my HRM Tri from CT today which I ordered using points earned from the 935. Ill run some comparisons on HR using that against the 935 OHRM and report back. Hoping to get a solid run in Thursday as well. For those of you waiting, I believe it is a product well worth the wait. The email/text/etc notification vibration is also very different than on the 230, whereas now it’s more of two short pulses which definitely grabs my attention better and separates itself from the vibration that occurs during auto lap.
I love how we’re all vicariously living through others who have been fortunate enough to get their 935 while we’re patiently (*cough* not patiently) waiting. I’m starting to think I may have a problem…
I haven’t been so patient but really don’t have much of a choice! I haven’t wanted to message Clever Training about it as I’m sure plenty of others have already so I’ve been checking here for updates.
Same here Blaine! I check back at these comments quite a bit. And sadly I have messaged Clever Training. The first shipment they received are shipping out to their March 29th orders. They’re supposed to get another shipment this week sometime. I placed my order with Amazon on the 30th and definitely don’t want to lose my place in line at this point. I do wish I had placed my order with Clever Training. I haven’t heard of anyone getting theirs through Amazon yet. I’m starting to suspect my Forerunner 630 knows I’m about to cheat on it because it’s been acting funny. Shut off on me today. It knows!
Clever Training is in the same boat for me. Got an email from them today stating 935 deliveries (watch only) are delayed due to production delays. Should not expect delivery until end of April… And I ordered March 29th 5pm CST!
Yep I got the same notice. Hopefully we’re able to get some of those that “trickle in” over the next few weeks. I ordered at about 2 pm eastern so I don’t doubt I’m lower on the list of Mar 29 purchases.
Sorry that you all are having to wait. All I’ll say is, in my view, it’s worth the wait. I was one of the lucky ones in the first CT shipment. So far, I couldn’t be happier with the 935.
Second activity today, treadmill easy effort for 6 miles. OHR performed exactly as I would have expected from the chest strap. At no point did I see any spikes or dropouts. At no point did I see any crossover between HR/Cadence. I was using my Stryd for pace and distance and cadence so not sure if that had any affect on anything. In the past I had no luck with any of Garmin’s elevate sensors. What I believe separates the 935 is the soft malleable band, the thinness of the 935, and how the contour of the watch conforms to my wrist much better than any of the previous devices including the Fenix 5 which I had and returned almost immediately due to the size and weight. What really impressed me was that my sleep last night was complete crap, including waking up once, and GC shows only 2 very short periods of deep sleep with everything else light sleep, and an awake period which I agree with. The 935 is very comfortable to have on your wrist 24/7.
Thanks for the updates Josh. Please keep them coming. I was one of the unlucky ones who ordered on the morning of 3/30, and now am delayed a month. Ugh.
My first run with it I can’t provide a GPX file due to it being to/from my home, but the 935 and Fenix 5 distances were the same, but the 935 track was much tighter and closer to reality than the Fenix 5. It was road and only 3 miles, but definitely shows improvement. (Fenix 5 was on the beta firmware, 935 was on the latest as well)
I agree with you Paul. If not a bold face lie, then perhaps a tiny white lie. Seems awfully coincidental that a lot of us won’t get the actual watch until late April. I had this same thing happen to me when I purchased the 910XT years ago. Ended up waiting for 3 months to get it.
Well, they did ship. There’s not really any doubt there. You can see plenty of posts in the Garmin forums for folks with units.
But like any large product launch, they don’t have enough product to fulfill orders on day 1 or week 1. No different than Apple. If you didn’t order the Apple Watch on Day 1 when it first came out, the wait was 2-3 months. And weeks is the norm for other Apple products too if you don’t order in the first hours.
FWIW, I’ve had my watch for a couple days, 2 runs, and battery still at 80%. That’s pretty darn good I believe.
For my meeting this evening I did my usual walk up 8 flights of stairs to the board room for a little more exercise, and HR responded swiftly and the displayed rate felt what I believe it should be. Again, I feel in tune enough with my body that I know what a low 50s RHR feels like versus an easy effort mid 130s feels like.
when will this product become available? some people said they got it already, but I called Clever Training, REI, I even call the Garmin store in Miami and they still don’t know when it will become available. Not even Amazon has a estimated date. It might take a couple of months before it hits the road – that is how it looks like
It’s been shipping, including from Clever Training (you can find people here who have received units), and a number of other smaller retailers have posted photos of arrived units. You can see those in the Garmin forums for example.
Most shipping estimates show more units arriving in the next few weeks, depending on where you are/were in the pre/backorder queue. I don’t think you’re looking at a couple months here.
Anyone else have a Fenix 5 and waiting on the 935 to ship (from CT in my case) to compare? I keep waffling on whether reduced weight will mean that much to me. Been a longtime Forerunner user (205, 310, 620, 920). I plan to use one of the 2 (F5 or 935) as a daily driver (returning the loser). The Fenix does look sharp in an office setting, but it is heavy.
From the Garmin forums it appears that 935 does seem to have slightly better GPS tracking results so far than the F5, but of course the sample size is small, and it’s early days for both devices.
I don’t have a Fenix 5, but I do have a 935. I previously had a 920xt. I cannot get over have small and light-weight the 935 is. Makes the 920xt seem like a brick on my wrist in comparison. I’ve been wearing the 935 24/7, including to work. It’s perhaps not as nice as the F5, but it sure is a lot more professional looking than the 920xt. It’s a subdued black watch. I’ve had it for nearly a week now, and I’m really very, very happy with it.
I am in a similar situation as you, except I cancelled my F5 order altogether. I come from F3 and am looking forward to a lighter watch with a cleaner bezel. I hope the 935 looks good with the F5 metal band for the office.
Did you purchase F5 with metal band? Like others here, would love to see what a 935 with metal band would look like. Main concern is a color mismatch between metal band and 935 bezel.
After a 1 hour intense weight training session this morning I took a short break and decided to go out for a fast run so I could see how the 935 reacted and post for my fellow readers. No surprises. Tracks on GC super tight, as good as my 230 was (and those were the best of any Garmin device I’ve had until the 935 came along). OHR did great, and since this was my usual route I knew where my HR should be trending, i.e., up/down/holding steady.
The comfort of having to wear the 935 slightly snug is perfectly fine due to its thin size and light weight. Previously I’ve found other OHR devices less than comfortable.
Also, FWIW, I did check OHR during my lifting session. It actually responded well for me in between sets when my forearm/wrist muscles weren’t engaged.
First run with both the 935 and 920 with HRM-TRI. HR tracks very close (never more than 2 BPM out), although GPS varied by 1% low on 935 vs 920 and TomTom Spark.
Not as classy looking as the Fenix 5 (which I really wanted) but the light weight makes up for it. This is a sports watch after all! WiFi upload is definitely a bonus and I can’t imagine putting a quick-fit strap on as the stretchy black one is fine. Also fits under shirt cuffs better.
The number of metrics and custom screens is amazing, almost too much data.
Is the accuracy of GPS higher on the 935 compared to Fenix 5 due to plastic case in the 935? I guess that the GPS antenna is the same on the 935 and Fenix 5.
I wouldn’t overthink that assumption too much. There are so many factors that contribute to GPS accuracy, and I don’t see anything that’s really indicative of a trend either way from the data I’ve seen in the forums.
Many times folks try to ‘find blame’ on a given component, when in reality it’s often something far more random and specific to that environment and that person and some other factor.
EVERYONE!!!! Garmin forums is reporting http://www.runningwarehouse.com has the 935 in stock ready to ship. Just put my order in. Fingers crossed they haven’t ran out.
I took a shot and put my order in. The site says “in stock.” I also got a delivery date for April 12th. I kind of figure between this order and a pre-order on Amazon I should be good. I can always cancel one when I get more confirmation that I am receiving the 935. The site still says “in stock” today.
Aww shucks sorry folks. I was just getting ready to comment that I talked with Runners Warehouse and confirmed my order for it to be shipped Wednesday for anyone else who was interested. I’d say the few they had went fast. Hope everyone lucks out and gets theirs sooner!
Will the Garmin 935 support the Tacx Neo Smart indoor trainer?
How many bike will the 935 independently track? My old Polar RCX5 track my road bike and 2 mountain bikes
If you mean does it have FE-C control then no (see features tables above). But it will happily pair to the Neo’s power meter.
Garmin watches don’t really track bikes per se – you only pair to the sensors on them. Mileage recording by bike can be done in Garmin Connect or in 3rd party apps like Strava.
In the swimming section of the feature comparison table there is an ‘indoor auto-pause’ row – does this represent automatic pause during rest? Or is this for pre-programmed workout intervals?
Wahooo! I am impressed by your presentation. I have a simple question. Have you tested accuracy of the GPS with and without Glonass? Because on my Suunto Traverse, paradoxe when I am using both system, it is give me more discrepancies !!! THANK YOU very much !
It technically is possible to actually have worse GPS tracks in GLONASS mode. It’s rare, and is almost 100% based on whatever is specific to that environment/terrain. But it happens. My guess (completely random finger in the wind guess) is that it’s probably 3-5% of cases GLONASS makes it worse.
Yes have seen reports on the Garmin forums of sometimes using GLONASS being worse with any device. The usual advice is if you think your tracks are poor with GPS, try also with GLONASS but go back to GPS if no better. What of course is generally unclear to us consumers is how a combination of GPS and GLONASS sats are actually selected in any given situation and what impact a “good” or “bad” algorithm might have.
I have the 935 for 2 days now and I found that GPS+GLONASS was much MUCH worse. I ran the same 10k track 2 days (yesterday and today) and if you look at the results it’s quite a big difference: link to mygpsfiles.com
In the GPS+GLONASS mode there are a lot of gaps in the track and the track itself is much less smooth. Seems to “jump” around a lot more like the sampling was vastly reduced.
Maybe it was a flake (I’ll know more the more I use it) but for now it looks like my watch will be in GPS only mode.
Interesting, Eli, thank you. However by the looks of it I (Slovenia) should be in the white. Also I understand it as GPS plus GLONASS, so at *worst* it should be GPS level, but maybe even better. However in practice that’s not the case :/
One of the more enjoyable things for me to do is to go for a longer run with my oldest son riding his bike alongside me (almost 9 yrs old). We are fortunate to live 1.6 miles away from a park similar in size and layout to Central Park. This morning I again put the 935 to the test with a 9 mile run, in tandem with my Stryd footpod. Zero complaints, nada, all terrific.
GPS tracks were terrific when reviewing the run on Strava, OHR performed awesome. Kind of a boring post because no concerns were raised. That’s the way it should be. I feel like the 305 has been reborn in a perfect form factor.
Josh – Have you had any Stryd issues with the 935? I’ve read issues of dropouts with the fenix 5 but can’t figure out why the two would behave differently in this regard. I have a Styrd on order as of last week.
No Stryd problems for me with the 935 nor heard of others either. Does seem some F5 owners are still having issues though. Seems unclear why this is so.
I can also (boring, as well 🙂 ) add that it works like a charm for me. I’m also coming from a 305 and over the time (some Garmins, a Suunto) I already did some compromises when it comes to good GPS-reception.
The Fenix 5 was too much off for me to accept (personal preference, you may think different of course).
Now I’m really happy since I own the 935 and I’d sign the “I feel like the 305 has been reborn in a perfect form factor” 100%
Has anyone spotted a 935 in the shops in the UK? Online, there only seems to be a few places selling it in the UK. Quite like to see it in person before blowing nearly 500 squid.
Just ordered from Wiggle as was showing in stock yet delivery when checked out is showing as 10 days away! Wondering are they showing as in stock on the site yet they waiting for another shipment?! 🙁
Personally I think you should ignore these relatively small price differences between the F5 and 935 and decide what is most important to you – which largely comes down to what they look like and what they weigh given they basically do the same things.
Thanks for the review. Looking for a replacement for my FR610 as a serious runner (2h39 marathoner)
How accurate is the wrist based heart rate on the 935? Seems very nice to have HR data of all runs but it needs to be within 2-3bpm accurate at LT pace or higher, or else it is of no use to me.
The 630 can be had on sale for as low as 270$ these days, so almost half the price. Guessing they’re clearing shelves for its successor later this year.
Is the 935 worth it for only runners?
Yes I did. Quite a few people who come by here have the 935 already and I was hoping some of them would chime in.
Want to get a feel if it’s hit or miss based on the user (like the 235), or if the 935 is really a big step above the 735XT and 235 in terms of HRM accuracy.
Ideally I’d try it first, but not an option yet at this point.
Hi Dirk, kudos for your marathon time! I have also a FR610 and I’m thinking about upgrading to the FR935. I’m also very interested of answers to your question by 935’s owners.
To save some bandwidth will link to basically your same question and some replies (including from me) over on the Garmin forums link to forums.garmin.com
Hi Tim, I think that in a short “warm down” run the 935 had an easy job. Can you test the optical 935 in comparison of a chest strap synced with your 735 in a hard steady run or in a hard intensity interval workout?
I’ve had a 935 for about ten days now. I haven’t done an explicit test (i.e., a workout with both the 935 and a chest strap), but I can say that I’ve been very impressed with the optical HR data. I’ve done everything with it from short recovery runs to a tough long run this past weekend with the last half hour at a very aggressive pace. I’ve also ridden my bike trainer inside and my mountain bike outside. I know from experience what I would expect my HR to be in each of these cases, and that’s what the 935 has reported with mostly consistent and steady data. Now, I have seen a few little blips here-and-there, but I *think* those are explicable by something I did during the workout (e.g., a hard turn around during a run). But I can’t totally be sure of that unless I did some more rigorous testing.
Happy to chime in as well. I was lucky enough to receive my 935 from CT early on due to order being placed very early. I’ve owned just about every watch from Garmin and have tried every OHR version they’ve produced. Without fail, the 935 for me has been accurate, comfortable, ergonomic, lightweight, easy to use, the most no brainer awesome incredible piece of running gear I’ve owned. I also purchased a HRM-TRI strap from CT with the points I earned, and imagine I’ll use it for biking. But as far as running accuracy, 24/7 monitoring, looks, comfort, there isn’t another watch I’d want on my wrist. I owned the F5 briefly and it was so heavy that I promptly returned it, and also tried the Spartan Sport WHR and found it to be inconsistent for me as well as very heavy and a less pleasant user interface. In short, serious runners (I’m primarily a runner and bike/swim as cross training) will hopefully love the watch as much as I do.
>> I also purchased a HRM-TRI strap from CT with the points I earned, and imagine I’ll use it for biking. <<
Josh – Is there any advantage to using the HRM-TRI over the HRM-Run for outdoor cycling? I don't intend to use either for swimming (or all that often, really), so I was considering opting for the cheaper of the two.
Hi Josh,
just to mention it before Chlorine damages your HRM-TRI: it’s not designed for indoor swimming/pools. This is where you would use HRM-SWIM.
Best,
Olly
Been using my HRM-Tri in chlorine pool for 17 months now. 2 battery replacements, I use it daily for running/biking. Swimming in a chlorine pool: about 40 times since Dec 2015. I “try” to wash it a couple times a week, but probably lax way behind what is recommended. It’s a comfy durable strap. All is fine.
…but how do you keep the strap from wiggling around and ending up around your waist after pushing from the wall?
Tight fitting tops while swimming?
The few times I’ve tried to wear an HR strap (I haven’t tried the HRM-SWIM) they move around far too much. My understanding was that the HRM-SWIM was intended to fix this with the special strap material, but I never invested in it because I just didn’t care enough to try.
Plus my masters group would have made more fun of me — bullys.
You don’t have to wear a shirt. Lululemon makes a product that actually incorporates HRM electrodes and will accept Polar as well as Garmin transmitter pods, and will hold everything in place and not flop around.
Yes, I wear my old tri-top in the pool. I don’t do flip turns. I really don’t like swimming, but if I want to get to Hawaii, I’m forced to swim my butt off in indoor pools here in Michigan winters. I try to mimic the actual conditions as much as possible (swim cap, HRM, shirt). I’ll even wear my race shirt on occasion to see if it’s giving me any chafing issues. I agree, HRM tri strap will not stay in place if no tri top or tight shirt. Tried it once before and I thought, oh, I’ll just tap the wall and turn around. Flop! Doesn’t take much to have it slip down. Even a sprint lap will make it wiggle loose. BUT, it’s nice looking at my HR data after the swims to see what zone I’m in or if my SWOLF/HR is getting any better.
Thanks all for the feedback! I wonder if the 935’s oHR performs a little better compared to the Fenix 5 because it’s lighter and consequently shakes a little less on the wrist?
I used a post that Ray did in March 2016, “How I configure my watches…,” to set up mine. I had some different preferences than him for data screens, but his guidance on other settings was useful. Available here: link to dcrainmaker.com. If Ray sees this, I’d be curious if anything’s change since then.
Hi, just ordered the 935 and it should arrive wext week. I’m looking for a screen protector but can’t find any delivered soon.
Are the fenix 5 and the 935 the same screen size ? (At least roughly) ? Then later I’ll order a 935 one.
thanks
There is a thread on forums.garmin.com that speaks to the screen protector question a little bit.
In short, the F5 and 935 are not quite the same size for screen protectors. I believe the F5 protector “generally” works on the 935 but leaves some of the outer screen diameter exposed.
I just received an email from CleverTraining stating, “The production delay has been lifted from Garmin and we have a shipment that is currently on the way to our warehouse and available for processing early next week. This shipment regrettably will not fulfill all existing pre-orders.”
Basically, if you don’t notice a credit card charge or a shipping notice by early next week, it won’t be until the end of April until they receive the next batch. **Fingers crossed that we make the shipment that goes out next week**
Group Tracking – can anyone verify that this is fully functional on the 935. Not just that it transmits via live track like all Garmin GPS devices, but that it will actually display your friends on the bread crumb map on the 935 itself.
As always, great write up! I just ordered a 935 via Clever Training VIP.
One note though: in your product comparison chart, under the first section (Function/Feature) there’s a row titled “BACKLIGHT GREATNESS” (for which you scored the 935 as “GREAT” lol). I assume you mean “Backlight Brightness”?
As always another great review. Thanks. Have finally signed up as a subscriber after a couple of years lurking in the background.
Question – given the form factor of the FR935 and the similarity in software with the Fenix 5’s, where do you think they’ll take the FR6nn series. Surely they won’t have three watches that are so similar in capability.
I suppose, my specific question is there likely to be a FR640 and if so, what would it do that the FR935 doesn’t? They may well release a FR640 and together with the Fenix 5 and FR935 they will all be near identical just with differing target markets.
I don’t have any information. But I suppose that the software will be exactly the same. The difference of the FR645 will just be from “hardware”:
1- no barometric altimeter
2- a bit less battery
3- shape a little smaller
4- less weight
5- touchscreen
6- a bit cheaper
So the FR645 will be better for runner who are looking for the smallest and lightest watch, worse for hikers and triathletes.
Maybe I’m right?
This is a good question. I wonder if the current dichotomy will continue where the 200-700 series are all built on a cheaper plastic form factor, and the 900 and Fenix on the the sturdier form factor with metal buttons etc. It would be nice if a new 600 or 700 series came out that was built the same as the sturdy 935, only smaller. Compared to the other Forerunners, the 935 is quite large for many people. Currently with the exception of the Fenix 5s, you generally have to choose between sturdy/high quality huge watch, or flimsy plastic normal sized watch.
Great review, although I did skim some of it – having fully digested the Fenix 5 review the first few paragraphs of this article sold me on the 935.
Does anyone know of a Garmin or 3rd party widget that shows on the watch sleep details, or is it hidden away somewhere inconspicuous already? It’s one of the few activity tracking metrics I’m interested in but I can only see it through the Connect IQ app or website currently.
And Ray, any feeling of when/if the stress tracking from the Vivosmart 3 will make the jump to the 935?
Great review as always!! Two questions: 1) I currently own the 235 and have difficulty reading the screen…is the 935 improved as far as readability and backlighting? 2) Forgive my ignorance, but does the 935 live tracking allow for someone to track my run at home without having to have it “attached” to another device such as my phone?
Yesterday during my 6 mile treadmill run (stuck indoors right now as the pollen floating in the air in the Midwest USA is terrible right now for someone with bad allergies), I began with the OHR, paused after 2 miles and opened the HRM-TRI i bought and used it for a mile, and then went back to OHR. I went back to OHR simply because the data being produced as compared to the OHR at the same pace was within 1-2 beats per minute. That, and the fact the chest strap, while comfortable for a chest strap, now seems very uncomfortable when a reliable OHR is available.
The only issue I had, and I did email strava about this so if anyone else has a thought please chime in, is that the pauses were not recognized and my pace on strava was way off. I emailed with strava and they said it only works with GPS which is not correct as my FR230 did not have this issue.
Great review as always and I’ve just upgraded from 310XT to the 935 and love it. My question is around the V02 and fitness metrics. Do I need to always use the 935 to get these metrics, I prefer to my Edge for cycling but the rides don’t seem to end up on the 935 via Garmin connect so I’ve been recording on both and deleting one which is OK but a bit of a pain.
Is there any difference with the unit itself between the base version and tri bundle. If I get base version and buy the HR straps separate will that be the same as the tri bundle version? Thanks
The only difference I can tell is the colouring. Tri bundle comes with the yellow straps, and yellow circle around the top-right button, base bundle is black straps and silver circle.
Hello Ray and everyone else. Thank you for all the hard work you do to provide excellent reviews.
I currently have a Forerunner 110 and Vivoactive. I am primarily a runner but am very interested in moving to participating in triathlons. I have been eyeing the 920xt since last Fall. I am interested in a watch to help me improve my running (mostly) as well as cycling and swimming. I purchased a 920xt on Amazon w/ HRM-run for $220 last week and have 30 days to return it. I am very interested in the 935 because of its ability to provide Recovery Time, Training Status, Training Load and Anaerobic measurements. I am not particularly adept at being able to tell whether I am overtraining or just tired from lack of sleep/sickness. My question basically boils down to this: is it worth my money at this point to more than double my investment for a 935 at this time? Or is the 920xt “good enough” for someone who likes data but hasn’t run a triathlon yet?
I realize that I would be buying current technology and support for another couple of years vs the 920xt which is basically at end of (supported) life. I like the readability of the 920xt over the Vivoactive for my older eyes. Is the 935 even more readable than 920xt? I don’t mind a HR strap but the idea of not having to have one is appealing.
Appreciate any advice the folks on this forum have to offer. Thanks again for your excellent reviews.
The 920xt is more than enough for someone just getting into multisport. With the HRM-Run or HRM-Tri it will give you all the same Running Dynamics data you need, at a lower cost. I also believe it has more screen real estate with it being square, so the data fields are bigger and the numbers are easier to read. I also had both the 920XT and the VivoActive. The 920 I used for training and events, while the Vivoactive I used as my daily, and for Walking trips and Golf GPS. Now the 935 combines all those into one, into a smaller package, so I have sold both of them in preparation of having the 935 only. By selling both of them, I have recouped the cost of the new 935, so it was worth it to me.
The idea that the screen is bigger and more usable with the rectangular shape of the 920 is somewhat of a myth. The actual physical display area is 1.13 square inches (Pi*0.6^2) on the 935 vs 1.04 on the 920 (1.2″x0.8″). Plus the 935 has higher resolution so makes text a bit clearer. As for the usability of the screen space, I actually like that of the round watches better now that I’ve gotten used to it. Not all data takes the same amount of space. HR with a max of 3 digits shouldn’t take the same amount of space as time with up to 8 digits (hh:mm:ss). Especially with custom CIQ fields, you can make great use of the extra space on the round watch with fonts that are more to your liking and field layout that takes advantage of the specific data. And moving forward, you’ll have more CIQ field options on the 935.
That said, the 920 would absolutely do everything you need for triathlon regardless of your level. The 935 would most likely be a better everyday watch in addition to a slightly better triathlon watch. And if you are a data junky like me, the 935 would probably be more fun.
Actually was too generous with the size of the 920 screen. According to Garmin’s site, it’s 1.1″ x 0.8″, so only 0.88 square inches vs the 1.13 on the 935.
My vote would be the 920xt. I got it a few months ago for around $200 (black/grey version). I typically buy when a new watch comes out to get a deal on the prior models. You are looking at quite the premium for the new 935 model (even though I like what I read about it so far).
Previously I was using a refurb 310xt. I did many running races and a full Ironman tri with that watch. Honestly some of the new tech and metrics are over-rated in my opinion. Leastways my high school freshman son joined the track team and is kicking my ass now winning medals with no watch, lol. They go for training runs after school and I ask how do they know how things went if no one had a watch. He says they go by feel and get great workouts. I could be wrong but suspect he wouldn’t be doing much better with all the crazy metrics they have now. It’s cool if some people like gadgets – there is fun in that. But if you are not going to get into that aspect why blow the money.
Personally, I would consider these aspects as most important: 1) Which watch feels better on your arm (size/shape/depth/weight) while training/racing, 2) Which watch is easier to see (font/backlight/field options) in terms of the key important metrics you will view while training/racing, 3) Which watch is easier to use in terms of buttons/OS. For me the answer was the 920xt, especially since I already knew I liked the 310xt layout. I just wanted something less bulky, with wifi and some other features that I find useful. Ok and less orange as well, lol.
Also I think for many things rectangle screen is better than round. Round is mainly a function of watches in the past having a dial. Very few display devices use a round display for good reason, as it generally does not make best use of real estate. I suspect if watches originally had square/rectangle displays, few would now have round displays. But as another user mentioned, round display can work and work well depending on layout. For me though, using 4 key metrics almost exclusively, I like the rectangle screen. Mainly I wanted reasonable cost running/tri watch with easy read font, strong even backlight (most of my training is done in low light), and long batter life (to avoid backlight drain and lots of charging). For me that was 920xt and it sits low on my wrist in terms of depth and feels ok in terms of weight compared to some of the other watches.
I would like to try a cloth band option though on the 920xt. Not a fan of the rubberish bands. A good thing about the 935 and some other watches is a greater band selection, and that new snap-on band system. I could see myself getting a 935 but likely a few years from now when a newer watch gets released and prices drop.
Would be great if you could try on a 935. I had tried on a Fenix 3 and that thing was big and bulky. Glad I tried it on – helped me decide on the 920xt. If you can try on the 935 and compare to 920xt that could make your decision easy if one jumps out at you as simply being a better fit.
Clearly, the 920xt is cheaper than the 935. I’ve used the 920xt exclusively since Nov. ’14 when it came out. I’ve got a lot of opinions on it, and I’m one who always uses a 4-data point screen and hates cycling through settings.
I say go for the 935! Having 24/7 monitoring of heart rate is more important than running dynamics. Tracking your heart rate while you do all the non-exercising things of your life will let you know how well you’re truly progressing in fitness. It will also clue you into things happening in your life that you didn’t know were killing you, e.g. stress or diet. Especially now that the OHR monitor is every second vice “smart”… huge improvement. Want to go hiking? You can track your heart rate so you keep it low and keep your training impact safe. Want to hit the gym and you forgot your chest strap at home? No worries! Feeling crappy at work and want to get your HR? Got it! No need to count it manually, and no need to record it manually.
Every time Garmin updates the 920xt, I feel like something breaks. 24-hr clock, metronome, swim lap counter, alerts- it’s frustrating platform. Plus it doesn’t have Varia support. They’re clearly moving forward with the circular form factor on Fenix and Forerunner… don’t fight the wave even if you don’t agree. Circular watches still look more normal even though it’s not ideal shape for 4 boxes of data.
Skip the 920xt! It fared me well, but I see no reason to buy it when the 935 is superior.
Thanks to everyone for their thoughts/suggestions. I ended up ordering the FR935 (just watch at this point) from REI though I still have another week before I have to return the 920xt. I like the 935 much more than my vivoactive for the size and clarity of the text – I can actually read most of the numbers fairly well (its harder on screens (data fields) that display 7 items, but still readable with my older eyes. I like the 24/7 heart rate monitoring and the look and feel of the 935. And its nice and light.
Something that I appeared to have missed when I was reading all the reviews and debating watches was the fact that a HRM chest strap is still needed for heart-rate variability measurements. Part of the reason my wanting the watch was to ditch a strap for anything other than swimming, I have a TICK-Run HRM strap which is works with Elite HRV app to measure my HRV. But I hate to have separate apps to do everything and then try and import into Garmin Connect, Training Peaks, etc. I was also planning to purchase the Tri-bundle straps separately so I could get running dynamics and swim measurements but didn’t realize that it’s $50 more than FR935 tri bundle not including quick release kit and extra strap.
So now I have a few more questions.
1) is it worth upgrading to FR935 tri bundle for the extra $150 to save $ overall from buying things separately?
2) what exactly does HRV get me if I have the watch measure it vice using the TICKR-Run & app?
3) Am I being silly about all the data? As Ray has mentioned, I couldn’t find anything concrete about improving running dynamics so not really sure how to do it other than shorten my stride (to land softer and possibly reduce vertical oscillation) and try not to bounce when I run (reduce vertical oscillation). The data that I am most interested in is V02 max, (available on 920xt as well) and the Training Load and Training Status features, as well as Real Time performance and lactate threshold information. I’m not particularly good at determining whether I’m “just tired” or overtraining so something that helps me figure it out via physiological measurements would be nice.
Oh, the last reason for the FR935 is to purchase technology that will be supported for many years (updates and such) vs. buying 2 generation old technology. I suspect that the 920xt would be all I currently need but I like to plan for growth when I can. Thoughts?
Thanks again to everyone for their help! And thanks to Ray for trying to help fools like me make a “simple” decision!
DITTO! I had the 735 and sold it (for more than I thought I would), and got the 935 and could not be more excited. IMHO this is everything I wanted. I do golf when I can, and I am not a triathlete but I do swim and run 6 days a week and am a data junkie. The 935 looks great on the wrist, better than my 735 did. So I may not be the serious athlete this is targeted for, but I take my running serious, love the swimming metrics, love to golf, and love the look that this watch offers.
Great review as always!! Two questions: 1) I currently own the 235 and have difficulty reading the screen…is the 935 improved as far as readability and backlighting? 2) Forgive my ignorance, but does the 935 live tracking allow for someone to track my run at home without having to have it “attached” to another device such as my phone?
What aspects of the 235 display make it difficult to read? Is it the font size/shape or the weak/irregular backlight issues I have read about? I have the 920xt and it is easy to read in terms of the fonts, even with 4 fields displayed, and the backlight has no unevenness or dim spots. I typically leave the backlight on for the length of my evening/night training runs and it works well. (Good thing 920xt battery is long lasting.)
My son runs track, and I was considering the 230/235 if I can get it on a deal for him, but would want him to be able to read it easily at school meets and low light training runs.
Rex, the 935 has the same screen as the Fenix 5, which is pretty similar to the Fenix 3 before it (just a bit higher res than the Fenix 3). The screens on these watches are much nicer than the FR 235, 735 etc. They are larger, covered in glass, sharper, and the backlight is much much brighter. You also have control of the backlight from 5% to 100%, and you can assign the backlight menu to a hotkey which you can access at any time. So if you’re doing a workout and the sun goes down, you can hold the hotkey you have backlight assigned to, and quickly set the backlight to “always on, 100%” or whatever you want. You can also specify backlight settings for watch mode and workout mode. It’s nice and granular and makes a huge difference. There are lots of little things like this that make a big difference over something like the 235, and it really adds up.
Starting to fall out with the Garmin Connect website.
I use a paid subscription service (OS maps) to generate routes to be followed whilst out running. I have my .gpx files. How the hell do I get Garmin Connect to create a course from them?
I’ve tried importing in GC (from + on dashboard.) It looks like it’s worked, but nothing shows up in either Courses or Activities – the latter being what I expected (create course from activity, delete activity.)
OK, so I have the Polar A300 and want to upgrade… I don’t want to get a Mercedes Benz (Fenix 5) I want to get a Toyota FJ Cruiser (920XT) or I would like to raise the suspension on my current VW Citi (Just get a Bluetooth strap)?
I am probably over-complicating things, but at the end of the day: I want to get something that will last me for the next 10 years. I know the Fenix 5 is the most probable recommendation, but I simply don’t need all the features available in that watch.
On the other hand, I don’t want to be stuck again with sub-prime tech like the Polar A300 for my current needs.
I’m doing the Ironman next year and would like to get the middle ground (Bluetooth HR strap capability is a not-negotiable for me)
Any help out there? (Sorry the comment is so long)
Should I wait for something cheaper than the 935?(Get a bluetooth strap)
Buy the Fenix 5 (Too many features, but ah well)
Buy the 935 (Can’t go lower – no bluetooth strap capability)
Any other ideas
The obvious step down from the 935 is the 920XT, given that you need the battery life. The 735 doesn’t have the same battery life as the 920. What’s your reasoning behind not wanting the 920?
Get a discounted Ambit 3 Peak or Ambit 3 Vertical, or try to find a deal on the Polar V800 (since the replacement should come out this year and you are already in the Polar envirmonment.) I had the Vertical and the V800, and I was happy with both. I don’t know if anything can last 10 years, though but on the Half Marathon I ran a couple of weeks ago, I saw a guy running with a Forerunner 305, and the Half Marathon last October, I saw a lady running with a Forerunner 201! I was surprised that the batteries still worked!
Anyone have any impression on first beat training load vs TSS/CTL and the PCM chart through training peaks? I use the PCM pretty heavily and track my ramp rates etc, and wondering how this compares to the new on watch features?
Yes, you just go into the activity type e.g. hike, press and hold ‘up’ and choose ‘Hike settings’ where there’s a GPS submenu. Choice then of GPS, GPS+GLONASS or Ultratrac.
If you change it for that activity it won’t change it for others.
***just to clarify – if you change the GPS mode it won’t change it for other activity TYPES. I believe it’ll stay in that mode for all future hikes (for example) until you change it***
Hi Ray,
went for the new FR 935 in hope to use more IQ Data Fields than on my previous FR 920XT.
Unfortunately the FR 935 is giving me also only 2 Fields.
You wrote in your review: “Connect IQ: Fully supports CIQ 2.2.3+, as well as a full 2MB for apps or 32 installed CIQ apps/items, whichever comes first.”
Thought the new device expanded for the Fields. I am a little bit disappointed, or did I have to configure that to increase the number of IQ Data Fields? If not, do you think this comes as an update, cause this is the only reason I’ve upgraded from the 920XT!
Best Regards…
Can anyone help me understand the rational behind the temperature sensor feature and related data screens. The sensor seems to be poorly placed. I am often seeing a temp 10-15′ F higher than the actual. The Garmin FAQ suggests I should take the watch off for 20-30 minutes to get an accurate treading! That is just not right. Perhaps the should go back and Liston to Ray’s CinnectIQ talk.
The temperature sensor, while neat to see the output, is mainly there as compensation/adjustment for the barometric sensor. If you need to rely on accurate temps, do not wear the watch on your body. Secure it to a backpack strap, or something else. Alternatively, Garmin offers the Tempe wireless pod.
Why does Garmin require a chest strap in order for the lactate threshold to calculate? Why don’t they use the built in optical sensor? It seems like it’s accurate enough.
I think it’s because lactate threshold calculations depend on accurate HRV (heart rate variability) measurement, and optical sensors aren’t (yet) able to measure that accurately enough.
Can anyone comment on the CPU speed and overall “snappiness” of the FR935 compared to the Fenix 5 and the FR235? Wife has the FR235 and at times it seems slow to respond to button presses…
Subjectively, my FR935 is very snappy compared to the FR630 (which I assume is no better or no worse than the FR235). I used the FR630 for a year, but I’ve only briefly tried out my friends’ 230/235s.
Switching pages was always very slow and frustrating for me with my 630 (maybe because I always use 1 or 2 Connect IQ datafields?). I haven’t had that problem with the 935 so far.
If this helps, according to the “Tree Benchmark” app: link to forums.garmin.com
FR235: 770
FR630: 830
F5: ~3200
I ran Tree Benchmark on the FR935 and got 3184. I dunno if I’d say it’s “4X as fast” as my old watch, but it’s def “fast enough”. If I press the up/down buttons fast during an activity, the pages change just as fast, without too much lag.
Thanks, Will. The switching of pages/screens has been slow on my FR235, like you describe with your FR630, and I look forward to a nicer consumer experience with the FR935.
Does anyone have any knowledge about the CPU speed in the FR935 vs the FR235?
I know it sounds redundant but can the 935 transmit the HR data to an Edge 520? I prefer to use the edge 520 during the cycling portion of a triathlon and would prefer to see the HR data via the edge rather than having to look at the 935. Thanks.
Are there any downsides to changing GPS sampling from GPS (default) to GPS+GLONASS for most activities? Any battery life hit etc? If my understanding is correct GLONASS allows faster locking so I was surprised to see that it doesn’t default to that.
GLONASS takes about 20% more battery. Effectively enabling it gives more sats to lock onto but unless you are in a very poor reception area (or indoors) then probably won’t make much of a difference with the initial lock.
I was using the Garmin FACE IT app to customize my watch face on my 735 .. I now have the 935 and do not see that as a watch choice .. Do you think it will be added or is this something that cant be done with the 935?
Really sorry to leave this here, but I think your review is too neutral. It needs to bit more like the run pod one
I’ve just spent £450 on the watch and it’s the most dissapointed I have ever been with any garmin product ever.
I know you mention watch being plastic, but cheap and nasty would have been more accurate. The watch strap alone is the most flimsy I’ve ever seen and not sure how long that will last! Not long at al i’m guessing.
I too, have the 935 and personally, I think the build is fine. I did consider the fenix, but it was too heavy in my opinion.
The build is no different to previous Forerunner products I have had. My last watch was the 235.
Interesting. In my opinion, it’s the best Garmin product I have purchased, and I have purchased a few over the last 15 years. Solid software. Solid build. Nice simple look without the bright accent colors they’ve used in the past. Full featured (great for almost any sport or multi-sport). Solid GPS accuracy. Light weight. I’m pretty sure the strap is like it is by design, a little on the stretchy side to allow it to be snugger for the HR accuracy. Were you hoping for a rigid strap that would be uncomfortable?
Yeah, I guess I’m with pretty much everyone else: It’s a plastic watch. Thus…it’s…well…plastic.
That said, I think the build quality feels solid, which is honestly like most of Garmin’s plastic watches. It’s likely to be my main running watch instead of a Fenix 5 unit, I really like it.
I never understood people not liking plastic. Sure some plastics are cheap and crappy but it can make a much more durable product then metal.
You may be wondering what I mean when plastic can be scratched way more easily then metal which is true, but slight scratches aren’t that important to me. The watch working is much more important and plastic can deform and rebound much better then metal allowing it to handle shock better. Plus its lighter.
I’ve had a 920 since a month after it came out and where it basically 24/7. While I’ve had to replace the strap almost every 6 months the watch itself works great. The back of the watch is black now and no idea what the serial number is anymore but still in pretty good shape.
Tempted to get the 935 but I think I’ve harped enough on my worry about it which has nothing to do with build quality
Why don’t they use carbon composite materials? Then it could be light weight and make those who want no plastic materials happy. (think duraace pedals)
It would be also interesting the use of titanium. I saw that Garmin used it with the Cronos, but it was really really expensive. But other brands (Seiko, Citizen) do great watch in titanium without this big increase in price. Garmin could try titanium for the Fenix5 (but not so expensive as Cronos!) and carbon for the 935.
100 $ would be still a reasonable increase in price. But I don’t understand why the Garmin Cronos titanium costs so much more than the other Cronos. To contain cost, they could also make just the watch body titanium and the band plastic, maybe it’s the band that pulls the price up in the Cronos series.
Compared to what other Garmin products? Agree with ekutter – for me it is the best Forerunner I have had and I have had pretty much all of them since the original 201. The strap is “flexible” (my description!) as you are advised to wear these watches tight if want to give the OHR the best chance of working reasonably.
I want to show an example of one of my wrist only HR-runs I did.
As you can see in the picture, the heart rate graph is pretty stepped and not that what I usually get when I do my workouts with an heart rate belt. The road I was running was overall flat pavement, no humpbacked underground. I’m also pretty sure (I think I know myself pretty good) that the max out of 167 HR is far off reality. My run was (for sure) in between 10-15 beats and I doubt this rogue max and min values (I had no stops in this run). I will make another test with the parallel use of my older 920XT. For me so far the optical heart rate is not valid enough and useless. Anyone else with same experiences?
You’d definitely want to try and record data from two units, otherwise it’s honestly hard to compare. When doing so, a few quick tips:
A) Put the watches on seperate wrists, do NOT put them side by side on the same wrist
B) Pair your FR920XT to a HR strap (obviously)
C) Ensure that the FR935 doesn’t try and autopair to the same HR strap (it will try, and you’ll want to decline)
D) Pro Tip: I actually let the FR935 pair to my HR strap…but then I set the HR sensor as disabled. This prevents any future test fails.
E) For comparisons, you can use free 3rd party sites (MyGPSFiles is one), or the DCR Analyzer to quickly whip up comparisons (link to dcrainmaker.com)
I first though about a comparison with this Data Field:
Auxiliary Heart Rate, from IMGrant:
A simple data field that connects to ANT+ heart rate monitors, displays heart rate (in bpm), and records it into the FIT file.
This was developed so that I could use the built-in optical heart rate monitor on my Forerunner 235 and an external ANT+ chest strap at the same time, logging values from both for comparison.
Another tip before your next run: do a hard reset of the watch. It’s the first thing that Garmin Support tells to do when they hear complain about heart rate accuracy. In my case it solved my issue (with another model of Garmin)
Interesting, that’s a cool data field. Never seen that before! Awesome.
I’ve long been asking for someone to give me an Edge data field (or heck, even a full blown app) that allows me to pair to multiple power meters and then log them to individual .FIT files, ideally with the name appended to them
Great ConnectIQ data field! It worked and I can see both HR plots separately in Garmin Connect. But so far I have not succeeded in exporting the data in text files (ideally CSV) that I can easily analyze on my end. What do you guys recommend? Thanks!
@gijom, the data that AUXILIARY HR saves in the Fit file are separated in a developer data fields. If you use Golden Cheetah (http://www.goldencheetah.org) for example, this can read those kind of fields.
From there I copied the values into Excel and made my graphs.
Hope that helps!
@ray have you tested the AUXILIARY HR data field? does it also connects to powermeters when in range and active? would be really cool indeed!
Thank you. It worked. Here is my first plot. Was just living my life at home except for when HR goes up as I did some squats. I lost the Chest HR signal at some point. Interestingly after I stopped squatting the Optical HR was faster to show slower HR. Will try to setup a better experiment now that I have setup the “flow”. Thanks!
I have been having a few issues on runs with OHR. On this run I tightened the strap after about 25 minutes of running but it still took another 5 minutes for the HR reading to drop down to where I knew it should be.
So here is the result of my 15km run from 5 o’clock:
Of course I tried to wear the watch as tight and firm as possible. More would be really uncomfortable,
Pretty amazing, that the final 2/3s of my run are pretty accurate. Looks like the same issue Dan Morley showed in his posting above, from 10:22pm today!
I think you agree with me, that the first part does not look good at all.
Yeah, I’d agree, doesn’t look good. Almost looks like cadence lock for the first part, though hard to tell without knowing your cadence values (but typically inflated HR values are cadence lock).
Here is more details from my run on Saturday. When I started the run, I would say the 935 was snug. When I tightened it at the 26 minute mark, I would it was then tight enough to leave strap marks/indents on my wrist by the end of the run.
How do you know or make sure you have a HR lock before starting the activity? All I know is that before I began my run, the HR screen was reading my HR and at around my normal resting HR.
On my run today, I made sure the 935 was snug and reading my HR prior to starting my run. For the full 40 minute run the OHR was reading too high and never did drop back into a normal range. I guess the only way I can produce quantifiable data to Garmin is if I start wearing multiple devices.
Perhaps I will upgrade to the beta firmware and see if that makes any difference.
I have a 735 and the optical HR sensor has been largely a huge disappointment.
I was using before a Mio optical sensor with very good results (provided that I wear it with the sensor in the “under” side of the arm).
So once the 735 came out, it did look like a godsend solution…
I noticed that 735 optical sensor works poorly especially in case of high sweat rate (like for the tropical weather here…) with very poor accuracy (either too low or too high). This despite wearing it tight up to the point of leaving marks on the wrist
Now I did resort to using the 735 with the Mio HR band (yes, it looks crazy) and it works well..
So, my question is: does the 935 optical HR sensor works better than the 735 ?
is any HW or SW improvement ?
Thanks for the great review as usual! Have you looked in to how much the new gyroscope improves ultratrack accuracy for this watch and/or the Fenix 5? I can’t find any info anywhere. I’m racing my first 100 mile ultra this summer and trying to figure out if I need to pack a battery or if this new technology will make it “good enough”.
I switched my Fenix 5 to a 935 yesterday and only for the look and feel, I could not be happier. On my average wrist, it sits much better and is far more comfortable, especially when worn at night. Since I am wearing my watch 24/7, I am thinking of investing in QuickFit bands. Would be interested in seeing the watch with the QuickFit leather 22 band to check if it looks silly or not. With a watch face like the “Ranger” from frtimboli, it may look legit.
I also noticed the difference of screens when starting an activity does not exist anymore after the 2.90 update. Looks like the Fenix 5 and the 935 strictly have the same firmware which is good news!
Another detail: Garmin Face It is apparently not yet enabled for the 935.
Finally any good recommendation for a quality screen protector?
I see that with the 4 fields data page it is not possibile to hide the field titles to increase the size of the numbers. In the 3 field data page it is possibile to display the number without field title. Do you think that in the future it will be possibile to display also for the 4 fields data page the numbers without field title? Do you think that it could be an interesting option for people who would like to have bigger numbers?
Whatever anybody can do to get bigger numbers would be a huge improvement, I don’t wear glasses or need them yet, but coming from a Forerunner 910 the 935 is a let down with the small numbers, and what is the purpose of the black ring around the screen, surely make the display full size… I can see them, but on rough ground mountain biking, using a bike mount it’s just not as good as the 910, not even close.
This is where Connect IQ data fields come in really handy. A programmer can make the screen look exactly as you want. If you don’t personally do programming, look at the list of data fields in the Garmin Connect IQ store to see if anything works better for you. The best approach is generally a single data field taking up the entire screen, containing multiple metrics drawing in the location and size you want. In most cases, developers use this technique to get more than four pieces of data on the screen. There are likely data fields that do just what you are asking for as well. If you having any programming skills, creating such a data field is pretty simple and you can customize to your hearts content.
Currently the 935 (base) is only available for pre order, for example in Clever Training or Amazon. Does anybody know when is it going to be available? thx.
I got mine from Clever Training on monday. Their update from last week was
”
Thank you for your recent order for the Garmin Forerunner 935. We have a large shipment that is scheduled for delivery, to our warehouse, at the end of this week. We will fulfill most orders with this incoming shipment and provide tracking details for your convenience.
For any orders that are not available for fulfillment with this shipment, we anticipate more units leaving the Garmin facility at the end of April and processing remaining orders with the following shipment.
“
Indeed, it’s already been shipping for a month now. Just in very limited quantities. Garmin has long stated their plans were for more units at the end of April, so this seems roughly in line with that.
So if I already have the Garmin 630 with the premium heart rate strap, why would I want this? Optical heart rate, I understand, but you still have to wear a heart rate strap or new pod (yay! another $70) to get the advanced running dynamics that are already on the 630. Sounds like a lot to pay for “extended battery life”.
Please convince me why I need to spend my money. I’m willing, but not yet convinced I should.
I don’t normally do this (because I hate sounding like a shill), but here goes. First off, TBH, if you need someone to convince you to spend your money, you probably shouldn’t.
Having said that, I actually upgraded from the 630 myself, so I can tell you why I did it and what things I liked the best (your mileage may vary):
What I like best (and why I bought it)
– 24/7 HR monitoring (I care about my resting HR), with 1-second sampling
– UI is so much more responsive (e.g. no more unbearable lag when switching between data pages or widgets!). To me this is huge.
– Brighter backlight (even at the default 20% brightness)
– Stronger vibration
– course navigation with simple turn-by-turn directions (there’s a good app for this, but native functionality is almost always better, since you get to keep all the other features in the regular “run/cycle app”)
More pluses:
– No more touchscreen issues (sadly the 630 touchscreen is probably a nice idea, but has too many issues for me, especially in the winter or the rain). (Combined with the above lag, the touchscreen is not ideal to use. e.g. Try scrolling 2 data pages over during a long run — you have to be very patient to avoid scrolling 1 or 3 instead.)
– magnetic compass (630’s GPS compass only works while you’re moving)
– better battery life (to be fair I only need this because I am wearing it 24/7 now…)
– practically unlimited # of data pages (as opposed to 4) — some connect IQ fields take up a whole page, so it isn’t crazy to want 5 or more pages (or so I tell myself)
– Sharper, more colourful screen with nicer fonts
Other things I like (which are more of a bonus):
– barometric altimeter (nice to have, for counting stairs or trail running/hiking)
– Training load info (yes, there are other ways to get this)
– Anaerobic training effect
– UI in general is much more customizable (e.g. reorder data pages, reorder activities, use black background for activity, multiple layouts for 3/4 fields)
– Built-in watch faces are much more customizable (can add/remove fields such as steps, battery indicator, move bar)
– stopwatch/timer (which can be used at any time, even during a running activity)
– ability to return to clock/widgets page during an activity (useful for long runs when you want to check something else without saving your activity). With the 630, most things (e.g. widgets, custom clock face) are not accessible during an activity/app (except settings). With the 935, most things are accessible during an activity/app
– quick shortcut menu (e.g. toggle bluetooth, do not disturb, etc. during an activity, which is impossible for the 630 afaik). With the 630, if you forgot to turn off your bluetooth before the big marathon, you’re just SOL.
– support for latest version of Connect IQ going forward (background apps, watch faces with 1s updates at all times — lack of a “second hand” is a big complaint many ppl have of the current custom watch faces)
– hotkeys (e.g. return to widgets during an activity, take a screenshot)
– ability to take screenshots! (great for saving recovery HR, etc.)
More reasons (which don’t apply to me right now, but might be important to others):
– Multisport/triathlon support
– (Native) swim support (you can get a swim app for 630, if you really want it.)
Honestly most of the UI customization/shortcut stuff probably should’ve been in the 630. I think a basic stopwatch should be in every garmin watch. But they aren’t. And I won’t pretend any of that is “worth” the money. It’s an expensive watch.
But those are the things I like about the 935. Ever since I saw the features the Fenix 3/5 had, I wanted them in my Forerunner. But the price, size and rumours of poor GPS tracking soured me from getting the Fenix 5.
For me, the 935 is basically the Garmin runner’s watch I always wanted, and everything the 630 should’ve been. I wish it had existed when when I bought my 630 because I do feel bad about the price. I’ll probably hang it to this one for a lot longer than my 630. It isn’t perfect — some people point to a dimmer screen (without backlight) compared to Fenix 3. I think that entering text with the virtual keyboard is still a pain. And of course there are still bugs with the current firmware — hopefully they’ll all be cleared up eventually.
But who knows? Maybe there’ll be a successor to the 630 which is similar to this. Seems like most people think *this* is the 630 successor. Maybe the 230 successor will be almost as good. I remember that the 230 inherited *most* of the advanced features of the 620 (at a lower price), so you might want to wait for a 240/245. I’m sure a 230 successor will omit 1 or 2 things that the 630 has, such as advanced running dynamics. But features from last gen’s high end watch always seem to trickle-down to this gen’s mid range watch.
I know I would’ve felt really bad if I got the 735 6 months ago (for example). And if you’re happy with the 630 and don’t need any of stuff the 935 has to offer, I would stick with it or wait for the next mid-range watch. If I didn’t want 24/7 HR monitoring, I wouldn’t have upgraded.
I feel about the same about the 935, but I upgraded from the fenix 3.
What I like most is oHR accuracy is good in spite of the bony wrists I have. Had my first run today and compared it to regular chest HR with the “Auxiliary Heart Rate” data field and it was almost spot on (except for recovery in intervals). Really surprising given the fact that previous Garmin models did not perform well.
Even indoor bike oHR accuracy is acceptable. The Cardio workout was less than stellar, however.
Great summary and useful to know as I am also coming from a 630. But you forgot to mention one of the biggest differences: size. The 935 is a much larger watch, and even though it maintains a similar weight to the 630, it may not suit some people with particularly small wrists.
If they produced a smaller version of the 935 with the same feature set, it would be the perfect watch for me, even if battery life had to be compromised.
This might be a silly question but I just got the HRM run strap with the Garmin 935. When I am running and have heart rate as a data field, how do I know if it is broadcasting from the strap or the optical? Does the optical get automatically turned off when the strap is connected to it?
Alternatively, if I don’t want to wear the strap for a run but have it close by (i.e. in my backpack) before I start will the optical HR kick in once it is out of range?
The latest HRM-RUN strap doesn’t let you disconnect the sensor, but I *think* it won’t even start broadcasting unless you are wearing it (i.e. it is reading valid data). It doesn’t even work if you are not moving (it times out after maybe 30s of not moving, even if you are wearing it, as I found when I tried to use it to measure my resting HR).
If you want to know for sure you can go to Menu (hold Up) > Settings > Sensors & Accessories and check the status of your sensor there. You can even disable it if you are sure you don’t want to use it. (Although because of the above reasons I don’t think it’s necessary.)
I have the 935 and just wondering why my watch keep resetting settings – such as I change the time from 12 hour to 24 hour or km’s to miles. If I don’t check the watch for a while or put on the watch the next day for a run, I find it has reverted to km’s and 12 hours.
Is this normal? syncing issues with Garmin Connect?
Just thought I ask before I attempt resetting the watch and see if I’m being an idiot.
I saw on the Garmin forums that you can create routes on your phone using apps like Wikiloc and routeCourse, that will transfer routes direct to the 935 without the need for a computer. Does anyone have any experience with these? I think they require an annual fee ($10?) but it would mean I wouldn’t have pay the extra for the 5x and it’s maps.
Routes, maybe. Maps, no. The maps on the 5X are there for a reason and it’s the only current Garmin wrist device that takes maps (the Epix and the Fenix 1 and 2 are the previous ones that would, although the 1 and 2 were very limited and couldn’t navigate from maps). You’ll get a route without context, and good luck if something goes wrong.
Note that you can still get *turn-by-turn* directions with the 935, one of two ways:
1) Import route and navigate using dwMap (same dev as routeCourse). dwMap gives you turn-by-turn directions, regardless of where the route was imported from. This is the most user-friendly way, but you’re using the dwMap app on your watch, not the native run app, so you lose some features like Connect IQ data fields, metronome, etc. And you have to pay for a subscription to get turn-by-turn directions.
2) Create a course in GC (website) or save an activity as a course in GC, then send to device. (GC adds the turn-by-turn directions to the course automatically.)
There is another way, which is to create the route (with embedded TbT directions) “somehow” (there are a few different ways) and put it in on your watch using a computer and the USB cable, but that’s even more complicated than 2).
Currently, routes imported with routeCourse do *not* have turn-by-turn directions, which is a deal-breaker for me. The dev is looking into it, tho.
In the review, Ray said there wasn’t a way to create a route on your phone and send it to your device. But it looks like these apps are claiming just that, no computer needed. I don’t really need the maps of the 5x if I can create a route on my phone and send it to the 935. I have a 310xt so I’m used to following a breadcrumb trail without turn by turn directions. It would be much easier than having to check my phone every time I’m running in an unknown area.
Thanks Will. The subscription is less than what I would have to pay for the 5x and the smaller size of the 935 makes it more appealing. There are times I would need to create routes at short notice (holidays/different work locations) and these apps would make it easier to create a route to follow.
Hello – I’ve been mulling over purchasing the Fenix 5 for a while now and typically follow your product reviews as the end all be all for sports watches. Just a general question – when doing a side by side of what the Forerunner 935 has vs. the Fenix 5, it looks like they are basically the same (save the 5X that has the mapping technology). In your opinion, what’s the actual difference that drives the difference in price points? I want the watch mainly for running, HR tracking and other work outs while also being able to wear it every day (home, office, out).
Thanks – and congrats on the continued success of your site.
Mike
Now that the watch has been out for a while, is there anyone out there who uses it in conjunction with Android? Specifically I have a fully updated Pixel XL. I have a Fenix 3 that connects and disconnects seemingly willy nilly. I’m concerned Garmin just sucks at the bluetooth connection since my ELEMNT connects just fine and never loses connection.
My Forerunner 935 arrived on Friday, just in time for this weekend’s marathon. I am highly impressed, love how light it is, not too massive on my smallish wrists (lady), and loving the always on optical hr. I’m truly impressed by the battery life : 3 full days, including a nearly 5 hour marathon with Run Dynamics Pod, sleep tracking, and I’m still at 65%! Wow!! The biggest challenge is getting used to the different button locations, having used the square watches for the last 10 years, but I’m so happy with my 935
I have a Fenix 3. I love most of the watch but what is really bad is the tempo indication during running. Way to much fluctuation. Not usable. Maybe my personal device was bad but there were more people complaining.
Ray?Or others? Is this watch accurate in “tempo indication during running” compared to fenix 3?
I have the same issue. I’m using now run race screen (link to apps.garmin.com) with different pace smoothing settings, depending on what I’m doing. For longruns I leave it at 15-20s, for intervals I set it to 5-10s.
For me, I LOVE the look of the 935. This whole plastic vs. metal was certainly an issue with my 735. As much as I loved the 735 (except lack of golf), it did indeed look plastic…thie 935 looks great on. My two cents
Bundle’s weren’t set to start leaving Garmin until Apr 28th, which was Friday, which meant the absolute earliest you’d see retailers receive them was May 1st. But that’s assuming the retailer paid to upgrade their shipping from Garmin’s distribution hub to the retailer. I’d suspect a company like Amazon would probably just leave it at the defaults.
Also assumes those orders went out on April 28th, and further assumes there was a lot of quantity.
Amazon today started to show availability of the Base version starting May 10. I wonder if they will fulfill the back log of preorders from now. I hope so.
I have just received my new 935. To my surprise the active display is smaller than the on my 735. But the black ring is now bigger and the watch face the fill out the face look ridiculous compared to 735, due to the larger black ring around the face.
735 active face is 31,1 mm according to Garmin and 935 is 30,5 mm. I was looking for a bigger watch face not a smaller. As some has said 935 has now a round face but the price has been a big black ring. The ring is approxly 5mm wide. Why Garmin cannot use the watch face area better, i cannot understand. It is the same as for Fenix 5 as the watch face size is the same as for 935.
The actual display area is still larger because it doesn’t cut off the bottom/top. Plus the resolution is higher and display is crisper, along with a much better back light. I too wish the display took up more of the watch but I’m sure they did this for technical reasons. A bigger display would use more battery. A smaller watch body probably wouldn’t be big enough for all the electronics and battery. Look at the Fenix 5s where they slightly shrunk the watch body, but also reduced the battery life. They are always balancing size with functionality, and for me this was a home run, given today’s technology.
The first thing that struck me when I saw the 935, coming from a 630 owner, was the size. It’s noticeably bigger than the 620/630/735, and almost the same size as Fenix 5. Interesting point that the increase in size was necessary to fit the larger battery and cram in all the sensors, but this may not be a welcome change for guys with particularly small wrists or women. I initially thought about delaying the purchase of the 935 in the hope that Garmin would release an update for the 630, or is this the new 630? I wonder if this size will be adopted for all future Forerunner watches?
I’ve got slim wrists and I haven’t noticed it as being especially chunky – the slim profile makes a real difference there. It doesn’t look obtrusive to my eyes, and it doesn’t get in the way – getting slim shirt sleeves or tight longsleeve top sleeves over it isn’t a problem.
So for me the size is a complete non-issue. Perhaps the F5 – having a bigger profile – would be more of an issue?
Ray, my new Garmin 935 from Clever Training arrived today, replacing my trusty 310xt which finally gave up after 6 years. Can the metronome feature the 935 be set to function in the swim mode or does it work just for running? Sure would be nice in lieu of the Tempo Trainer.
Thanks for the awesome website! It’s the first place I come before making any exercise related purchase.
Pete Holahan
Ray, have you had a chance to test using Garmin’s UltraTrac mode? As an ultrarunner who needs more than a 24 hr. battery life, I’m curious as to the accuracy of the UltraTrac mode.
Hi all, just got my 935 which is pretty awesome. Except i have one problem the battery is draining quit fast during normal daily usage. In hour i lose around 4% battery per hour is this normal?
My watch is not draining battery that quickly. I recharged the watch Tuesday afternoon, and have worn in since then (~40 hours), including a 25 minute run yesterday, and I’m now at 90%.
As a follow up, I’ve been using the 935 with an iPhone 7+, connected via BT throughout the day. There are likely other settings that effect battery drain, but I at least wanted to clarify that part.
4% / hour is about what you’d expect with GPS turned on. If you are just leaving it on a standard watch face, it should be under 0.3%
I personally run a CIQ App 24/7 (rather than a watch face) doing regular web communication and various sensors enabled and I’m only seeing 0.8% / hour. No way a basic watch face, no matter what it’s doing, should be higher than that.
Hi, soft reset did not work.
However an hard reset below did the trick.
5. Hard-reset or Factory-reset – Option B
Turn OFF the Fenix
Press and *HOLD* LAP button.
Yep, HOLD it.
Power on
You will get the menu “Clean user data: Yes/No?” release LAP button.
You know what to do….
After each swim workout the barometer and Altimeter give wrong values.
Example : 43 meter before session 957 meters after and barometer 1017 before and 1190 after.
Someone have the same issue like me ? i already made a call to french garmin support but they don’t know this product and no feedback for this problem !!
Here the same problem, yesterday, before a swim, the pressure was around 1018mb and 1045 after…
How long does it take that it becomes normal? The next morning it is still 2 high….
Got my 935 and noticed, in the right light, very fine surface scratches on the optical heart rate sensor (only in the black area). Anyone else seeing this issue? Any cause for concern, or should it be fine as long as they don’t get deep? Pic of the scratches (as good as I could get a shot, haha): link to imgur.com
Yes, i had the same scratches and i do not know where they can come from. Did you get any reply? i’m having trouble with wrist HR and hoping this is not the cause;
Thanks for another exhaustive review. I’ve purchased the 935 and so far so good. The one question I have though – in your opinion – is why are Garmin watches getting more and more expensive. E.g. for the 935 at £469 it is not that different to say an iPhone 7 (£599). There are way less components in a Garmin, and clearly lower production scale, but are they now positioning themselves as a premium brand, or are the production costs of their watches relatively high given the components used?
Hi Ray great job done as usually (this review cost me 500€ 🙂 but watch is FANTASTIC ) but now that I have my brand new 935 since 3 days I have a question. I did 2 training and during these training after around 30 minutes I take out my HRM with the aim to use the watch ones. result was horrible because in both cases the watch wasn’t switching from Hrm to the watch ones. Watch was quite tight on my wrist. I tried to move the watch from left side to right side but result was the same few seconds of info then no more. Do you or someone else any suggestion? Is it better to avoid the switch on the fly so use one or the other from the beginning? Is there something in settings to be done? Bottom line I’m worried that unit doesn’t work properly.
Tks so much for any help here.
I have had the 935 for about a month now and all is good, but I am having sync issues with the GC app on the iphone. When I open the app I get the blue bar saying ‘syncing’ but after a short while it goes red and says ‘problem connecting with the server’. This happens every time, so it is not a random problem.
we have the same problem with an fenix 5 (or FR 935) and Motorola Moto G3.
It looks like it depends on the mobile phone connection or missing wifi connection.
The Garmin Connect App isn´t able to sync without a stabile internet connection.
Sometimes the GC App can´t finish trying sync, and the result is:
– mobile phone get´s very hot, and
– battery get´s very fast down
That´s not good and may be dangerous …
Asked Clever Training UK, when they will be shipping tri-bundle of 935. Well, they’re waiting for head office to notify.. So, early May might turn mid-end of May.
Hi Ray!
Short question abour quick release kit (I am completely new to these kits – never used one for my other garmin watches): Will the 935 quick release kit make use of the quick fit feature or do I have to use screws?
Really cannot figure it out based on the pictures shown by garmin.
Thanks for your feedback, Björn.
Yes, you can use the Quick Fit 22 band on the 935, although you will need to use the screwdriver to take the original 935 band off. Once you take if off, you simply just screw the poles back together and then you can take advantage of the Quick Fit bands.
Thx Adam,
I know and already own 2 quick fit bands – works like a charm.
But now I am considering buying the quick release kit (for easy bike mounting) which would be uncomfortable if not working in the “quick fit ecosystem”
Has anyone tried a less expensive 3rd party 22mm quick release band? 50.00 for a band seems a bit steep. I had used a 3rd party for my 735 and had no issues with it at all, not sure if anyone has tried that with the 935
Hi there- I just got my 935 from REI. I already have issues with it. It randomly turns off and won’t come back on unless you plug it into the charger. The battery life tells me it’s fine so it’s not that unless it’s not reading the battery life correct. Happens during workouts or just randomly during the day. Anyone else have this issue?
I’m sad to say if I can’t figure it out it’s getting returned.
Sorry to read this, Jordy.
Mine is rock solid. I would recommend a hard-/factory reset and a full charge. On which firmware are you?
If that doesn’t work there is for sure a hardware issue in your unit.
I love my 935 – best garmin I ever owned (and I had a lot of them ;-))
This sounds like it’s likely just a dud device. Mine has had no issues. Good thing is you got it at REI who will exchange it no questions asked. Hopefully you have an REI near you to make it completely painless. I’d definitely not send it to Garmin for repair or exchange as you would risk getting a refurbished model rather than brand new.
I have twice over 3 weeks had my watch just freeze (2.90 and 2.95 firmware).
I had to do a hard reset the first time.
The second time I needed to plug in the watch.
I have contacted garmin but did not hear anything back.
It seems to be retailers have received units from Garmin to work in the preorders. Amazon says now that mine arrives this Friday!. Looking forward to use it.
Hi, is the actual screen (without the black border and bezel) of the 935 bigger then the screen of the forerunner 630?
So I mean the screen without the black border.
So I’m strongly considering the FR 935 to replace my old 910xt. I was hoping for a rectangular display but this watch looks pretty sweet.
Question, though. I can get it in a bundle that includes the HRM-Tri and HRM-Swim. However, the HRM-tri seems to do everything the new running dynamics pod does. So should I save some money and get the 935 with the dyanmics pod rather than the bundle? I don’t see what the advantage of the bundle is…
You would get the Tri, if you intend on using it in, or training for, Triathlons. It basically does everything the HRM-Run and HRM-Swim does, in one strap. It saves having to swap out the straps between swimming and running, because the HRM-Run isn’t waterproof. But if you don’t do triathlons, then the HRM-Tri is a waste.
Mark, for HR accuracy some people still use the band even though the 935 has the wrist HR monitor, something that the pod can’t give you. As Ray mentioned in his review the wrist HR monitor still has some issues especially with the bike.
Would anyone mind giving me some instructions on how to track sleep? Mine is not tracking. Do you need activity tracking on? I only use mine for running so I just leave all the activity tacking off. But I set up slee times and entered into “do not disturb” but still no info.
Thought readers would be interested to see that battery level percentage tends to decrease slower at low levels than at high levels. See the plot… Note that I have not be very active and used GPS only about 4 hours over the week because of an injury. I mostly swam.
after going quickly thorugh the review, I am not sure about the quality of the HRM sensor. Is it upgraded, or somehow different (appart from sticking out less out of the back of the watch), compared to 235? I had a chance to test the 235 when it came out, but it was a disappointment for me, it didn’t work well enough…
Maybe an estimate on how the Suunto Spartan Wrist HR might compare to it, HRM-wise?
Not sure I would ever trust any wrist based HRM over another solution whether a chest strap or even something like the Scosche RHYTHM for accuracy.
That noted, my view (grain of salt view) is that it is nice there is a built in heart rate monitor in situations where in a pinch I decide to run or do another activity and want some general sense of HR.
But when I go for a run, cycling, etc., and am prepping, I usually will then use a strap and/or the Scosche which I think is more dependable given it is attached farther up on the arm.
I have the chest strap which I have used for years, and I know and trust its strengths well (very accurate and precise most of time), but am aware of shortcomings (when not sweating and when cold needs to be artificially wetted — but before a critical race the pre-wetting may dry out, causing dryness artefact; conversely when very very wet, in rain with a wet jacket, there is over-contact artefact, and lastly due to a tapering chest to waist profile, my strap tends to slip down during a run).
I have tried 2 MIOs and when they work they are accurate enough, but during running the surge artefact from swinging the arms or deceleration on foot-strike tends to overcome the sensitivity of blush detection. Biking is much more tolerant for wrist-wearing detection. But for running I have tried all kinds of solutions. My best results have come with getting an extra large strap for my MIO LINK and wearing it just above my elbow on the inside of my biceps where my skin is paler, and maybe a little thinner. But I still get sudden losses of accurate heart rate when the displayed value suddenly jumps to my running cadence, especially when cold (?capillary vasoconstriction?) or when running hard (greater vertical oscillation?). Very Frustrating.
The Scosche may indeed be better because it is worn higher (less centrifugal force on arm swing), but the real benefit is the 3 LEDs, one with a yellow in addition to the 2 greens, better to detect the blood light wavelength absorption thorough the skin of people with pigment. I am of East Asian descent and my skin pigment is a contributing difficulty to the HR pickup I think. However the Scosche is an old model, and I am reluctant to pull the trigger. Also the battery may not last the duration I would take in a full Iron Man race; so I am reluctant to get one.
Ray, great review as always. Really like the FR935 even as only a running watch. I am only skeptical about the optical heart rate. What is the user experience so far for running beside the issues mentioned by Ray.
After about a week, my 935’s back and down buttons are no longer clicking. The still work, they just feel harder to press and don’t make the click feel anymore. Very cleaned them and nothing changed.
Yes I have the same issue after a month of owning my 935. Still functional but you don’t get the same feeling that you have actually pressed the button. Quite annoying.
I’ve had it 2-3 weeks and I feel like all my buttons (with the exception of the start/stop button) have stopped truly clicking. Once and a while I get a nice click but usually they’re very soft. They still work fine and I’m pretty sure they’ll hold up, but it’s a slight bummer. Other than that I love the watch.
Same here. My down button is noticeably soft and less “clickier” than before. I’ve had it 5 weeks and this makes me nervous. Today I actually had to change the angle at which I clicked the down button for it to respond. This is not a good sign to me.
Yup, I contacted Garmin and they said the feel of my “Down” button would not get better, and offered to exchange. They also said I could go through the retailer I bought it from (Amazon). I thought Amazon had stock when I initiated the exchange, but unlucky, they’re now back to out of stock, so looks like I’ll be waiting a bit to get my 935 back!
I’ve got a support request in with Garmin Australia.
Just after a week of ownership my down button is no longer clicking.
My up button is starting to go that way.
They tried to do the “we haven’t received any other calls about this” as though this was a reason for not giving me support, I argued my point and they insisted I provide photo’s, proof of purchase, serial number and a video….
Well video can’t help with the tactile feed back, but I managed to capture the clicking noise, or lack thereof. link to 1drv.ms
Video is mostly out of focus, I was more interested in capturing the audio.
Just ordered my 935 and it should be in next week! I plan on wearing it outside of traditional activities for sleep tracking, HR, etc. (and because it looks sharp) Do current 935 owners find value in a screen protector? I hadn’t planned on getting one, but I’ve read mixed reviews about how easy the screen scratches. Thanks!
I wear mine ALL the time 24/7 – one of the first things I did was put a screen protector on it. I think it holds up better (granted only 2 weeks) than my 735 did – I rough house with my 55 lb dog with no scratches yet.
IMHO I think the protector makes it look better and this watch looks great on the wrist.
I’m a triathlete. I want a good device that’ll work across all three sports. I want it to be a reliable HR monitor, and not on my chest (under a wetsuit and tri suit.
Is the 935 worth the money?
Should I buy a 735 or Fenix or Sunntu, or ?
Thanks for simple responses. This review is way too much for me! LOL. I just want the damn thing to work and work as simply as possible!
As was stated by someone else, for swimming you will need a strap. Also for cycling given all the bouncing around, I get the impression NONE of the wrist based HRMs work all that well, though I never have checked closely.
I myself either use a chest strap (Garmin or Wahoo) or more consistently these days just use the Scosche RHYTHM+ which is further up on the arm and somehow doesn’t seem to get the spikes and issues I have seen with wrist based.
I have also read though have no data to support the idea that somehow if you are darker skinned these optical HRMs don’t work as well. I am darker but have not experienced that issue, but perhaps if I used a strap same time to compare data I might find differently. Who knows.
My wife is keen to get a GPS watch for running, and one of her chief considerations is simplicity of syncing with Strava. Looking at Garmin’s whole range, which model(s) can do it the most seamlessly (i.e. fewest steps)?
Ideally, syncing would happen without conscious effort, either via automatically connecting to our home wireless network, or from being paired with her iPhone via Bluetooth (assuming pairing is ‘set it & forget it’ ).
Mike,
It is one time setup which is done in the Strava page. After that it is transparent because each and every time you synchronize an activity with Garmin it will automatically will be sent it to Strava within seconds.
Synchronizing activities with Garmin can be done easily via bluetooth using the mobile Garmin connect app or via Wifi or via you desktop Garmin express. I typically use the first option which is seamless, once the 935 and my iPhone are close the sync happens.
Glad to hear that your sync experience has been so smooth over Bluetooth and the Garmin App. I have an Edge 510 that also will sync via Bluetooth, and honestly it’s been equal parts nice bonus feature or alternatively, an unreliable source of frustration. Hence my desire to figure out if I was the either the norm or the exception.
It does sound like WiFi sync requires the absolute least amount of user intervention to sync with Garmin Connect – Let me know if I’m wrong on that one though.
So in summary, from a purchasing perspective, if I was content with Bluetooth sync I could go with something as inexpensive as the Forerunner 35, but if I really wanted the WiFi option, that would push the price point up toward the 935 I guess.
The Edge 510 uses Bluetooth 2.1 which was antiquated even at the time of its release (I think it was Ray’s biggest issue with the 510 in his review), so it wouldn’t shock me if it was a pain for syncing.
I’ve not actually noticed if the Wifi Autosyncs on the 935. It is easy enough to trigger a sync (Hold the light button to bring up the menu ring, and hit the Sync button), but I’ve not had any issues with just opening the Garmin app on my phone to sync. The run usually appears on Strava before the Garmin app says it is done syncing.
Your final conclusion is correct though. In terms of just syncing runs, anything from the FR25 to 935 will get the job done. Obviously a wide price range between the two, so it depends on if the additional features are necessary.
Mike, note that the difference in features between the 35 and 935 are huge and it is not only wifi; of course the difference in price is appreciable. The 935 is almost the top of the line for Garmin and it targeted for triathletes, hard core runners and data geeks 🙂
It depends on what you want for her, if you want something simple to track pace, time which uploads data to strava the 35 would do the job.
Ended up buying a 235 (only $15 more than the 35).
Ya’ll were spot on with saying that syncing via BT to Garmin Connect is a complete non-issue (post-pairing and with the App running, it ‘just happens’).
Very different days than my experience with the Edge 510, although I think I had especially bad luck for some reason as I have several teammates that sync exclusively via BT on their Edge 510’s and seem happy with it. Thanks for the help.
HRV stress. How is it the Vivosmart 3 can do the stress test with just the optical sensor but the 935 says I need a chest HRM to measure a stress score?
I’ve just got this garmin and there are a couple of things that have lost me.
I have the 820 so I’m used to group track showing on maps. I see on the 935 there’s a setting for group track to “show on maps”. How exactly do I get those maps and see the other riders?
Also struggling with the training status. I have an injury which means I can’t run but can bike. Do I need to run do set this up? It keeps asking me to do 2 outdoor runs for it to work.
Any news on this? I’ve looked at forums stating that there have been issues with the Fenix series not picking up Vo2max workouts, therefore not giving training status.
I also have the same issue. Since I do not have a power meter on my bike, the cycling VO2max cannot be calculated. And I still have not run with the 935. It is also showing me the same that I need to run twice to get the status.
link to media.dcrainmaker.com mentions that it should be 2 runs/rides, but it seems it needs min 2 runs. Even if I run 2 times, what is the guarantee that it will show the correct status, if i only bike?
The 920XT had a “Mute Notifications” option which would enable the Vibration, Sound or Sound/Vibration. I can’t seem to find this option on the 935XT, am I missing it or does it not exist? Is there another work around that I am missing. Currently have an iPhone 6, if that matters.
I want to get my 935 connected as a Bluetooth device so it can be added as a trusted device, when unlocking my phone. I already know it has to be added as a Device through Garmin Connect, I’ve already done that, but that doesn’t add the watch as a BLE device.
How can I turn Bluetooth on, on the watch, so when I scan with my phone, it gets picked up as a BLE device?
Don’t tell me to pair it within Garmn Connect… I’ve done that already and that’s not what fixes this problem.
Open settings in Garmin connect, long press the watch, then choose update connection. This will pair it as a BT device on Android at the system level. It does allow smart unlock. I use mine every day like this 🙂
When you say ‘long press the watch, then choose update connection’, what do you mean? What button do you ‘long press’ on the watch? There is no ‘Update Connection’ option inside Garmin Connect. Thanks.
Any chance of getting pictures of the quick release kit mounted? I wonder how much thickness it adds and if it stays wearable all day with it. If not, I think I would prefer a Fenix 5.
The 935 Quick Release goes back to the design of the FR305. Similar concept but much improved, and in my opinion, it’s held in place more securely than with a quarter mount Quick Release system.
You could use it all day… but it would look a little bit funky.
Just to be sure, the quick release kit is similar to a quick fit band? So if I get a quick fit band, I can switch it off within seconds? That would eliminate every hesitation I have.
Is similar in concept, as both will hold the watch by the pins. If you have a quickfit band yes, you will be able to take the band off the watch in a matter of seconds and place it in the Quick Release mount, and no need to worry about using the screw driver.
I don’t really understand why this quickfit band is not included in the Tri bundle, as it would make much more sense.
About the video… it would be too silly! :-). Really, it’s very simple. You just slide the watch on the bottom of the mount and click on top. That’s it.
I typically use a Garmin 820 with chest strap for bike rides and a Garmin FR235 (no chest strap) for everyday and runs. I like the addition of Training Load to this new watch and am considering upgrading my 235. But does the training load use data from other Garmin sources such as my 820 or will it only pull from the 935?
If it’s not a standard triathlon, then set it up as a custom activity then just press the lap button to transition between the activities. Just like on any previous forerunner multisport watch
Okay… but… I don’t see the point of that? If you are finished an activity, why not just end it and start the next one? Wouldn’t it keep timing the activity you’ve toggled from?
Yes I understand that.. but what’s the difference in that, and setting up an activity and using the lap button to stop / start the activities? Surely that would be better??
Hi All,
I’m ready to pull the trigger on the 935 with the TriBundle
Does anyone know the where I can buy it from currently to get it in my hands the fastest… Thanks so much
Tri bundle will be tough. I know CT is expecting to have any remaining backorders for the tri bundle within about two weeks. All early-ish backorders (for tri bundle) have been fulfilled, and they actually had some stock I think it was about 7-10 days ago on bundles too.
You wouldn’t happen to have insight on Clevertraining’s european inventory and backorders? Ordered my tri bundle on 31st of March and still waiting for the shipping notification… Oh, the pain of the long wait!
I ordered 29th of March from Clever Training UK and still haven’t received my Tri Bundle. Based on customer support emails Head office in US is handling all the transactions to Garmin. So my guess is that CleverTraining US gets first and UK what’s left. (Wiggle UK already has bundles in Stock.)
Actually, US and UK sales are totally separate for Garmin. Distribution for UK is handled via the UK Garmin distributor channel, and US via the US side.
Wiggle had some sort of early deal there, which I believe is set to expire shortly. It’s why the dates were a bit later as listed on the site initially.
That said, I’ll get some clarification on when the bundles are expected in. Thanks for the support!
I’m really psyched about the 935, I prefer it over the fenix 5 because of its size. But I wonder, do you think Garmin will keep updating the 935 at the same time as the fenix 5? As you mentioned, they are pretty much the same, but since Garmin tends to give preference to the fenix lineup, not sure if they will keep updating both at the same time.
Hi Ray,
I enjoyed the review of the 935 and other reviews you have made.
Well I bought the 935 and updated it to the latest software.
I like it but have noticed a few minor anomalies you may be interested in.
After and ocean swim the altimeter seems to lose calibration.
After re-calibration (using GPS) both the Altimeter and the Barometer seem to return to normal.
I selected auto-calibration and it either does not work or I am too impatient to wait for it.
The optical HR reading seems a little high after an ocean swim until the salt water is rinsed away.
It seems to read OK if wet but not if there is salt water present.
Wi-fi works OK as long as the SSID is broadcast, however the auto connect does not seem to work.
I waited 24 hours and gave up, then connected manually.
I have noticed the maximum HR in a run is not reflected in the 4 hour HR plot.
hi DC R
when i view the compass in Open water swim it tracks north as you would expect however whwn i press the start button for the activity the compass seems to fix on one position. just wondering if you saw this.
cheers
After asking in the Garmin forum with no luck, I would like to see if you have noticed spikes in the pace chart in garmin connect using the 935?. See for example this run during the weekend:
It has several spikes, amazing paces (1m/m, 3m/m, etc) during the run. I have the same setup that I had with my 235, hr band and tempe pod and no issues noted before. Have you seen this with the 935? Any other insight will be appreciated. Thanks.
I think I figured this out. I had set up 3D Speed on and only when on I am having the spikes in the speed graph. Once I put it back to off (default) everything is back to normal.
after the last update via garmin express (something with sensor and chipset, fw is still 3.30) i lost connection to my polar h7 strap and can’t connect anymore. the 935 just don’t find the strap. anyone else with this problem or even better, ideas?
I’m torn between the 5 and the 5X, but would like to understand something regarding the display size. Since the 5X measures 51 mm, does that mean that the display area is a little bit larger than the 5, or is it because the screen size is the same, but the bezel and case is a little wider? I haven’t been able to try on an actual set for comparison and have tried to use your photos for indication.
I currently have a Polar V800, which I bought on preorder in 2014, so it’s getting a little old. My plan was to wait until the new v800 was released but that doesn’t seem to be happening anytime soon. In your opinion, should I wait and see what polar does or pull the trigger on the Garmin 935?…
I replaced my V800 with the Garmin 935 a couple of weeks ago, although haven’t been looking for a new watch at all.
I’ve read so many good things about it, and the watch works like a charm straight out of the box and don’t have to wait for software updates with the promised functions like we did with V800.
So I am really happy with the watch, but at the same time after 15 years of using Polar products, it broke my heart to go with the competition this time.
Hello Judith, this is interesting. I changed 3 years ago from Polar RS800 to the Garmin FR620 because I wanted a watch with GPS. The V800 didnt offer anymore value for money and a lot of things have been missing or not working. The Garmin 620 works fine, except it the elevation, since it doesnt have a barometric sensor. Therefore I was looking to change and the 935 came to my attention. I dont like very often to use my heart rate strap and like therefore the concept of the optical sensor, but it many reviews it doesnt seem to work well. How do you like this feature. Thanks for you feedback. Peter
Hi Peter,
I’ve upped my training at the beginning of this year and I started to have serious problems with the heartrate strap…so much that sometimes I had to skip wearing it till my skin healed enough to wear it again.
At the same time I’ve been following Ray’s reviews on optical heartrate watches and now was the time to venture in it…So far I am a lot happier with OHR. Obviously I don’t analyze it as much as Ray, but it satisfies my hunger for information on my runnings. Having 24/7 heartrate measurement gives me some guidance where to go next too.
Same thing for me : even if my v800 is still ok (used twice a week for running, once for swimming and 2 times a month for mountain biking on average), I would like to “test” a new watch. Not sure if it’s a geek desire, or the fact Polar HR sensor is getting worse and worse each time I use it (today it recorded a 214 heart rate max while it’s actually hard to get to 190 !) that makes me eager to buy a 935. Garmin platform is one of the best, with good mobile apps. The watch offer everything I am waiting for. And embedded HR sensor could be great for running. But I would have to buy a HRM-tri monitor for mountain biking and swimming activities. Therefore the total (€) amount could be higher than expected. That’s the only thing that slowed me down for the moment to be honest…
Forerunner 935 bug while swimming? I experienced now two times the forerunner 935 is not recording (openenwater activity) geo data (location, Distance) after proper recording bicycling stop and store this recording and jump after 5 min into 15 degrees water, after starting openwater activity and acquiring GPS signal. Later after a while of rest sminging again it seems to work with the openwater activity. But i have the impression aquiring GPS signal while swimming is very very bad, and inaccurate, and this in an open sun lake. Is that normal or are there any specifics in handling the forerunner 935 before go to swimming? At this time i’m totally frustrated and do not know if it is a bug or a malfunction.
The 935 sounds great from the review and people’s feedback after buying and running it though its paces. I probably have some questions.
Is the Stryd so much more accurate in terms of distance, pace and cadance than the Garmin footpod?
If you purchase both the 935 bundle and Stryd will it take the data from (VO, GCT, distance, pace and cadance) HRM-TRI strap or the Stryd footpod? Which one is more accurate?
Anyone using the Garmin 935 bundle and Stryd footpod together? And how are you finding it?
Would it make sense to buy a third party heart rate monitor with the 935 ?
Indeed, the garmin ones do not give me the functionnality I want (I think …) i.e.
– Can record without the watch and transmit after (during strength workout for example)
– Can provide correct HRV/RR data to the watch
– Can do everything else a garmin chest strap does and as good as they do (autonomy, accuracy)
! except running dynamics and transmit HR in water as I don’t care about those parts
There are some funnies with the 935 and open water swimming (not using the HR strap).
Sometimes in the swim results I get both average and maximum HR readings and sometimes not.
Both readings are the same when I get them.
For my 3.2km swim last Sunday the watch recorded a maximum HR of 75 and an average HR of 75.
This data was uploaded to Garmin Connect.
The watch should not record any HR data without the strap (from my understanding). You guessed it, the watch recorded NO aerobic benefit for that swim. Other swims record no HR data (as expected). I have no idea how the open water swims are treated WRT my overall Training Status.
As usual the open water swims muck up the altimeter readings. The other day I returned home and I noticed I was at minus 126 metres height. At the start of a swim I notice a sharp drop in both altitude and barometric pressure when observing the graphs of this data.
After a swim I notice the HR reading is generally too high and takes sometime (say 20 minutes) to recover.
So far I have not noticed and problems with running and bike riding.
I have firmware version 3.3 and can’t wait for the next update.
No it doesn’t. It’s a 3 part system, as opposed to the 2-part system of the 920: The watch, the wrist bracket, and the bracket which sits on your bike. The wrist bracket has a circular hole in the back which doesn’t block the HR sensor. You then lift the watch out of this bracket, and place it into the other bracket which sits permanently on your bike. This uses the same 1/4 turn mounts as previously, but it’s been rotated 90 degrees, so you’ll need to modify your existing mounts.
Interesting. My wife has a Garmin 620 she has used a few years, and is holding out for a “new” version of it versus the 935 (skipped the 630). I actually tried to get her the 935 but didn’t really work out, she just wasn’t that interested.
Thinking maybe she could like the fenix 5s better, but besides expense I keep getting concerned if people are really finding issues with GPS on it because of the metal. My 935 is working out great.
Interesting if they really have decided to ditch a premium running watch, must be a heck of a lot of serious runners who don’t want/need a tri watch. So now they have to buy a multi sport watch even though they only do one sport. Maybe the tri scene is growing?
I suppose from a price point of view in the past I think there wasn’t a huge price difference between the top running watch and a dedicated tri watch and Garmin think runners will now end up buying a tri watch.
I think the cross training push for runners is helping Garmin to steer people to the multi-sport watch. I myself have a general fear of biking and only do it if my car breaks down :). However, I have taken up swimming so a stand alone running watch was not in the cards. Also I love the walk and golf features to boot which my 735 was lacking.
I am 100% sold on my 935. I feel that it is way more rugged than the 735 was in terms of picking up nicks and scratches for some reason – same level of playing around with the dog and wearing it 24/7 for the past month and not a single mark showing anywhere.
Even the running watches have effectively been multi sport watches, just with minimal features removed that made it easier to do a sequence of sports for multi-sport events. 90% or more of the features were already there. I actually think this is a great move by Garmin to simplify their lineup. Some that only want to do a couple sports might get confused because they don’t need a multi-sport watch, but I think many more got confused before by all the different versions of their watches.
I don’t understand why they would release something running specific – I don’t see the gains. The differences as best I can tell are entirely software based, the hardware would be identical so it wouldn’t be any cheaper would it?
The features that make it a tri/multi-sport watch don’t in anyway hinder, obstruct or clutter it’s running functionality. They’re just extra modes that you can either hide by removing from your favourites, or remove from the watch full stop.
I’m a runner, 5 of my top 6 sports modes are all variations of running – I’ve set up different ‘apps’ with customised data fields for long runs, races, trail runs etc. I don’t see the need to remove Open Water swim modes etc even though I’m unlikely to use them anytime soon because they don’t do any harm being hidden in the bottom of what is effectively an app drawer.
Ray, do you think they will move the vivoactive HR up in terms of features and price, or will it remain designed to compete with the apple watch? Also, I’m surprised that this model hasn’t been refreshed yet. Do you think it’s too late for this year, unless maybe September? Lastly, as you said, going for a round format would allow for faster upgrades, but it seems that they’ll stick to the rectangular model for tactile screens instead. Is that a mistake? I personally don’t like this format. Thanks!
I don’t we’ll see a shift in pricing, since it does really well at the $250 price point (allowing it to undercut the Apple Watch for most fitness reasons). I don’t know on futures for it, but at the moment it handles itself well, save the lack of music when competing against things like the TomTom series or the Polar M600 (+ random other Android Wear watches).
I’m having trouble to connect my Wahoo Blue HR to my forerunner 935. Is there a setting to activate BLE sensors or what am I missing. And yes, the sensor is fine and I can connect it to Wahoo fitness app on Iphone.
same for me with a polar h7 strap.
before the last update via garmin express (sensor and chipset update) it worked without problems.
so hoping for the next update
I used the 935 for the first time today on an indoor bike session and the HR was way low on the hard intervals, ranging from 100-120 when it should be around the 170, could I be missing something or is my watch defective? 🙁
In the Review its mentioned about free-style multisport mode. This does not work for me, when I press the left centre button during a workout it takes me to the current settings but I cant see where would change the sport. Can anyone give me any ideas as to what I’m doing wrong?
Ordered the base model from Amazon May 24, and as of today, June 4, they still don’t have an estimated ship date. Every model I’ve checked is similarly vague about when they’ll be back in stock. Anybody know what this is about? Seems unlikely to be just a problem of too much demand. Manufacturing problems, maybe? Sure would like to have my new watch.
I felt that both REI and Clever Training were pretty quick even though they didn’t specify a date on their websites. I ordered one from both (one for me and my wife), and they came pretty darn quick in both cases.
I think they have rolling stock coming in daily so they are able to keep up with the demand real time.
Has anyone else had their 935 quit working when not on external power? I received my 935 on April 5th and it has worked great – may favorite Garmin watch to date (after owning the 910 and 920). June 2nd did an OWS and then noticed on my drive home the screen was off and no response to any button press. When I got home plugged it in and it powered on and it works but no activity/blinking from the HRM. Unplug from power and it immediately shuts off. Short version – I talked with Garmin Support and they were unable to bring it back to life. So the 935 is on the way back to Garmin and new one will be shipped to me – bummer is it may be a couple weeks but I’m hoping they can find one sooner as I have a 70.3 on June 10th. Anyone else with a similar experience?
How often do you clean it? After every / every other training session? I think giving it a 5 minute dunk in a glass of hot tap water (not boiling hot) every so often may help to clean out any sweat / salt build up in any nooks and crannies, and help with keeping the buttons acting as they should. I certainly found this helped on my 920XT when I felt the buttons weren’t quite right.
I have one question.
After wearing Fenix 5 for about 14 day and now wearing Forerunner 935.
Is it possible that OHR on Forerunner 935 is more stable and more accurate than in Fenix 5 due to lighter watch and more stable watch because of weight of Fenix 5.
Fenix 5 looks definitely better and more solid build than Forerunner 935, but for daily use and more exact HR data, I think FR935 is better.
Has anyone had issues with the distance not keeping up during an open water swim, it takes a few minutes after getting out of the lake to catch up, if I press the lap button to move onto the bike it then just takes the current distance reading. Any ideas? Could it be because I mix between front crawl and breast stroke?
Hi Ray, I have been using a Garmin Edge 520 and just bought a Forerunner 935. I assume that if I countinue using my Garmin Edge for my bike rides and I use the Forerunner for my swimming and running, I will not get accurate stats such as training load & stress. And I believe Garmin Connect will not integrate them using The Firstbeat software from the Forerunner 935. Is there a way to integrate all my workout data? Thanks
I’ve been using the 935 for a couple of weeks and it consistently reports lower mileage and slower miles splits than the Strava iPhone app (iPhone 6s Plus). I have the 935 set to use GPS and Glonass, and AFAIK the iPhone uses the same. Some of the mile splits are ~30 seconds slower on the 935, and the mileage is often .1-.2 lower per mile. Has anyone else noticed this or compared the two? Thoughts? Same for cycling, btw, longer distance and faster avg speed reported by iPhone.
You may take GLONAS out of the picture to see if it improves. It may sound odd but just do a search in this page and you’ll see that there are reports of affecting accurancy.
I assume your first part refers to running? In any case, are you talking trails or road? On trails, my 935 is always short compared to my Edge or FR630, biking or running. On the road, all 3 are generally within a fraction of a percent of each other.
Pros:
– Very solid mount in watch and bike modes.
– Super easy and fast to switch from watch to bike.
– Accurately tracks HR after it’s installed.
– Seems durable, though I’ve only used it for a couple of weeks.
Cons:
– It’s less comfortable than the standard watch and kinda bothers my wrist bones, so I end up wearing it higher on my wrist than I normally would.
– Any fashion value that the 935 had before the QR (very little, IMO) is completely gone with this thing on…it makes the watch seem significantly bigger/uglier on the wrist. I personally don’t care as I only wear the watch for running, but it’s a consideration if you wear it 24/7.
– $30 seems a bit pricey for what it is
That’s the coolest part of the 935 quick release system when paired with a quick fit band. Outside of a triathlon, there would be little reason to use the watch part of the quick release. Just about as fast to attach the quick fit band as pop it in to the watch cradle.
The $30 seems pretty reasonable to me. It’s the $50 for the quick fit band that seems really excessive.
I just sold my Vivoactive HR device (which I loved!) in order to upgrade to a multisport watch instead as I have ambitions of doing some triathlons in the near future. Currently i’m a gran fondo / touring style cyclist who just picked up running this year. I have completed one 1/2 marathon and am starting to train for a full which i’m hoping to do by the end of the year. Swimming is my weakness but i’m hoping to jump in the water a bit more often over the summer as well and then we’ll see where things go from there.
I’m a bit torn on whether I should go for the Forerunner 735xt or the 935. I’ve checked out the product comparison tool and read just about every review online there is. Obviously the 935 is the latest and greatest, but it’s not that much different and i’m not sure it really makes sense for me to justify the extra cost.
The reviews on the 735 have left me with mixed feelings and am a bit hesitant on choosing it. But should I really be concerned?
I’m not a fan of the GPS altimeter over the barometric but in fairness I have no experience with the GPS version. Does it make that much of a difference? It’s not like i’m living in the Rocky Mountains. We have some hills here, but it’s
I’m also concerned with the battery life. Realistically, I think 14hrs should be fine. It’s actually slightly better than the Vivoactive HR was and i had no issues with it, but as i get into triathlons, will this become an issue? It might take me 14hrs to swim a km! 😉 (obviously joking…) I guess as long as it’s fully charged before starting, I should be fine?
Price is also a bit of a consideration. I have seen the 735 watch only for $450 CDN where the 935 is $680 watch only. It’s a pretty big price for a barometric altimeter and battery life. I realize there are other benefits, but does it really add up?
I guess my biggest concern is with the quality. Is the 735 as flakey as I’ve read in many reviews (buttons, blank screens, plastic cracks, etc.)? Do we expect to see similar issues with the 935 as it gets more use (we’re already hearing about button issues)?
Will I have any regrets with the 735? Or should I just suck it up and go with the 935 instead?
I only swim and run so I can’t talk to all the advanced “stuff”, but I did sell my 735 to get the 935 so I can talk to that:
1. The 935 seems to me at least to be far more sturdy and able to take the constant wear and tear of wearing it all day. I had some small marks and such on my 735 pretty early on and my 935 has survived more advanced activities with no scratches or anything. Not sure of the factual nature surrounding this, but it just seems better. I love the look of it over the 735.
2. If you golf, that added feature is huge as it was for me I love the golf GPS tracking it is awesome. The added battery life makes a massive difference when you do play golf or go on long runs/walks/bike rides.
3. The screen quality is way improved over the 735. the resolution makes a really big difference for me.
I’ll keep it short and sweet but those were my reasons for switching as well as my reasons for being so happy that i did so. I have had the 935 for about 45 days now.
I just upgraded from F3 (non HR) to 935, and I love it! The F3, IMO was not comfortable for everyday wear due to its weight, and it did not function as an activity tracker. I’m also not a bling guy and the F3’s bezel was too showy for my tastes. The 935 is very very comfortable to wear, even all day. While the 935 is slight thicker than the F3, it actually feels smaller and more comfortable. Functionality aside, I think these are important considerations.
Regarding the altimeter, I find the GPS altimeter much better than barametric. From other barametric watches I’ve had in the past, I had to calibrate before every activity since weather affected readings from day to day, and I was never certain if the gain/loss were acurate. But if I were at some unfamiliar place, I had to guess the calibration. Part of the fun of running or biking at a new place to to see the true altitude you’ve summited. I also love it for skiiing as well.
With previous training watches, battery life was always an issue. I had to constantly plan ahead to charge the watch. With these new Garmins, I can do several short workouts a week without being worried about charging the watch. One less variable to deal with. Worth it IMO. I’m also starting to use the 935 as my everyday smart watch in place of my trusty Pebble Time (so sad). Most smart watches are a joke due to their battery life. (How good is a watch if you’re always worried about it dying on you. Both the 935 (still testing) and the F3 would easily last 2 weeks if not using the GPS (Pebble would last 5 days). Functionality is still limited tho. We need more apps!
Price is important, for sure. But if you can swing it, go with the 935. It is the best multisport watch I’ve ever owned (my first was the Polar 625).
Hi.
I have a suunto that i use for triathlon. Movescount have an app that you can add into your running menu screen created to predict current triathlon race finish time over olympic, half and full ironman distances. This is handy when you’re on the run instead of trying to do calculations in your head. Does the 935 have a similar app to download or in build software that does the same?
Thanks
Hi all, seeking some help with Garmin 935 and the iOS connect app.
Had the 935 for just on a month and has been fantastic for all uses, but there has been a major issue of late I suppose more so with the app than the watch and looking for any help anywhere. I’ve put a post on Garmin forums and even emailed support with no responses. So here goes.
Lately the app has been using MONSTEROUS amounts of data doing who knows what, but it appears streaming high def movies or downloading the Garmin backup server. I have a 12gb data plan on my phone a month and the app completely blew it apart in two nights without me noticing until I awoke one morning to find msgs from my provider saying I had used all my data. After investigating and begging my phone company for more data I deleted the app and reinstalled, monitored it closely for days, turning off data for the app unless I wanted to sync activities. After a week of close monitoring I let my guard down and forgot to turn data use off for the connect app and again over night it used 3gb doing god knows what and blew my data cap again. So now I have no data left and cannot figure wtf the app is doing.
So my question is, has anyone else had this problem or knows what is going on? I’m scratching for answers as this is quite a problem and it is silence treatment from Garmin on this problem. If anyone else has experienced this or knows anything about it please help a brother out!
So I assume as long as the app isn’t running, no extra data usage? Where does it show up in the settings/Cellular options? Is it actually showing all the usage as coming from Connect or is it something in System (look at the bottom)? I had a similar thing happen a couple months ago where suddenly I plowed through 2GB of my 2GB plan in 48 hours while using the iPhone mapping (so no Garmin device involved here). My normal usage is less than 200MB per month. I believe it was under Settings/System/Mapping Services. But I use navigation all the time and had never had this happen before or since. In my case, Verizon support bumped my 2GB plan to 4GB for a month for free so I could still use my phone.
So it could actually be some randomness on your phone where multiple apps, or even system services, are interacting with Connect.
On Android you can see the specific app data usage, you don’t need to guess or speculate.
Settings->Data Usage. Breaks it down app by app. Or you can go in via the Apps menu, look at Connect and see there.
For what it’s worth, over the last month my GC Android app has used less than 60MB of data, of which about 1/3 was foreground use (i.e. when I was physically using the app, as opposed to background use.) So I would be concerned by the numbers being quoted.
It’s broken down app by app in iOS as well, I hadn’t reset the figures for months but when I went investigating the first time the usual culperites where there (safari, chrome, YouTube, Spotify, Facebook etc) for data usage, but connect had used 16gb which I thought was strange. So I reset the values and watched them like a hawk. In 5 days connect barely used a MB, then all of a sudden one night it used 2.4gb and blew my cap again. Everyone I know who has Garmin connect on there phone has been watching it s I asked them and none of them have had any issues, a few people are posting on Garmin forums about this and it has been meet with silence as well so I am perplexed as to what is happening.
I assume you are just using a watch face when this happens (CIQ or stock) but not actually running a CIQ app? Connect IQ apps can request web data but watch faces and data fields can’t.
This sounds like a serious bug in Connect. I’d contact Garmin support if you haven’t already. There is no way it should be accessing this kind of data.
Just running stock 935, haven’t installed any apps or widgets etc.
I contacted garmin via email who said to contact there phone support who basically denied it’s the app and my phone is wrong. I asked the person to escalate this quickly as I’m not the only person who has seen this and the developers need to know asap and look into it. That was meet with resistance as well.
So I’m hoping DC Reads this and uses his garmin contacts and get some them to look into it.
Got some screen shots, I reset my data stats on the 12th June (so it reset the 16gb connect had previously used and I didn’t take a screenshot of it, also don’t judge me for some of the apps I have installed haha) and for the most part ive had to turn data use off for the app to avoid it burning through more data. As I said I watched it like a hawk for a few days and it barely used a MB, let my guard down one night and left data on for it and it used 2.5gb as the screenshot shows.
Really appreciate the reply and any help you can gather Ray!
Hi,
I would like to raise my concern about the accuracy of the GPS on the 935
I just bought one to replace my 910XT and it seems that the accuracy is way worse for me using the same settings ( smart recording and GPS only)
I am running almost always the same course at lunch time that goes around wharf and the last 3 times were with the 935.
They all have the same issue I have never seen ( I checked the map because I saw each time my pace dropping from 5.xx min/k to 4.10-20 min /k. link to connect.garmin.com link to connect.garmin.com link to connect.garmin.com
You can see than both my phone and my 910XT are way more accurate between Dawes Point and Miller point
It is the 3 wharf around 30min
Anyone experienced this kind of issue ?
I called Garmin and they asked me to change the settings to recording 1 per second and GPS + Glonass.
I will do that later this week but I would expect at least the same accuracy between the 910 and the 935 when using the same settings
Thoughts ??
I see the same sort of errors even with glonass turned on as well. Also saw it with 735. Seems to be related to any course with something like switch backs–the tight back and forth seems to confuse it. My iphone however is perfect on the same course at the same time so not sure what it is. I thought about turning OFF glonass to see if that would help, but sounds like it wouldn’t.
For information I have done more test
GPS + Glonass + Smart recording : link to connect.garmin.com
It is almost worst !
GPS + 1 per second is pretty bad as well : link to connect.garmin.com
I am pretty disappointed so far by the GPS !
I have screwed the test GPS + GLONASS + 1 per second. I did only the reverse course so I will have to run it again.
To me there is no excuse to have a less accurate GPS than the 910XT …
In all the activities, bar one which was down to me as I arrived late at a race and had to start the activity as soon as the circle went green (I normally leave it around four/five minutes), I’ve found the GPS on my 935 to be on par, if not slightly better, than my 910XT. Settings are with GPS and one second recording, and with no added widgets/apps installed.
Hi,
I have a Garmin Forerunner 935.
I have found that I need to buy the HRM strap because the OHR has flaws.
I have firmware 4.10. and wear my watch on my RIGHT wrist.
The OHR is erratic during an event like Walking/Running.
The OHR reads too high after the end of an event eg running.
It seems that there is an algorithm that hold the HR artificially high after an event; for a period of approximately 10 minutes.
The OHR reads erratically during an event. Yesterday I walked briskly at a constant pace.
My HR was approximately 115 to 120, however the OHR reading varied from 70 to 120 back to 70 back to 120 and so on. The variation was somewhat gradual ie it did not jump from one extreme to another.
The cycle of changes were approximately 30 to 40 seconds.
The OHR operation needs to be reviewed.
It seems that the OHR operation is affected by skin colour. I have a light skin colour.
If Garmin are trying to find an algorithm that is ‘one fits all’ then this may not be possible.
I suggest Garmin provide ‘switches’ in the code to allow the user to set the correct skin colour.
During an event like running I may get a HR reading maximum of 143 as an example.
The HR widget will record its own maximum that is different during the same period; say 132.
I suggest Garmin make the operation consistent; there is only one maximum.
The firmware should have a ‘global’ variable that is shared amongst all apps and widgets so that the watch displays consistent data.
There may be a bug in connecting with GPS satellites during open water swimming.
I had the watch setup for GPS+Glonass and have undertaken several open water swims (over 20) since getting the watch.
On two occasions the watch lost satellite contact completely mid-swim; once with version 3.3 firmware and once with version 4.10 firmware.
I have since changed the setting to just GPS only and will review this.
On both occasions I had stopped mid-swim and looked at the current status.
It seems like this ‘gesture’ may have turned off the GPS sensor; I know this sounds silly.
The watch had some 20 to 30 minutes to regain satellite contact but failed to do so.
There may be an issue in the firmware where there is a race condition when connecting with GPS or Glonass satellites.
I trust the feedback will help others and finds its way back to Garmin developers.
@Nick I do not recognize the problems you have with OHR. Reading are always spot on no strange fluctuations. Even with intervals the readings are acceptable not as good as with a band but still acceptable. The readings i have during an exercise let’s say 21 kilometer are always consistent with the HR widget. I did several comparisons between old tracks with heartrate band and the OHR they were all pretty consistent or acceptable margin.
The IQ watch face with constant visible heartrate is pretty good indicator of recovery after hard training or illness that alone is priceless.
After +6 weeks of usages I must admit that for my needs Cycling, hiking running it has been a blast, an almost a bug free experience
All in all this is the best Garmin watch I have ever owned and I had several of them.
Hi Mike,
I am glad you are enjoying your watch.
As an exercise perform an activity where your HR is say 120bpm at the end.
Save the activity and then go and look at the widget’s OHR reading.
Use the watch and your pulse to measure your HR.
When you go back to the widget are the readings in the same ball-park.
If so my watch may be faulty.
I also am curious about your skin colour.
Regards,
Nick
I’m on my 2nd 935 and have same problems with both, the heart rate I record during my activities do not match up with the max readings in the HR widget, this has been same for both watches
Sorry i missed your response.
I did check an 80 Kilometre cycle activity and hike activity both activities end low 125 and 130BPM in the all-day stress overview they are consistent. Tomorrow i wil do a recovery run that so it should be no problem to check against 120 at the end. Although i don’t think i won’t see any huge difference between widget, all day stress and the actual activity.
Hi Nicko, Did run yesterday and today last kilometers i did walk or dribble with both runs. I switch back and forth between the heart rate widget and IQ watch face. I must admit there was difference of 2 so 118 to 120. But other then that it was pretty consistent.
Hi Mike,
Thanks for doing that little test. I would be happy with those results if I were you.
BTW there is nothing magic about 120bpm; it was meant as an example.
I just noticed that after an activity I was getting a HR reading of 100+ from the OHR widget and actually measuring 70-80bpm using the watch and my pulse. The OHR readings gradually settle down after 5 minutes or so. My HR falls quite quickly after exercise and I have also noticed the OHR seems to lag behind fast changes in HR even during exercise; at least it does for my watch.
I am using a HRM strap now so I am not too concerned with the OHR readings during exercise. For resting HR the OHR is pretty good.
Regards,
Nick
They almost couldn’t be more different products. It’s like comparing a golf cart (Vivosmart HR+) to a sports car (FR935). There are too many feature differences to list, but this will get you on the way:link to dcrainmaker.com
Overall: Vivosmart HR+ is an activity tracker that sort of does GPS tracking. FR935 is a top of the line GPS runner/triathlete training watch. Every bell and whistle they currently have (beside mapping).
This may be a bit off topic, but I do love my 935 and would like to use it in a more robust fashion as I prepare for an upcoming marathon. My previous two races were 1/2’s and I simply put my training plan to a calendar and tried to adhere to what that said each morning.
My question is does anyone use training plans for marathons? I am using a 20 week plan (like the longer timeframe), so I would have to put 100 entries into the training calendar – would these all show up on my 935 when I go to menu under the run option and go to Training>My Workouts? What is the best way to set it up so I don’t have 100 workouts on my watch?
First of all- thank you so much for all you do here. I can’t imagine all the time it must take. What a wonderful resource! The best out there!
I’m debating between a Forerunner 935 and a Fenix 5S (sapphire). It’s basically coming down to a choice between price and size. I am a woman with a fairly small wrist. I saw the pic of the Fenix 5S on the girl’s wrist. Does there happen to one of the Forerunner 935 on her wrist that I missed?
Do you have an REI around? They, or many running stores have the Fenix 5S as well as the 935 on display and you can judge for yourself. I would say that the weight of the 935 vs. the 5S is almost 20g, what I love about the 935 is that yes it is “plastic” but it does not have the look, feel, or sturdiness of plastic compared to my old 735. I get compliments on the watch all the time.
So, taking the in the fact that your wrist may be slimmer, it may also be impacted by the weight.
Yes, the weight difference is worth noting, for sure. I was planning on going to REI to check them out but their website says the Forerunner 935 is online only, unfortunately. I’m also just not sure if seeing it in the box will do much more for me. If you know of a place with both on display for trying on in all ears!
At least our local REI here in Bend OR has display models of all three Fenix 5 models and the 935. Not sure which ones they actually have in stock. But that would let you see them in person for size.
I have used both the 5 and 935 and I much prefer the 935. I have a small wrist and it doesn’t look huge on my wrist. I find the band is more comfortable than the quick fit and it can be adjusted more for smaller wrists. Also, if you plan on using the watch for biking, I would go with the 935. I tried two different Fenix 5’s and neither would work with my P1s and I have had zero issues with the 935. I returned the fenix and couldn’t be happier with the 935 plus it saves you $200.
Good to know – thanks! It does seem a little silly to spend $160 more (5S is discounted on Amazon) for a few mm less diameter). Went searching for in store models yesterday and couldn’t find any. I’m going to mull it over for a few more days but will probably order the 935 online.
I am following a post I made on 21st June.
I completed an open water swim today with GPS only enabled ie Glonass not selected.
I lost satellite contact again, this time at the 3.4km mark.
I tried to restart another open water activity 1km from the finish (while in the water) but no go.
I could not get a satellite connection.
At the end of the swim I found we had done 5.18km by asking a swim buddy what his Garmin 910xt was reading.
Either my Garmin 935 is faulty (I have issues with the OHR as well) or the firmware is flakey.
I have given the watch a fair go since getting it on the 10th May; I have used it for 24 open water swims, 17 runs and 7 bike rides.
Nick
Hi Nicko, I would contact Garmin since i have zero OHR problems and the 935 should be minimal on par with a 910XT GPS wise. You might have a faulty unit.
Ditto what Mike’s said, seems you may have a faulty unit as in all the activities I’ve done the GPS has been spot on and I’m a stickler for accuracy. Can’t comment on the OHR though as I don’t use that feature. All the best in getting it sorted.
Hi Mike,
Thanks for your feedback.
I am going to experiment a bit more and wait for the next firmware upgrade before considering a replacement unit. The OHR works quite well for resting HR and I have since bought the HRM straps (tri and swim) for activities where HR gets higher.
Skin colour is white for me too, so there no real differences there.
Regards,
Nick
Thanks for your feedback ZOOG,
I had an open water swim today and all was OK (1.7km).
I am thinking the problem may be related to when I stop mid-swim; I probably let my arm sink and lose satellite contact. The watch does not seem to recover from this. I think this may be the cause because each time I have lost satellite the distance did not increment from what I read at the last stop.
We often stop in a swim to regroup.
I am going to ensure the watch stays near the surface from now on and see if this fixes the problem.
Regards,
Nick
Yes it can, but not while wearing it, as the charging port is on the back. You will need to put it in your bag or something while it’s connected to your battery pack.
I’m trying to decide which model to buy. I have had some atrial fibrillation issues so I am primarily interested in very accurate and timely heart rate readings. I do not run but do bike (mainly indoors) and swim (pool only). I also would like to monitor my resting heart rate with great accuracy.
I realize the 935 is overkill but I tried on the Vivoactive HR and did not like the feel. It also cannot pair with the HRM-Swim monitor and it seems the OHR is not as accurate as the 935 so I’m willing to pay for the 935 unless there are better choices? Any thoughts?
Hello. Thanks as always for the epic detail in your reviews! I’ve had this device for about 2 weeks now, and either there is a feature missing, or i can’t find it!
I want to be able to Auto Lap by Position. Is that not possible with this Garmin? I like to ride to a point, and while I keep riding, hit the lap button to ‘mark’ the start of the lap, and then each time I pass that location, a lap is automatically completed. I can do this with my Garmin 1000 (and with my older 510 as well) Thanks for any help!
I have just noticed that DCR promo code: DCR10BTF works for Garmin 935 @clevertraining.co.uk but is still useless for clevertraining.com.. This makes it the cheapest place to buy 935 in Europe (along Rakuten.de that has some prmo codes lowering the price by 10%)..
I wonder if we are getting closer to Garmin US getting rid of firm price restrictions? The EU price policy by Garmin makes the watch to expensive anyway (so 10% off doesn’t make much diference) and I may be travelling to US at the end of summer – that’s why I am curious of the price loosening date…
In the US you can use the DCR/CT VIP program to get back 10% in points. Up till about two years ago you could use the coupon code in the US, and then Garmin changed some policies which restricted that further. So now the VIP program is where it’s at for US folks.
Meanwhile, for the rest of the world, such manufacturer pricing policies are considered illegal. There’s zero plans in the US by any companies to change that (European companies are generally envious about it).
As for arguing pricing in the US vs Europe, there is a simple reality that it costs more for businesses to do business in Europe than it does in the US (trust me, I know, we own a business in Europe). Of course, European consumers also get better rights than most US consumers (things like standard/min 2+ year warranties/etc…). It’s give and take…
Great review!!! I’ve been looking intently at the FR935 to replace my VivoActive.
I was wondering if you have looked at all at the rowing functionality? I’ve been looking everywhere for any kind of information/insight into those types of workouts and can’t find anything online or anything in the official Garmin documentation.
The FR935 has a dedicated mode for rowing. I use my FR935 on an (indoor) WaterRower machine and it works perfectly giving you accurate data such as total strokes, average pace/500m, max. and average stroke rate as well as a full graph. The only change, compared to my FR920XT, is that I had to wear it on my wrist instead of having it on the handle in order to get good measurement. I also have to enter the distance manually in GC since it’s an indoor session.
Ray, have you had a chance to test using Garmin’s UltraTrac mode? As an ultrarunner who needs more than a 24 hr. battery life, I’m curious as to the accuracy of the UltraTrac mode. With my Ambit2, increasing the battery life has resulted in poor GPS accuracy to the point of making it useless. Using the UltraTrac mode in my Fenix2 was the same – useless.
Just find it weird that Garmin watch keeps getting bigger and bigger but no real improvement to screen estate size. Was hoping it to be around the 42mm range and it seems pretty pointless to have a 47mm oversize watch for activities when the internal is exactly the same as the F5s(but the long lug make it pretty pointless either) with a slightly beefed up battery and 0.1 display advantage. Can’t Garmin for once think of runners with moderate size wrist?
Got my FR935 few weeks ago and I really enjoy the ultra low weight. You just dont’ feel it on your wrist. The only thing I miss from my former 920XT are the front buttons to start/stop activities.
So I have noticed some delays when using the OHR. I usually select the activity and wait for GPS and OHR icons to go steady before starting to record. During the first 2’30” or so the reported HR if off the track. It will for example say 110bpm, like before starting the activity, and then even go down to 109 or 108 althought I know that, for that particular part of the track (hill), I should be starting seeing 150+ bpm right away. Then after approximately 2’30” the reported HR suddently jumps from 108 to 160bpm and from there tracks my heart rate accurately for the remaining hour. Same thing happens at the end of the exercice when I experience a rapid HR drop but OHR seems to be unable to pick it up.
So is this a normal behavior for OHR?
I do understand that OHR may have limitations and will rely on the strap for some exercices when I need accurate HR tracking.
I have traveled the entire Internet looking for an answer to this very question and come up empty. Your question has been hanging out there for a month. Seriously, anyone?
I tested this watch over the weekend, but returned it on Monday.
Although using DCR advice on how to wear it, the OHR was not accurate at all for me. Approximately 50% of the time, it was more than 10 beats off compared to my Polar V800 and H7. This was both while running and during ‘non-activity’. In the cases it was more than 30 beats off, I checked my HR manually to confirm which device was wrong and which one was right.
A pity, since it was a nice and convenient device to use. It is also much lighter than my V800 which feels great while running. But given the bad HR readings for me, it didn’t make sense to keep it.
After the Scosche Rhythm+, this is the second device I bought after reading a DCR review. Both were unfortunately failing to read my HR optically very well.
I have my FR935 TriBundle about a month now and love it. However, I have just discovered a problem. I use the OHR for normal running but use my HRM-Tri for triathlons and bike training. I recently took part in a bike race and had my FR935 mounted on the quick release bike mount, but forgot to put on my HRM-Tri. To my surprise, the device still recorded a heart rate! Does anyone know how this could be possible? It obviously couldn’t have been my actual heart rate, as the watch was not on my wrist and I wasn’t wearing a heart rate strap. Strangely, there did seem to be some correlation between the recorded heart rate and the elevation of my bike ride! My guess is that the OHR was still somehow active, but the measurements were due to the vibrations or elevation or something else like that… any thoughts?
There are a couple threads on the Garmin message boards about this. Not sure exactly what it is picking up but it certainly isn’t heart rate. The interesting thing is that it actually is picking up numbers that at first glance almost could be reasonable for HR. My personal belief is that Garmin should figure out how to filter these signals out in this case as bad data is often worse than no data.
Hi ekutter,
Thanks for the info. I can’t seem to find those threads, would you be able to share a link?
Is this issue specific to the FR935 or do other OHR devices (e.g. FR735) have the same problem?
Garmin asked me to run more test (so I did with GPS+GLONASS+1per sec and it is still crap), to do a full reset of the watch ( so lost all my estimation, data … :()
But it is still pretty bad.
I have done more research on the segment I am looking at and send them quite of lof of comparison between garmin devices and tomtom that I found on garmin connect and strava
So I agree with DCR … GPS wise it is on par with the 735, the fenix3/5 meaning it is not great at all
While browsing this segment I have found few people using the 910 and it is always spot on …
They want to replace it … but quite frankly I have found few 935 and the track look always bad ( same for 735, 235, 225, Fenix3 , Fenix5)
Hi Nicolas, i dont understand why you kept this watch. This is not normal behavior. You seem to have problems al over the spectrum. Problems that the most of us dont have. Just get a other unit.
My point is that it seems that it is not a problem of my unit but a problem of deisgn(or soft?) of the 935 and all the most recent garmin gps watch
All the segment I have found ( every single one of them) are as bad if you take 735, 935 , fenix 3, fenix 5 …
And every single one of themusing 910 are spot on
To me I either accept that 935 is way worse than 910 ( at least in this context) or I ask for a refund and go to tomtom or Suunto … or I buy an other 910
thanks for the great article, they are alwasy really useful. I was wondering if you could help…
My Dad is looking to buy one of these but he doesn’t have an internet connection in his home (no wifi or mobile data). Will he be able to get the data from the watch to his laptop and/or phone without an internet connection? (maybe by using Bluetooth?)
I’ve had the 935 for 5 days now and I’m having problems with the OHR in certain instances and wondering if anyone has suggestions. I do not run but comparing with my polar chest strap, the resting heart readings and the outdoor and indoor bike heart rates are spot on but when I simply walk or get up from a seated position I seem to get high rates. I used walking as an activity and one day saw erratic readings into the threshold and max range up to 150 bpm when my actual rate was 65-70. The next day the OHR was spot on between 65-70 followed by today when the same erratic readings occurred. I wear the watch exactly the same. I’ve called Garmin support and they tell me to give it more time and try the opposite wrist and turn the watch face inward but none of that has helped so far. Could it possibly be a defective unit?
I really wish Garmin would accept the fact the optical heart rate monitoring is garbage data at worst, and at least, unreliable for many people and make a less expensive version using a good old reliable chest strap! Then I would buy it in a heart beat! (Pun intended) :-). But there is no way I’m going to drop that kind of cash when there are so many complaints regarding functionality and accuracy.
I was a bit concerned with all the comments but I find it very very accurate.
Been running in a river valley with very thick vegetation and the GPS is spot on. Same with HR. It is clear that the response to a sudden change in HR is a bit delayed so not ideal for interval training. But for those of us interested in training at a somewhat constant pace it works great. I am very happy with how it works.
Probably adds very little expense on their part to include the OHR and may even be cheaper than having two separate products. It also probably adds only minimally to size and nothing to battery drain if you turn it off. So if you don’t like it, just don’t use it. Still can use any chest strap you might have laying around. And from a marketing stand point, it is basically necessary today to compete with all the other watches that also have marginal OHR. I too have issues with all OHR devices but many people seem to get very reliable data.
I personally agree with you that it is mostly useless although it does seem to provide reasonable resting HR values. But for me it is definitely useless when combined with the recovery adviser as I can have no confidence that it has reasonable data.
I just don’t agree with this. Anyone who reads online reviews (including Ray’s) knows that there is a limit to the accuracy of OHR. It’s not Garmin’s version of it, or Polar’s, or Apples – it’s just the technology.
Loose rule of thumb: for steady changes in HR, OHR is fine. For sudden changes – it’s slow to catch up.
Basic stuff that you have to accept. If you’re serious about your training and it involves sudden changes in effort intensity (which most will) then you’re going to need a chest strap.My interpretation from poring over various reviews and comparisons is that it’s change that OHR struggles to pick up on as quickly.
But that doesn’t mean that OHR doesn’t have its place. For long slow runs, I’ll often use OHR. And for recovery runs I just don’t see the point in sticking a strap on – there aren’t going to be any significant changes in effort, so the OHR is good for that. Accuracy has always been where I’ve expected it to be and perfectly acceptable; if it wasn’t I’d be looking at things like positioning first, faulty unit second. Because I’ve found the tech reliable.
For races, effort sessions or on the bike then the chest strap comes out.
Different tools for different jobs.
Side note, the 24×7 monitoring which is pretty much a base expectation of a huge chunk of consumers buying any fitness tracker or activity watch only comes from the OHR – there’s no other way to gather that data. So it’s worth having for that reason alone.
Mr T., thanks for the reply. I agree with what you said. I purchased the watch for all its features including activity tracking and resting heart rate and agree the OHR is needed for 24X7 tracking. I find it very accurate for resting heart rate. I also find it very accurate for indoor biking and road biking so no issues there.
My problem has been with walking and normal every day movement. My concern is not the time it takes to catch up to real hear rate but rather inaccurate readings. I’ve gone for walks at 18 minutes per mile, never changing pace, yet two of the three times the readings have gone from the 60’s to 150’s, back to the 60’s and up to 130’s, etc., throughout the entire walk with no change in pace or movement. The other time the readings stayed in the 60’s the whole walk (30 minutes). I wear the watch exactly the same.
I think I can accept I will get sporadic readings rather than return the watch because I assume if readings are accurate for sport activities and sometimes for every day then the watch is likely not defective???????
Hi Jim,
I have had a few issues with the 935 including your reported fluctuations in OHR readings during a brisk walk. See one of my posts above dated 21 June.
I have determined that the OHR has a place but at present (without firmware updates) it does not report (for me) accurately during activities where HR is elevated and/or fluctuating quickly.
So I bought the HR straps Tri and Swim. Now I am getting sensible results.
That is results that I can identify with when viewed on Garmin Connect.
Garmin suggested I disable OHR (in the settings) during a run after describing to them the following anomaly.
If I start a run activity with the OHR enabled and wearing the HR strap, at the end of the activity (when saving) the OHR data is used until you select the option “Download Heart Rate”.
I have saved the activity with OHR data then selected “Download Heart Rate” and viewed the differences between the two results. Apart from differences in average and maximum HR values “Training Effect” can be quite different. Last Friday after loading the HR strap data the Aerobic reading decreased from say 3.0 to 2.3 and Anaerobic increased from 0.3 to 2.0.
I don’t want to spoil things for those of you that have confidence in the OHR readings during a workout, but you wont really know the accuracy until you get a HR strap.
Nick
I just came across a research study in the Journal of the American Medical Association Cardiology. Researchers looked at the accuracy of wrist-based monitors using 4 different monitors. While I didn’t see which brands they used, they found them to be quite inaccurate while running at various speeds as compared to a medical grade ECG monitor. They were off by 9-17%, at times being off by as much as 40 beats! They also tested chest strap monitors and found them to be 99% accurate in the same study. Interesting.
I reckon you are right about the OHR Scott but 9-17% error may be generous.
Today and last Monday I watched the OHR widget measure HR readings that gradually crept as high as 250.
I went on an 11km bush walk last Monday, nothing too strenuous, and noticed the OHR readings 150 plus. I saved the Walk activity and noticed that I reached a max HR of 180 and recorded Aerobic and Anaerobic training effects both 5.0. My Intensity minutes were boosted by over 200; crazy! Garmin are investigating this.
There are some good studies out there, but most screw it up a lot. Which, as I note isn’t to say that all optical HR sensors are good (hardly), but that you still have to follow the instructions…especially researchers.
No, actually the one I found was not the Stanford study but one published by Marc Gillinov, M.D., of the Cleveland Clinic. The study compared readings collected by four different types of wrist-worn monitors – the Fitbit ChargeHR, AppleWatch, Mio Alpha, and Basis Peak – against readings taken by Polar H7 chest strap monitors.
I’m pretty sure Ray linked to the study Scott’s referring to a while back in a “week in review”, and it wasn’t the Stanford study. But I don’t have a link. Basically they were comparing accuracy of OHR vs a medical grade EKG, with a generic chest belt thrown in (I don’t recall that they actually identified the belt). The Apple Watch came out best, but the takeaway that struck me is that a chest belt is better than any OHR by a significant amount, nearly as good as the EKG.
I agree with your take away from the study. The authors of the study pretty much said the same. They indicate the OHR is ok for everyday, around the clock monitoring, but not so good for strenuous exercise.
But the studies looked at wrist based OHR devices, no?
How about something like the Scoche Rhythm which is on the upper arm? That is frankly what I am pretty much consistently now using, and i have found it to be accurate enough for me to feel confident whether running or riding.
But maybe I am just being fooled?
I admit I only use the Garmin 935 OHR more for spot checks and if I just happen not to have the Scosche around.
First, thanks for always doing such a great in depth review. Secondly, I logged into the TP piece and it keeps saying no workouts loaded. I clearly have them on my schedule, but am unsure how to fix this or even log out on the app on the watch and log in again. Can you help?
did you try to upload a course or track from Garmin connect to the device, in best case using an iPad? That would be a general use, if you travel and plan to use the navigation to do a run or bike ride.
I did not find very recent information about that feature. Most reports seem out-dated.
I’d say the worst case would be to try and use an iOS device to do course planning on Garmin units. It’s just horrendous. The best is simply a desktop/laptop computer. I haven’t tried on Android, but I can’t imagine it’s any worse than iOS.
The problem is that you can’t really use the Garmin Connect Course Creator on iOS, it just sucks. Especially if you have to tweak/change/undo a point. You can actually see it in some of my screenshots up above where I tried to fix a course data point from the car at the trailhead that was an accidentally click I made. I eventually gave up and just left with this wonky incorrect route portion at the end of my route. Sigh.
Oh, and I fail to understand how the single company in this entire segment that easily has the most GPS device/technology experience is the one that has the worst GPS route creation experience. And using ‘experience’ is a bit of a strong word, since that generally implies some sort of cohesive occurrence. I can’t say that occurs here.
(As a side note, during this very high I actually filmed an entire rant on this as I hiked along…but the sound came out like crap.)
That site is really great and even free. A one man work. Garmin should hire him.
So I’d take the Garmin connect just as interface to the watch, no need for for map data and creation. Maybe Garmin has even an interface protocol how to send course data to the watch using Bluetooth or Wifi. Do you know?
Yup, familiar with it. There’s lots of good sites like that. But it’s still missing the most important thing: Getting it to the watch.
For that, there’s no solution except wired cable, or first creating it on Garmin Connect (really a desktop – not mobile). Garmin doesn’t support any 3rd party Bluetooth Smart access, except limited Connect IQ things, if you have a Connect IQ app for your platform.
The CIQ app RouteCourse by Mappicus, lets you get routes on to your device wirelessly from a variety of sources I believe. It was mentioned in an earlier comment here. I haven’t personally used it but sounds like what you might be looking for. Given Garmin’s resources and position in the industry, there really is no excuse for not providing better support here, but at least through CIQ functionality, they have made it possible for 3rd parties to fill in some of the gaps.
Completely agree. It’s a total faff going through the routine of making the course (on something other than GC because it’s got poor mapping, in the UK at least), exporting a .gpx, converting the .gpx to something GC will swallow, turning it into an activity, then from that a course…a complete nonsense.
These are the market leaders.
Even Lezyne – newbies to this market, whose back-end software was at best ‘incomplete’ when the first GPS units were released – have better options for courses. At the very least you can just import a .gpx file and have your navigation. Basic stuff that Garmin can’t do.
But…they do a load of other stuff well. It just feels like right now they’re relying on 3rd party developers such as DWMaps to do their job for them.
Exactly. And now with the updated Garmin Connect website, I had to click dozens of times to get to the last activity (2009 is default date for GPX trace with no date) and delete it. Of course, if you do not delete the activity, you cannot upload a new GPX trace… Only geeks figure that out. Nonsense indeed.
One option are the Connect IQ apps like dwMap and routeCourse that allow route creation and upload from phone and PC – unfortunately to follow that course, you need to use the CIQ app, too.
I don’t think that’s the case, that you need to use the dwMap app to follow the course. Garmin added a CIQ feature that allows CIQ apps to hand off courses to a standard activity. My understanding is the only real reason you’d use dwMap would be on a device like the 630 that has no native course support.
I swim, bike and run. Then, I come here and write about my adventures. It’s as simple as that. Most of the time. If you’re new around these parts, here’s the long version of my story.
You'll support the site, and get ad-free DCR! Plus, you'll be more awesome. Click above for all the details. Oh, and you can sign-up for the newsletter here!
Here’s how to save!
Wanna save some cash and support the site? These companies help support the site! With Backcountry.com or Competitive Cyclist with either the coupon code DCRAINMAKER for first time users saving 15% on applicable products.
You can also pick-up tons of gear at REI via these links, which is a long-time supporter as well:
With TPC (The Pro's Closet), you'll save $40 on purchases over $200 with coupon code DCRAIN40 for tech and non-tech purchases!
Alternatively, for everything else on the planet, simply buy your goods from Amazon via the link below and I get a tiny bit back as an Amazon Associate. No cost to you, easy as pie!
You can use the above link for any Amazon country and it (should) automatically redirect to your local Amazon site.
Want to compare the features of each product, down to the nitty-gritty? No problem, the product comparison data is constantly updated with new products and new features added to old products!
Wanna create comparison chart graphs just like I do for GPS, heart rate, power meters and more? No problem, here's the platform I use - you can too!
Think my written reviews are deep? You should check out my videos. I take things to a whole new level of interactive depth!
Smart Trainers Buyers Guide: Looking at a smart trainer this winter? I cover all the units to buy (and avoid) for indoor training. The good, the bad, and the ugly.
Check out
my weekly podcast - with DesFit, which is packed with both gadget and non-gadget goodness!
Get all your awesome DC Rainmaker gear here!
FAQ’s
I have built an extensive list of my most frequently asked questions. Below are the most popular.
You probably stumbled upon here looking for a review of a sports gadget. If you’re trying to decide which unit to buy – check out my in-depth reviews section. Some reviews are over 60 pages long when printed out, with hundreds of photos! I aim to leave no stone unturned.
I travel a fair bit, both for work and for fun. Here’s a bunch of random trip reports and daily trip-logs that I’ve put together and posted. I’ve sorted it all by world geography, in an attempt to make it easy to figure out where I’ve been.
The most common question I receive outside of the “what’s the best GPS watch for me” variant, are photography-esq based. So in efforts to combat the amount of emails I need to sort through on a daily basis, I’ve complied this “My Photography Gear” post for your curious minds! It’s a nice break from the day to day sports-tech talk, and I hope you get something out of it!
Many readers stumble into my website in search of information on the latest and greatest sports tech products. But at the end of the day, you might just be wondering “What does Ray use when not testing new products?”. So here is the most up to date list of products I like and fit the bill for me and my training needs best! DC Rainmaker 2023 swim, bike, run, and general gear list. But wait, are you a female and feel like these things might not apply to you? If that’s the case (but certainly not saying my choices aren’t good for women), and you just want to see a different gear junkies “picks”, check out The Girl’s Gear Guide too.
Received my 935 from Clever Training this afternoon. Haven’t worked out with it yet, but first impression is that this is a home run for Garmin. Makes my 920xt look and feel like a cinder block on my wrist. Build quality seems good. Software is reasonably intuitive (at least by Garmin standards). All good.
Hey, when did you place your order? I’m trying to establish an ETA for mine. I preordered on Amazon. I’m thinking I should have ordered with Clever Training.
From what I can tell, it is pre-order everywhere – nobody seems to have it – I tried Clever Training, Amazon, REI, etc. Even called the Garmin store in Miami and they told me they did not have it yet, that it will take a couple of weeks. So, these people that got it already might have been very lucky, the beneficiaries of an early batch. Or please, explain better you secret for ordering the watch. Otherwise, I have to think amazon is as good as any other channel.
I ordered mine at 8am EDT from CT on the morning it was released. It shipped the next afternoon (3/30). I received it yesterday (4/1). No secret. Just unusually decisive for me. 😉
Lucky dog! Enjoy the watch 🙂
Ray,
I’m confused by this statement,”QuickFit bands are still compatible with the FR935″. So I understand, you can’t clip them on like you would do with the Fenix 5 bands, right? You’d have to use the tool set to put them on, right? Thanks in advance.
Tool needed to remove basic band and replace the pins. Then the QuickFit band can be placed and changed easily.
Thanks. Do you know if that tool comes with the watch as well? Or, is that a separate expense? Do you need to get new pins as well? I assume the quickfit 22 bands would not come with the pins or the tool.
Good question. Looking at Garmin and CleverTraining websites, my understanding is that the screwdivers only come with the 935 replacement bands (or the quick release kit), not the 935 itself, not the quickfit band. If confirmed that would mean that if you want to go from a regular 935 band to a Quickfit band, you need to find the screwdivers at your favorite tool store (or buy a quickrelease kit on top).
Anyone who received the 935… Do you confirm?
I ordered a standalone QuickFit 22 watch band (amp yellow) on amazon (certified garmin product) for when my 935 comes in so I can switch to the quickfit bands. The quickfit band that was delivered actually came with the 2 screwdrivers you are referring to in the box actually. I wasn’t worried since I still had the tools from my old 910xt but good to know that if you don’t have the tools already, it WILL come with your order of separate watch bands! Just FYI
Did it also come with replacement pins? If so, are the pins any different in size to the standard ones? Thanks.
I did the same but unfortunately the Fenix5 bands will not be as tight on the wrist as the 935 original band (thats only if you have tiny wrists like mine).
I’m a competitive runner, and having given this a lot of thought, this would be the perfect running watch if it was:
1) Slightly smaller, the same size as the 630 / 735 – for small wrists the F5 and 935 is a bit too big
2) Had a lightweight aluminium or titanium body, to give it a premium feel whilst keeping it lightweight
3) Was the same price as 735 was on launch – why should a plastic watch cost £469? Apple Watch Series 2 42mm is only £399, and it’s made entirely of lightweight aluminium
4) Touch screen, like the 630
I am a competitive runner too and am happy to go forward with the 935. I have been wearing a 735 as well as the 935 since got it to compare. I don’t notice any real difference between the two in wearability.
If looks are important, looks better than the 630/735 to me.
Price probably reflects the amount of effort that goes into the overall product relative to the number of likely buyers. Apple can undoubtedly pitch their stuff less due to huge sales but that is a very very basic as a running watch. Vastly overpriced for that alone.
Touchscreen – take it or leave it. Fraction quicker to change data screens, frustrating to work through the menus.
This should have launched at £400, same way the Fenix 5 launched at £500. £469 is Garmin taking us for fools.
Which is why I’ll wait until the price drops before getting it.
Realistically, you won’t see any price drops till 2018 for these series of watches.
That’s OK, I can wait.
Also I’m not a big fan of the exclusivity deal they’ve struck with Wiggle. Nothing against Wiggle really, I’ve placed a few orders with them and I’ve been happy with the service. It’s just the principle of the thing that makes me want to wait until it’s available from a different retailer. CleverTraining UK would be great with your discount if they hadn’t priced it over RRP!
I ordered one from Wiggle for £422 with 10% discount. If you’ve spent £100 in the last 12 months you get 10% and if spent more than £500 I *think* it’s 17% – so those prices are pretty reasonable after the discount.
I notice you have been wearing both 735 and 935, I have been looking at the 735 for a while and now the 935 is out I cannot decide. Quite a big price difference, is it justified? I also have small wrists so would the 735 be better?
I’m trying to find the stand out tech differences that accounts for the price jump and maybe they will be lost on me! Current set up is vivoactive and an old 310 for race day for tri mode which has had its day!!
Any help appreciated!
Thanks
Hi there,
I currently have the 235, and was going to upgrade to the F5, I think the 935 will be better suited for me.
One question, I tend to use connect to load my workouts. One thing that really annoyed me with the 235 was that the alert beeps were very low, so if I was running nerar cars I could barely here the beeps.
Are the beep louder on the 935?
I know its a minor detail, but just wondered.
Thank you.
Can you turn off the optical HRM? I like wearing my watches over long sleeves or over my wind breaker. I also think that the more exposed the watch is, the better track you can get. If you do pair it with a scoche, can you force the watch to only use that?
yes and yes – if you pair to an external HRM then it will be use that before OHR so, as such, no need to turn off OHR.
Hi Ray (and anyone else who might be able to answer this question),
I have an old Fenix, I think it’s a 2? It had a bunch of “outdoor” specific features, such as warning about approaching storms, displaying sunrise and sunset, moonrise and moonset, and other stuff like that. It had a compass screen, a barometer screen, etc. Do newer Fenixes (i.e. 5) still have this stuff? And if so, when you say the 935 is just a Fenix 5 in a different case, does that mean the 935 has it all too? I’m sure this info is in your comprehensive reviews somewhere, I apologize for having to ask.
Thank you
yes and yes basically
BUt doesn’t´t it look like a 735, no wait a fenix 5s, no maybe a 235 or….
same case and same chip, same morons buying the same watch over and over again
Garmin sure is milking the same cow over and over again
No need to buy one, no need to swear at those who might want to either.
Ray,
It would be helpful if you would include a size comparison picture that includes the previous generation, in this case the FR920XT! I can’t see how the 935 compares to the 920 on my arm. You only show a comparison to the round Fenix/735 models.
For the size comparison, see the below Danish test:
link to pushperformance.dk
That site is like a low budget Danish version of DCRainmaker. They use the scales, but he can only afford a cardboard paper towel tube!
Is it possible to listen to music through wireless earphones with this watch?
Unfortunately no music storage so you would need to run with your phone or other music device.
Sorry for the off topic in advance and don’t know if you have talked about it elsewhere (if so, point me in the right direction) but how do you compare the Sailfish with your older and defunct blueseventy?
are watch faces same on 935 and fenix5?
Really like the design for the 935. The size of the 235 with the design of the 935 would be the perfect everyday watch for me. But as a casual runner it’s hard to justify buying a 935.
That’s pretty much how I feel. I can’t justify getting a 935 to only track my runs and casual bike rides. If I did get it,I’d still be using my vivoactive to track my soccer games.
I’m hoping a 235 replacement will come out soon. Hopefully a forerunner 935 varriable with less features. Time will tell.
@D, how is the vivoactive for tracking soccer? GPS effective? I’ve been using a basic vivofit 2 and now 3 with HR strap, but considering a watch with GPS and built in HR. Honestly thinking about this 935 as well, very tempting.
Hi Ray,
I’m curious what power meters you’ve tested the Garmin FR935 with?
I personally like the improved HR measurement interval, just need to figure out what I can do with the sleeping metrics. 🙂
And foremost, good to see a little more customer-friendly price-point.
// Remo
I’ve tested it with: PowerTap P1, Power2Max NG, Tacx Neo, Quarq D-Zero, ROTOR 2INPower, and probably one or two others I’m forgetting.
All the above were mostly via ANT+, except the Quarq and P1 which were also via BLE.
No Stages? Already the usual reports with watches coming in of dropouts left, right and centre with that PM.
Thanks for sharing Ray, very much appreciated. No dual sided power meter ?
P1 and ROTOR are both dual sided.
I did a ride with Stages on Friday, no issues.
Hi Ray,
Did you have any issues with the P1 pedals on ANT+ with the 935 and drop outs of one pedal (or at least showing a ‘half’ power value)?
I seem to be getting this on occasion – although if I wake the pedals up and connect and calibrate with an 820 first (and leave that connected) the 935 behaves ok?? Trying to work out where the issue is???
No issues with the P1 on the FR935. And the vast majority of the time it was paired to that over the last month and a half.
Aerobars or regular road bike? The 935/Stages works ok on my road bike (wrist/hands out to side and closer to Stages sensor), but dismal on my TT/Aerobars where my wrist/hands are out in front and further from Stages sensor. I end up having to record my bike segment during Tri/Du with my Garmin Edge and overwrite the crappy power data from the 935.
Hi Ray,
Thanx for the review, this is definitely the watch to go for, for me, as coming from the 920XT.
I have a question about the OHR vs HR strap. For which functions besides the Lactate Threshold, the HR strap is required? Not for VO2 you state, but any other values/functions?
– The Stress Score is also based on your HRV and in the maual of the 935 at it states you have to perform a 3 minute test with a HR chest strap.
– In the manual at “Getting Your FTP Estimate” it states that you must pair a chest heart rate monitor besides the power meter (in your review you already suggest to wear a HR chest strap due to accuracy issues of the OHR)
Any other?
Can’t think of anything else.
Ray,
Playing around with the settings on my 935. Noticed a setting for “3D Speed” and “3D Distance.” The manual says it’s what you might expect: “calculate your speed or distance using both your elevation change and your horizontal movement over ground.” The default (for running, at least) has them off. I can’t recall reading or hearing you say much (anything?) about this setting. Any thoughts on it? Thanks.
I’ve talked a little about them in the past in skiing and such, which is about the only place it really matters (or other falling of the side of mountain/airplanes/etc… type activities).
Details from a much older post: link to dcrainmaker.com
What are your thoughts on having the 3d speed/distance setting on all the time, or at the very least on for something like a trail run with significant hills? I just completed a 20k trail race but the 935 measured it about a mile short. Would the 3d settings make much of a difference?
I am currently looking to upgrade from a 910xt and was pretty pumped about the Fenix 5 BUT now here comes the 935. By comparison there is virtually nothing different about the two watches other than plastic and wifi. I’ve been looking around and it seems that the 935 is being labeled as a watch that you would want if you’re a triathlete and the Fenix looks like it is more adept at trail running/adventure-ing outside. Why? I primarily trail run but can’t see 100 dollars for for the Fenix. Any thoughts or perspective?
Bit of a blur now that the 935 has all the trail running/adventure features that the standard F5 and F5S has. Really I think it comes down to what you like the look of the most and balance that with the relative weights.
I believe the differences are
The 935 is plastic but also lighter
The 935 is easier to use if you plan to attach to you’re bike during the bike portion of a Triathlon
The Fenix 5 is a hgher quality metal material but weighs more however it has “Visual GPS”
I hope this helps and I also have a question regarding the last item Imentioned. Can soemone explain how the GPS?Nav works on each watch?
Do they both offer turn by turn Nav that you can follow downloaded routes?
Tom,
What’s the “Visual GPS” you write about on the fenix 5?
I assume he is talking about the map features on the Fenix
There are two types of turn by turn, fake turn by turn and real turn by turn. The 5 and 5S and 935 (and a lot of other watches) can do fake turn by turn. You get a course from somewhere like RideWithGPS with embedded cue points and a track and the watch knows 1) you’re supposed to be on the track, and 2) it’s supposed to display whatever message is attached to a cue point (“Turn right on Main Street”) whenever it gets within a certain distance of a certain point. But the watch itself has no “routable” maps (in the case of the 5 and 5S, not even a picture it’s supposed to show), and absolutely no idea that there are roads, trails, etc. that the course if following. With the 5X, which does real turn by turn, the device itself has a digital map. It understands that there are roads etc., knows where they go, and can follow them all by itself. It displays the appropriate map to show you your surroundings, and can generate routes along roads etc., including turn directions, (“Turn right on Main Street”, and it knows what Main Street is and where it goes) all by itself. For the vast majority of cases, where the course is followed exactly as you planned, you can’t tell the difference. But it helps in cases where you can’t follow the course as planned that the device itself can reroute you, navigate to a point off the planned course, etc. I’m not sure how well the 5X can do this type of thing because of the size, but in principle it can act as a full navigation device, unlike the 5, 5s and 935.
In Europe the Fenix5 glass and 5S glass are available with discounts and, in some cases, cashback. This renders them far cheaper than the 935.
I would have bought the 935 if it was substantially cheaper or had similar discounts, but it currently does not. The 5S feels solid, as does the 5. The 935 feels plastic and does not feel like it will last years and years. The battery life on the 935 is great, whereas my current 5S is, due to size, lacking. I’ll live with it.
Paul,
I am planning to use the following method to get a RidewithGPS course to my 935. Will this give me “cue” points with the message displayed ?
I ask before I test, as I don’t want to do anything that will mess up the watch and cause me to reset to factory settings
link to ridewithgps.zendesk.com
Yes, that will work. The GPSies bit is the part that’s most important.
Hi Ray,
Thank you for the review! great as always and it all gets even better!
Quick question, to you or fellow readers, why does the 935 appear on CT EU to have a higher price than Garmin DE and even F5?
I do have a F3 non HR but was interested to upgrade – no time pressure as my F3 can easily still go long.
I am just wondering with any of the Garmin products, but particularly the 935 or Fenix, if you know if there is a way to respond to a text (like quick reply) or answer the phone? I know these can be done on the Apple watch but do you know of any other athlete watch that can do it as well? or if the Nike Apple watch has a way to connect to Training Peaks easily? I’m torn.
Thanks for your reviews. They are extremely helpful!
You can answer/decline an incoming call and even dial back one you have received but you will actually need the phone to say/hear anything. Not seen a way to respond to a text. Otherwise Apple Watch and 935 is like chalk and cheese. Former probably best smart watch but with somewhat basic sport tracking capability and the 935 is a state of the art sports/outdoor/triathlon GPS watch with some smart watch features.
Anyone order through Amazon and get a shipping date? I’ve read multiple dates for availability to ship- April 3rd, 7th, and 14th. Madness.
I ordered it on 3/29 when it said it would ship in 2-5 weeks and haven’t heard any update yet.
Arghh! You’re in front of me in the line for Amazon orders 🙂
Aside from the swimming capabilities would there be any functionality lost from using an HRM-Run from Forerunner 620 with this watch? Or would it be advisable to get the bundle and upgrade to the HRM-Tri for running/biking?
Assuming you have the latest HRM-Run firmware then no difference for run/bike. The HRM-Tri adds ability to store HR for later download when swimming.
I have not seen you comment on run pace accuracy. My 920 seems to take forever to catch up to my pace. There is a terrible lag.
How are the 935 and the Fenix 5 in this respect.
link to youtube.com is for the Fenix 5 but will be similar
Thanks.
My 920 is not close to that.
I notice this with my FR235 too, pace is stable but for uphill / downhill seems I’m past it when it starts showing. Probably at least 30s smoothing going on. For bigger pace changes it’s near instant though so seems there is kind of multi stage filter going on.
Will be interesting to compare to newer generation watches, but probably foot pod still wins for pacing.
Is Amazon shipping the 935 already?
I placed my order on the 30th through Amazon. I haven’t gotten any word on a shipping date.
Kinda sad to read “fabled 635”. Does that mean “I don’t know”, or does it mean it won’t happen?
I’m not a competitive runner, but I run a lot, and I cross train, and I have a downtown office type of job.
When will those of us get a watch like the 935, trim the triathlon features and make the emphasis on running. Keep all the fitness features (save for FTP. That’s insecure) and add a bright screen that will upset android and sacrifice some battery life, while still able to run a marathon.
That’s my dream 635. Or a better, elegant M600. 🙂
It means there’s no FR635. There’s logically no reason for it to be honest. This is a plastic unit just like a FR635 would have probably been (following in the footsteps of all past Garmin high-end running watches). It would have had these same features, etc…
No 635 but will there be a 235 replacement? Garming doesn’t have any new products in that price range. The 235 will be 2 years old this year.
Naive question- if I want to use the 935 for treadmill runs to see HR, distance, and pace, only, do I need to buy the bundle for the strap or use a footpod or is the watch by itself adequate for the basic stats? Thanks in advance for the answer!
If you use a treadmill quite a lot then a foot pod will give better results and would advise using one. For occasional use then the pace from the watch is generally in the ballpark especially on runs at your normal steady pace – important as the watch “learns” this from outdoor runs by modelling your armswing rates to pace.
Garmin peeps, fix the Garmin Connect mobile app for crying out loud. You put the smart watch functionality, make it work 100% of the bloody time.
Hello. Does anybody know, where can I see fr 935 photos with other quick fit straps attached (leather, metal, etc)?
Hi, Ray
Thanks for a great review, as always!
Do you think, in general, that Fenix 5 series and FR935 are overpriced?
Is the increase in price compared to their predecessors justified or not considering their hardware and software characteristics?
Since Garmin is updating their watches on a yearly basis, we can expect enormous prices in a year or two.
Goran
I don’t think it’s overpriced per se. If we look at the FR935, basically in the past that line has been at $399 (310XT/910XT/etc…), though the 920XT went to $449 if I remember correctly. However, none of those had a HR sensor in it, so you plopped down another $50-70 for that. So prices have risen slightly (basically $100 more), but you do get an optical HR sensor. And you get a crap-ton more features than in the past.
As for the Fenix 5 series, to me it seems a bit high, but the market continues to purchase in droves. So in that sense it’s hard to argue with the pricing of a more stylish watch with non-plastic materials being more pricey.
The thing that bothers me is that they no longer give you a choice about HR. I don’t want an optical HR sensor in my watch. (I pay zero attention to the numbers my Apple Watch records, because they’re all out of context and meaningless. Why was my HR x at that time? Who knows?). I have two Garmin hardshell HR belts that I’ve been using for years. For much of the year, any watch I have will be worn outside clothing, especially for my primary use, cross country skiing, and so the optical HR won’t work anyway. If the HR is the thing jacking up the prices, I really wish they’d produce some models without it.
You certainly have a choice to still wear an external HR strap – I do for all my timed activities (and indeed for a few things like lactate threshold and stress test you actually need one) but OHR is handy as a backup and/or for resting HR observations. I think OHR is getting a bit like having GPS in a sports watch – it is now expected rather than a bonus that GPS was at one time. Anyway the OHR sensor is now so discreet that on a blind test I don’t think I tell if was wearing a watch with one or not.
All about supply and demand. My feeling, and that’s just that, a feeling, is that Garmin is raising prices because the bottom end of the market for “casual” sports is going to be occupied, sooner rather than later, by smartwatches. These are not there yet for “serious” athletes because of battery life, platform, and other reasons and thus, we must suck it up and put up with Garmin protecting their income by hiking prices.
Having said that, I think the price of the 935 is OK in the US, and terribly overpriced everywhere else. At £400 it would have been day-one purchase, at its current price of £470, no freaking way.
Agree on supply & demand although I could not resist. BTW you can get very near £400 if are “loyal” to one current UK retailer and somewhere between the two with a DCR discount just by entering it.
OK, I can ignore the oHR, and if it’s only adding, say, $10 to the price I don’t mind. If it’s adding $100 to the price, I’d rather not have it at all. A 5X without the oHR is preferable to me than a 5X with it. If they made the oHR as a pop in extra sensor, that would be ideal.
Hi Ray,
Thanks a lot for you review. It tells that there is a swimrun mode, but maybe you just copied it from the fenix. Can you confirm that there is a built-in support?
Yes, you can do it one of two ways:
A) You can use the dedicated Swim-Run mode, which will iterate forever back and forth between openwater swimming and trail running
B) You can do a manual multisport mode, and use the lower left button to change sports manually on the fly during a recording. Also as many times as you’d want.
Personally, I’d use Option A since it quicker.
thanks for a great review! i have a few questions:
1) can the default sport mode changed to something else than running (when pressing the top right button)?
2) can the order of the sport modes be customized?
i’m wondering this as i’m doing more workouts at the gym, than running (or biking).
thanks!
1) It defaults to the last sport you used (and that you saved an activity from, discarded activities don’t count).
2) You can customize the specific items in the list, though I don’t see a way to customize the order they appear.
The Fenix 5 allows you to reorder at will, using Reorder App in the primary settings menu on any given sport. Not sure about the 935, but I thought it would be the same.
Ahh, good point, forgot you had to dig in one level deeper. I had thought it was there on other models. But yes, if you dig within a given sport on the FR935, it will do that as well.
> It defaults to the last sport you used
Not that I have seen – do a bike (or just go there) and then go back to LPM (clock screen) and it reverts to my “favourite” (and the default) of running. The 735 does what you say.
Thanks for another detailed review! 🙂
I’m waiting for a Garmin wearable with ant+ fe-c, does the 935 include that?
No – it’s mentioned in the product comparison tool.
Thanks for the review.
I find the First Beat’s data very interesting.
Since Garmin has licensed its use, do you think that it will eventually come to all high end Garmin products such has the Edge computers?
I am still using my Edge 800, working just fine, waiting for something “major” to upgrade …
Steph
Some of it is already in the Edge 520/820/1000 – see link to firstbeat.com and filter on Garmin.
Fair enough, and if it only raises the price by, say, $10 I don’t mind just ignoring the oHR. But if it raises the price by $100, then I want a 5X without the oHR.
I would be confident in predicting that you won’t see a Garmin high-end watch without OHR going forwards. In fact you might not see any new Garmin watch without it.
Hi Guys,
Sorry if somebody has asked this already… basically i have the 935 but i also have the 520 bike computer. i prefer to use the bike computer on the bike as it is larger etc. i also use the chest hear rate monitor and wouldn’t generally wear the watch whilst out cycling. So my question really is that when i upload my cycle onto garmin connect, is there a way i can get this onto my watch? The widgets have weekly totals etc and last activity, which i’d like to see on my watch if possible? I like to look at these when i’m bored in the office!!
Im not sure this can happen or maybe I’m looking in the wrong place.
Appreciate the help 🙂 thanks !!
You can put activities on the watch (put the FIT files in NEWFILES folder when connected to a computer). However only stuff actually recorded on the watch will “count” for history totals and the Firstbeat stuff like VO2 Max etc
I use an Edge as my main unit for cycling but wear the watch anyway – partly for the reasons just stated and also good as a backup.
I wonder if after turning off the GPS and measuring the pace from the foot pod is it also rounded to 5 s? This was for previous Garmin models, which I consider to be a disadvantage.
Still 5s yes.
Thank S to your review Ray I’m now the proud owner of a 935 having upgraded from my much loved 220.
My question is I’m looking for a screen protector for my watch, what other Garmin watches have the same dial/face size as the 935? There don’t appear to be any screen protectors out yet for the 935 so if it has the same size face as a different model I’ll pick some up for that model. The 220’s face is slightly larger for example.
Cheers
Never use them myself but punch Forerunner 935 Screen Protector into Amazon UK and one product comes up.
Matt
I am using a glass screen protector for the 735. Fits almost perfect as the screen size is very similar. Can’t remember which brand of protector I bought but there are several on amazon available. For my 230 I really liked a brand called Rerii.
Thanks Josh, duly ordered 🙂
I rec’d my 935 from CT yesterday and have been wearing it since. HR and sleep detected quite accurately. Size is nothing short of perfect. The 230 had been my daily watch as I loved the size and weight, and I felt the 735 was too small for me while the F5 was just way too heavy for me. The 935 is attractive, the band is extremely comfortable especially without an OHR bump of any significance, menu is intuitive, it is clearly my go to device for the next several years. I believe this will be my first real replacement for good ole trusty 305 which I still have. For those wondering about a screen protector, I had an extra 735 screen protector (HD glass) that I put on the 935 and it fits almost perfect. The 230 screen protector I have is too big. Looking forward to my first few activities with this beautiful device beginning later this morning. Side note I do not go into an office on a daily basis, so for me the more luxury look of the F5 is not necessary. That being said I am in meetings regularly and won’t hesitate for a moment to wear the 935. Love it. Thanks Ray, and thanks CT, and thanks Garmin too!
First activity done, a short 5k training run. Zero issue with crossover of HR/Cadence, pace distance cadence were all spot on as compared to my usual route with my Garmin 230 both with and without Stryd, I felt the OHRM worked very well as I am in tune with what an effort and corresponding HR feels like. No spikes in HR during run, everything seemed super steady, notifications worked perfectly, audio prompts were excellent. No complaints, only Kudos.
Very interesting. Can you continue keep us informed? Maybe sometimes wearing also a chest strap with another watch for comparison? thank you for the feedback
Hi Josh,
How does the screen of the 935 compare to the 735xt? Does the extra resolution and 64 colours add to the clarity? Is there a major improvement, or is it slight?
Thanks,
Chris,
I FIND THE SCREEN TO BE PLAIN AWESOME, THAT SIMPLE. I just received my HRM Tri from CT today which I ordered using points earned from the 935. Ill run some comparisons on HR using that against the 935 OHRM and report back. Hoping to get a solid run in Thursday as well. For those of you waiting, I believe it is a product well worth the wait. The email/text/etc notification vibration is also very different than on the 230, whereas now it’s more of two short pulses which definitely grabs my attention better and separates itself from the vibration that occurs during auto lap.
For the features that require a HRM strap, can you use an ‘old’ Garmin HRM strap (such as HRM3) or does it require a HRM Run/Tri?
Yes you could. Only need the HRM Run/Tri for the running dynamics and the HRM-Tri for swimming if want your HR there.
I love how we’re all vicariously living through others who have been fortunate enough to get their 935 while we’re patiently (*cough* not patiently) waiting. I’m starting to think I may have a problem…
I haven’t been so patient but really don’t have much of a choice! I haven’t wanted to message Clever Training about it as I’m sure plenty of others have already so I’ve been checking here for updates.
Same here Blaine! I check back at these comments quite a bit. And sadly I have messaged Clever Training. The first shipment they received are shipping out to their March 29th orders. They’re supposed to get another shipment this week sometime. I placed my order with Amazon on the 30th and definitely don’t want to lose my place in line at this point. I do wish I had placed my order with Clever Training. I haven’t heard of anyone getting theirs through Amazon yet. I’m starting to suspect my Forerunner 630 knows I’m about to cheat on it because it’s been acting funny. Shut off on me today. It knows!
I ordered from Amazon about noon EST on the 29th and haven’t gotten a shipment notice. Right now they say 4/14-5/1 estimated.
Clever Training is in the same boat for me. Got an email from them today stating 935 deliveries (watch only) are delayed due to production delays. Should not expect delivery until end of April… And I ordered March 29th 5pm CST!
Yep I got the same notice. Hopefully we’re able to get some of those that “trickle in” over the next few weeks. I ordered at about 2 pm eastern so I don’t doubt I’m lower on the list of Mar 29 purchases.
Sorry that you all are having to wait. All I’ll say is, in my view, it’s worth the wait. I was one of the lucky ones in the first CT shipment. So far, I couldn’t be happier with the 935.
Second activity today, treadmill easy effort for 6 miles. OHR performed exactly as I would have expected from the chest strap. At no point did I see any spikes or dropouts. At no point did I see any crossover between HR/Cadence. I was using my Stryd for pace and distance and cadence so not sure if that had any affect on anything. In the past I had no luck with any of Garmin’s elevate sensors. What I believe separates the 935 is the soft malleable band, the thinness of the 935, and how the contour of the watch conforms to my wrist much better than any of the previous devices including the Fenix 5 which I had and returned almost immediately due to the size and weight. What really impressed me was that my sleep last night was complete crap, including waking up once, and GC shows only 2 very short periods of deep sleep with everything else light sleep, and an awake period which I agree with. The 935 is very comfortable to have on your wrist 24/7.
Brilliant! Waiting for other outdoor runs reviews!
Thanks for the updates Josh. Please keep them coming. I was one of the unlucky ones who ordered on the morning of 3/30, and now am delayed a month. Ugh.
My first run with it I can’t provide a GPX file due to it being to/from my home, but the 935 and Fenix 5 distances were the same, but the 935 track was much tighter and closer to reality than the Fenix 5. It was road and only 3 miles, but definitely shows improvement. (Fenix 5 was on the beta firmware, 935 was on the latest as well)
I will be testing trail soon.
Matthew, any update on your trail runs, how the 935 performs versus the fenix 5 in terms of GPS track?
Any news on us shipping? I like how garmin says they are “shipping” on launch date and clearly that was a bold faced lie.
I agree with you Paul. If not a bold face lie, then perhaps a tiny white lie. Seems awfully coincidental that a lot of us won’t get the actual watch until late April. I had this same thing happen to me when I purchased the 910XT years ago. Ended up waiting for 3 months to get it.
Well, they did ship. There’s not really any doubt there. You can see plenty of posts in the Garmin forums for folks with units.
But like any large product launch, they don’t have enough product to fulfill orders on day 1 or week 1. No different than Apple. If you didn’t order the Apple Watch on Day 1 when it first came out, the wait was 2-3 months. And weeks is the norm for other Apple products too if you don’t order in the first hours.
FWIW, I’ve had my watch for a couple days, 2 runs, and battery still at 80%. That’s pretty darn good I believe.
For my meeting this evening I did my usual walk up 8 flights of stairs to the board room for a little more exercise, and HR responded swiftly and the displayed rate felt what I believe it should be. Again, I feel in tune enough with my body that I know what a low 50s RHR feels like versus an easy effort mid 130s feels like.
when will this product become available? some people said they got it already, but I called Clever Training, REI, I even call the Garmin store in Miami and they still don’t know when it will become available. Not even Amazon has a estimated date. It might take a couple of months before it hits the road – that is how it looks like
It’s been shipping, including from Clever Training (you can find people here who have received units), and a number of other smaller retailers have posted photos of arrived units. You can see those in the Garmin forums for example.
Most shipping estimates show more units arriving in the next few weeks, depending on where you are/were in the pre/backorder queue. I don’t think you’re looking at a couple months here.
Yup — ordered 9am EST on first day available and received mine earlier this week from Clever Training US.
This device is fakenews! Alternative facts! Didn’t find one lousy shop selling it. Nothing on Amazon! Nor on eBay!
And here I thought I was taking it hard…
Anyone else have a Fenix 5 and waiting on the 935 to ship (from CT in my case) to compare? I keep waffling on whether reduced weight will mean that much to me. Been a longtime Forerunner user (205, 310, 620, 920). I plan to use one of the 2 (F5 or 935) as a daily driver (returning the loser). The Fenix does look sharp in an office setting, but it is heavy.
From the Garmin forums it appears that 935 does seem to have slightly better GPS tracking results so far than the F5, but of course the sample size is small, and it’s early days for both devices.
I don’t have a Fenix 5, but I do have a 935. I previously had a 920xt. I cannot get over have small and light-weight the 935 is. Makes the 920xt seem like a brick on my wrist in comparison. I’ve been wearing the 935 24/7, including to work. It’s perhaps not as nice as the F5, but it sure is a lot more professional looking than the 920xt. It’s a subdued black watch. I’ve had it for nearly a week now, and I’m really very, very happy with it.
I am in a similar situation as you, except I cancelled my F5 order altogether. I come from F3 and am looking forward to a lighter watch with a cleaner bezel. I hope the 935 looks good with the F5 metal band for the office.
Did you purchase F5 with metal band? Like others here, would love to see what a 935 with metal band would look like. Main concern is a color mismatch between metal band and 935 bezel.
I just have the standard/silicone band. And thanks David.
FWIW, I think a metal band with the 935 would not look so great. The watch is plastic. Gotta go all in on the plastic.
After a 1 hour intense weight training session this morning I took a short break and decided to go out for a fast run so I could see how the 935 reacted and post for my fellow readers. No surprises. Tracks on GC super tight, as good as my 230 was (and those were the best of any Garmin device I’ve had until the 935 came along). OHR did great, and since this was my usual route I knew where my HR should be trending, i.e., up/down/holding steady.
The comfort of having to wear the 935 slightly snug is perfectly fine due to its thin size and light weight. Previously I’ve found other OHR devices less than comfortable.
Also, FWIW, I did check OHR during my lifting session. It actually responded well for me in between sets when my forearm/wrist muscles weren’t engaged.
First run with both the 935 and 920 with HRM-TRI. HR tracks very close (never more than 2 BPM out), although GPS varied by 1% low on 935 vs 920 and TomTom Spark.
Not as classy looking as the Fenix 5 (which I really wanted) but the light weight makes up for it. This is a sports watch after all! WiFi upload is definitely a bonus and I can’t imagine putting a quick-fit strap on as the stretchy black one is fine. Also fits under shirt cuffs better.
The number of metrics and custom screens is amazing, almost too much data.
Is the accuracy of GPS higher on the 935 compared to Fenix 5 due to plastic case in the 935? I guess that the GPS antenna is the same on the 935 and Fenix 5.
I wouldn’t overthink that assumption too much. There are so many factors that contribute to GPS accuracy, and I don’t see anything that’s really indicative of a trend either way from the data I’ve seen in the forums.
Many times folks try to ‘find blame’ on a given component, when in reality it’s often something far more random and specific to that environment and that person and some other factor.
That’s a good point, you almost never see two or more people going out with the same model at same time and then comparing,
EVERYONE!!!! Garmin forums is reporting http://www.runningwarehouse.com has the 935 in stock ready to ship. Just put my order in. Fingers crossed they haven’t ran out.
Danny is that real?! I saw it too. It I’m so worried it’s not true lol
I took a shot and put my order in. The site says “in stock.” I also got a delivery date for April 12th. I kind of figure between this order and a pre-order on Amazon I should be good. I can always cancel one when I get more confirmation that I am receiving the 935. The site still says “in stock” today.
It now says in stock May 1st.
Aww shucks sorry folks. I was just getting ready to comment that I talked with Runners Warehouse and confirmed my order for it to be shipped Wednesday for anyone else who was interested. I’d say the few they had went fast. Hope everyone lucks out and gets theirs sooner!
Will the Garmin 935 support the Tacx Neo Smart indoor trainer?
How many bike will the 935 independently track? My old Polar RCX5 track my road bike and 2 mountain bikes
If you mean does it have FE-C control then no (see features tables above). But it will happily pair to the Neo’s power meter.
Garmin watches don’t really track bikes per se – you only pair to the sensors on them. Mileage recording by bike can be done in Garmin Connect or in 3rd party apps like Strava.
In the swimming section of the feature comparison table there is an ‘indoor auto-pause’ row – does this represent automatic pause during rest? Or is this for pre-programmed workout intervals?
Yes would like to know this as well – many thanks
Wahooo! I am impressed by your presentation. I have a simple question. Have you tested accuracy of the GPS with and without Glonass? Because on my Suunto Traverse, paradoxe when I am using both system, it is give me more discrepancies !!! THANK YOU very much !
That’s not possible. You must use it wrong.
It technically is possible to actually have worse GPS tracks in GLONASS mode. It’s rare, and is almost 100% based on whatever is specific to that environment/terrain. But it happens. My guess (completely random finger in the wind guess) is that it’s probably 3-5% of cases GLONASS makes it worse.
Yes have seen reports on the Garmin forums of sometimes using GLONASS being worse with any device. The usual advice is if you think your tracks are poor with GPS, try also with GLONASS but go back to GPS if no better. What of course is generally unclear to us consumers is how a combination of GPS and GLONASS sats are actually selected in any given situation and what impact a “good” or “bad” algorithm might have.
I have the 935 for 2 days now and I found that GPS+GLONASS was much MUCH worse. I ran the same 10k track 2 days (yesterday and today) and if you look at the results it’s quite a big difference: link to mygpsfiles.com
In the GPS+GLONASS mode there are a lot of gaps in the track and the track itself is much less smooth. Seems to “jump” around a lot more like the sampling was vastly reduced.
Maybe it was a flake (I’ll know more the more I use it) but for now it looks like my watch will be in GPS only mode.
GPS has a better service map then GLONASS:
GPS:
link to nstb.tc.faa.gov
GLONASS:
link to glonass-iac.ru
Explanation:
link to gps.sref.info
So if you are in the yellow glonass area guessing GPS alone will be better
Interesting, Eli, thank you. However by the looks of it I (Slovenia) should be in the white. Also I understand it as GPS plus GLONASS, so at *worst* it should be GPS level, but maybe even better. However in practice that’s not the case :/
Maybe it’ll be fixed in a SW update, maybe not 😀
One of the more enjoyable things for me to do is to go for a longer run with my oldest son riding his bike alongside me (almost 9 yrs old). We are fortunate to live 1.6 miles away from a park similar in size and layout to Central Park. This morning I again put the 935 to the test with a 9 mile run, in tandem with my Stryd footpod. Zero complaints, nada, all terrific.
GPS tracks were terrific when reviewing the run on Strava, OHR performed awesome. Kind of a boring post because no concerns were raised. That’s the way it should be. I feel like the 305 has been reborn in a perfect form factor.
Josh – Have you had any Stryd issues with the 935? I’ve read issues of dropouts with the fenix 5 but can’t figure out why the two would behave differently in this regard. I have a Styrd on order as of last week.
No Stryd problems for me with the 935 nor heard of others either. Does seem some F5 owners are still having issues though. Seems unclear why this is so.
Mine has worked like a charm. Never been so confident in my training devices.
I can also (boring, as well 🙂 ) add that it works like a charm for me. I’m also coming from a 305 and over the time (some Garmins, a Suunto) I already did some compromises when it comes to good GPS-reception.
The Fenix 5 was too much off for me to accept (personal preference, you may think different of course).
Now I’m really happy since I own the 935 and I’d sign the “I feel like the 305 has been reborn in a perfect form factor” 100%
Has anyone spotted a 935 in the shops in the UK? Online, there only seems to be a few places selling it in the UK. Quite like to see it in person before blowing nearly 500 squid.
AFAIK still only Wiggle at the moment.
Just ordered from Wiggle as was showing in stock yet delivery when checked out is showing as 10 days away! Wondering are they showing as in stock on the site yet they waiting for another shipment?! 🙁
Is wiggle offering the tri bundle? I can only find watch-only
link to swimoutlet.com has instock, I just purchased. Said they had at least 2 in stock. Good luck!
And sold out again, sorry.
in my country F935 costs 560eur, and Fenix 5 599eur. Maybe it is worth to add 40 eur and get F5
Personally I think you should ignore these relatively small price differences between the F5 and 935 and decide what is most important to you – which largely comes down to what they look like and what they weigh given they basically do the same things.
Great review as always.
Thanks for the review. Looking for a replacement for my FR610 as a serious runner (2h39 marathoner)
How accurate is the wrist based heart rate on the 935? Seems very nice to have HR data of all runs but it needs to be within 2-3bpm accurate at LT pace or higher, or else it is of no use to me.
The 630 can be had on sale for as low as 270$ these days, so almost half the price. Guessing they’re clearing shelves for its successor later this year.
Is the 935 worth it for only runners?
Did you look at the review? link to dcrainmaker.com
Yes I did. Quite a few people who come by here have the 935 already and I was hoping some of them would chime in.
Want to get a feel if it’s hit or miss based on the user (like the 235), or if the 935 is really a big step above the 735XT and 235 in terms of HRM accuracy.
Ideally I’d try it first, but not an option yet at this point.
Hi Dirk, kudos for your marathon time! I have also a FR610 and I’m thinking about upgrading to the FR935. I’m also very interested of answers to your question by 935’s owners.
To save some bandwidth will link to basically your same question and some replies (including from me) over on the Garmin forums link to forums.garmin.com
Hi Tim, I think that in a short “warm down” run the 935 had an easy job. Can you test the optical 935 in comparison of a chest strap synced with your 735 in a hard steady run or in a hard intensity interval workout?
I’ve had a 935 for about ten days now. I haven’t done an explicit test (i.e., a workout with both the 935 and a chest strap), but I can say that I’ve been very impressed with the optical HR data. I’ve done everything with it from short recovery runs to a tough long run this past weekend with the last half hour at a very aggressive pace. I’ve also ridden my bike trainer inside and my mountain bike outside. I know from experience what I would expect my HR to be in each of these cases, and that’s what the 935 has reported with mostly consistent and steady data. Now, I have seen a few little blips here-and-there, but I *think* those are explicable by something I did during the workout (e.g., a hard turn around during a run). But I can’t totally be sure of that unless I did some more rigorous testing.
Happy to chime in as well. I was lucky enough to receive my 935 from CT early on due to order being placed very early. I’ve owned just about every watch from Garmin and have tried every OHR version they’ve produced. Without fail, the 935 for me has been accurate, comfortable, ergonomic, lightweight, easy to use, the most no brainer awesome incredible piece of running gear I’ve owned. I also purchased a HRM-TRI strap from CT with the points I earned, and imagine I’ll use it for biking. But as far as running accuracy, 24/7 monitoring, looks, comfort, there isn’t another watch I’d want on my wrist. I owned the F5 briefly and it was so heavy that I promptly returned it, and also tried the Spartan Sport WHR and found it to be inconsistent for me as well as very heavy and a less pleasant user interface. In short, serious runners (I’m primarily a runner and bike/swim as cross training) will hopefully love the watch as much as I do.
Agree with everything Josh wrote. The 935 is shaping up to be my favorite sports gadget I’ve ever owned. I couldn’t be happier with mine.
>> I also purchased a HRM-TRI strap from CT with the points I earned, and imagine I’ll use it for biking. <<
Josh – Is there any advantage to using the HRM-TRI over the HRM-Run for outdoor cycling? I don't intend to use either for swimming (or all that often, really), so I was considering opting for the cheaper of the two.
Ray could probably answer that better than me, but i primarily spent a little more for this one so id have pool HR as well.
Hi Josh,
just to mention it before Chlorine damages your HRM-TRI: it’s not designed for indoor swimming/pools. This is where you would use HRM-SWIM.
Best,
Olly
Correct. Thankfully my pool at home is saltwater :).
Been using my HRM-Tri in chlorine pool for 17 months now. 2 battery replacements, I use it daily for running/biking. Swimming in a chlorine pool: about 40 times since Dec 2015. I “try” to wash it a couple times a week, but probably lax way behind what is recommended. It’s a comfy durable strap. All is fine.
…but how do you keep the strap from wiggling around and ending up around your waist after pushing from the wall?
Tight fitting tops while swimming?
The few times I’ve tried to wear an HR strap (I haven’t tried the HRM-SWIM) they move around far too much. My understanding was that the HRM-SWIM was intended to fix this with the special strap material, but I never invested in it because I just didn’t care enough to try.
Plus my masters group would have made more fun of me — bullys.
So just give the bullies more fodder and wear a shirt in the pool :-p
You don’t have to wear a shirt. Lululemon makes a product that actually incorporates HRM electrodes and will accept Polar as well as Garmin transmitter pods, and will hold everything in place and not flop around.
link to totalwomenscycling.com
But take martial arts training first.
Yes, I wear my old tri-top in the pool. I don’t do flip turns. I really don’t like swimming, but if I want to get to Hawaii, I’m forced to swim my butt off in indoor pools here in Michigan winters. I try to mimic the actual conditions as much as possible (swim cap, HRM, shirt). I’ll even wear my race shirt on occasion to see if it’s giving me any chafing issues. I agree, HRM tri strap will not stay in place if no tri top or tight shirt. Tried it once before and I thought, oh, I’ll just tap the wall and turn around. Flop! Doesn’t take much to have it slip down. Even a sprint lap will make it wiggle loose. BUT, it’s nice looking at my HR data after the swims to see what zone I’m in or if my SWOLF/HR is getting any better.
Thanks all for the feedback! I wonder if the 935’s oHR performs a little better compared to the Fenix 5 because it’s lighter and consequently shakes a little less on the wrist?
Does anyone know if there will be units for sale at the Boston Marathon Expo?
Hi, is there a recommended settings guide available anywhere
I used a post that Ray did in March 2016, “How I configure my watches…,” to set up mine. I had some different preferences than him for data screens, but his guidance on other settings was useful. Available here: link to dcrainmaker.com. If Ray sees this, I’d be curious if anything’s change since then.
Do the QuickFit bands work with the OEM pins, or do they use a different Pin? Will / Do they work in conjunction with the Quick Release kit?
The Dutch Garmin website talks about a -for me unexpected more expensive- price point for the Garmin Forerunner 935.
EUR 550,- for just the watch
EUR 700,- for the tri bundle
The pricing advantage compared to the Fenix 5 models is almost gone.
Hi, just ordered the 935 and it should arrive wext week. I’m looking for a screen protector but can’t find any delivered soon.
Are the fenix 5 and the 935 the same screen size ? (At least roughly) ? Then later I’ll order a 935 one.
thanks
There is a thread on forums.garmin.com that speaks to the screen protector question a little bit.
In short, the F5 and 935 are not quite the same size for screen protectors. I believe the F5 protector “generally” works on the 935 but leaves some of the outer screen diameter exposed.
Probably better than nothing for now though.
Where did you or anyone order from? What kind of order date to shipping dates are you getting?
Im using a screen protector i bought on Amazon, Rerii for the 735, fits almost perfectly, it is glass.
I ordered on wiggle, it should arrive next week, it’s been sent already but with easter …
Thanks for the great review (As usual)
Garmin site says the 935 is out of stock, any insiders out there know when they’ll be back in stock?
I heard end of Apri / early May from REI but not sure about Garmin. I saw some for sale on ebay but they are going for couple hundred bucks over MSRP…
Has anyone heard anything from Clever Training? Any shipping notices or credit card charge?
I just received an email from CleverTraining stating, “The production delay has been lifted from Garmin and we have a shipment that is currently on the way to our warehouse and available for processing early next week. This shipment regrettably will not fulfill all existing pre-orders.”
Basically, if you don’t notice a credit card charge or a shipping notice by early next week, it won’t be until the end of April until they receive the next batch. **Fingers crossed that we make the shipment that goes out next week**
Yeah I got that email shortly after posting this. It’s a bummer we can only hope to be in this batch but what ya gonna do?
Group Tracking – can anyone verify that this is fully functional on the 935. Not just that it transmits via live track like all Garmin GPS devices, but that it will actually display your friends on the bread crumb map on the 935 itself.
Hi,
So I just got my 935 and was just wondering the best way to record push up sessions or if this is even possible? Any help much appreciated!
Cheers
I would say create a new activity(“Other Strength or Other Pushups”)
From the online manual:
link to www8.garmin.com
As always, great write up! I just ordered a 935 via Clever Training VIP.
One note though: in your product comparison chart, under the first section (Function/Feature) there’s a row titled “BACKLIGHT GREATNESS” (for which you scored the 935 as “GREAT” lol). I assume you mean “Backlight Brightness”?
The backlight is great again :-p
Ray,
As always another great review. Thanks. Have finally signed up as a subscriber after a couple of years lurking in the background.
Question – given the form factor of the FR935 and the similarity in software with the Fenix 5’s, where do you think they’ll take the FR6nn series. Surely they won’t have three watches that are so similar in capability.
I suppose, my specific question is there likely to be a FR640 and if so, what would it do that the FR935 doesn’t? They may well release a FR640 and together with the Fenix 5 and FR935 they will all be near identical just with differing target markets.
Interested in your thoughts on this.
Thank you.
I don’t have any information. But I suppose that the software will be exactly the same. The difference of the FR645 will just be from “hardware”:
1- no barometric altimeter
2- a bit less battery
3- shape a little smaller
4- less weight
5- touchscreen
6- a bit cheaper
So the FR645 will be better for runner who are looking for the smallest and lightest watch, worse for hikers and triathletes.
Maybe I’m right?
This is a good question. I wonder if the current dichotomy will continue where the 200-700 series are all built on a cheaper plastic form factor, and the 900 and Fenix on the the sturdier form factor with metal buttons etc. It would be nice if a new 600 or 700 series came out that was built the same as the sturdy 935, only smaller. Compared to the other Forerunners, the 935 is quite large for many people. Currently with the exception of the Fenix 5s, you generally have to choose between sturdy/high quality huge watch, or flimsy plastic normal sized watch.
“I suppose, my specific question is there likely to be a FR640 and if so, what would it do that the FR935 doesn’t?”
I don’t think you’ll see a FR635/640/645/etc….
I think Garmin is basically saying the FR935 is what people wanted in a FR635/645. Which, to be fair, is pretty much true.
For those that want less features, they’d have a FR235 or similar.
Great review, although I did skim some of it – having fully digested the Fenix 5 review the first few paragraphs of this article sold me on the 935.
Does anyone know of a Garmin or 3rd party widget that shows on the watch sleep details, or is it hidden away somewhere inconspicuous already? It’s one of the few activity tracking metrics I’m interested in but I can only see it through the Connect IQ app or website currently.
And Ray, any feeling of when/if the stress tracking from the Vivosmart 3 will make the jump to the 935?
Great review as always!! Two questions: 1) I currently own the 235 and have difficulty reading the screen…is the 935 improved as far as readability and backlighting? 2) Forgive my ignorance, but does the 935 live tracking allow for someone to track my run at home without having to have it “attached” to another device such as my phone?
Many thanks!
Yesterday during my 6 mile treadmill run (stuck indoors right now as the pollen floating in the air in the Midwest USA is terrible right now for someone with bad allergies), I began with the OHR, paused after 2 miles and opened the HRM-TRI i bought and used it for a mile, and then went back to OHR. I went back to OHR simply because the data being produced as compared to the OHR at the same pace was within 1-2 beats per minute. That, and the fact the chest strap, while comfortable for a chest strap, now seems very uncomfortable when a reliable OHR is available.
The only issue I had, and I did email strava about this so if anyone else has a thought please chime in, is that the pauses were not recognized and my pace on strava was way off. I emailed with strava and they said it only works with GPS which is not correct as my FR230 did not have this issue.
Hi Ray,
Great review as always and I’ve just upgraded from 310XT to the 935 and love it. My question is around the V02 and fitness metrics. Do I need to always use the 935 to get these metrics, I prefer to my Edge for cycling but the rides don’t seem to end up on the 935 via Garmin connect so I’ve been recording on both and deleting one which is OK but a bit of a pain.
Many Thanks
Simon
Is there any difference with the unit itself between the base version and tri bundle. If I get base version and buy the HR straps separate will that be the same as the tri bundle version? Thanks
The only difference I can tell is the colouring. Tri bundle comes with the yellow straps, and yellow circle around the top-right button, base bundle is black straps and silver circle.
Hello Ray and everyone else. Thank you for all the hard work you do to provide excellent reviews.
I currently have a Forerunner 110 and Vivoactive. I am primarily a runner but am very interested in moving to participating in triathlons. I have been eyeing the 920xt since last Fall. I am interested in a watch to help me improve my running (mostly) as well as cycling and swimming. I purchased a 920xt on Amazon w/ HRM-run for $220 last week and have 30 days to return it. I am very interested in the 935 because of its ability to provide Recovery Time, Training Status, Training Load and Anaerobic measurements. I am not particularly adept at being able to tell whether I am overtraining or just tired from lack of sleep/sickness. My question basically boils down to this: is it worth my money at this point to more than double my investment for a 935 at this time? Or is the 920xt “good enough” for someone who likes data but hasn’t run a triathlon yet?
I realize that I would be buying current technology and support for another couple of years vs the 920xt which is basically at end of (supported) life. I like the readability of the 920xt over the Vivoactive for my older eyes. Is the 935 even more readable than 920xt? I don’t mind a HR strap but the idea of not having to have one is appealing.
Appreciate any advice the folks on this forum have to offer. Thanks again for your excellent reviews.
The 920xt is more than enough for someone just getting into multisport. With the HRM-Run or HRM-Tri it will give you all the same Running Dynamics data you need, at a lower cost. I also believe it has more screen real estate with it being square, so the data fields are bigger and the numbers are easier to read. I also had both the 920XT and the VivoActive. The 920 I used for training and events, while the Vivoactive I used as my daily, and for Walking trips and Golf GPS. Now the 935 combines all those into one, into a smaller package, so I have sold both of them in preparation of having the 935 only. By selling both of them, I have recouped the cost of the new 935, so it was worth it to me.
The idea that the screen is bigger and more usable with the rectangular shape of the 920 is somewhat of a myth. The actual physical display area is 1.13 square inches (Pi*0.6^2) on the 935 vs 1.04 on the 920 (1.2″x0.8″). Plus the 935 has higher resolution so makes text a bit clearer. As for the usability of the screen space, I actually like that of the round watches better now that I’ve gotten used to it. Not all data takes the same amount of space. HR with a max of 3 digits shouldn’t take the same amount of space as time with up to 8 digits (hh:mm:ss). Especially with custom CIQ fields, you can make great use of the extra space on the round watch with fonts that are more to your liking and field layout that takes advantage of the specific data. And moving forward, you’ll have more CIQ field options on the 935.
That said, the 920 would absolutely do everything you need for triathlon regardless of your level. The 935 would most likely be a better everyday watch in addition to a slightly better triathlon watch. And if you are a data junky like me, the 935 would probably be more fun.
Actually was too generous with the size of the 920 screen. According to Garmin’s site, it’s 1.1″ x 0.8″, so only 0.88 square inches vs the 1.13 on the 935.
My vote would be the 920xt. I got it a few months ago for around $200 (black/grey version). I typically buy when a new watch comes out to get a deal on the prior models. You are looking at quite the premium for the new 935 model (even though I like what I read about it so far).
Previously I was using a refurb 310xt. I did many running races and a full Ironman tri with that watch. Honestly some of the new tech and metrics are over-rated in my opinion. Leastways my high school freshman son joined the track team and is kicking my ass now winning medals with no watch, lol. They go for training runs after school and I ask how do they know how things went if no one had a watch. He says they go by feel and get great workouts. I could be wrong but suspect he wouldn’t be doing much better with all the crazy metrics they have now. It’s cool if some people like gadgets – there is fun in that. But if you are not going to get into that aspect why blow the money.
Personally, I would consider these aspects as most important: 1) Which watch feels better on your arm (size/shape/depth/weight) while training/racing, 2) Which watch is easier to see (font/backlight/field options) in terms of the key important metrics you will view while training/racing, 3) Which watch is easier to use in terms of buttons/OS. For me the answer was the 920xt, especially since I already knew I liked the 310xt layout. I just wanted something less bulky, with wifi and some other features that I find useful. Ok and less orange as well, lol.
Also I think for many things rectangle screen is better than round. Round is mainly a function of watches in the past having a dial. Very few display devices use a round display for good reason, as it generally does not make best use of real estate. I suspect if watches originally had square/rectangle displays, few would now have round displays. But as another user mentioned, round display can work and work well depending on layout. For me though, using 4 key metrics almost exclusively, I like the rectangle screen. Mainly I wanted reasonable cost running/tri watch with easy read font, strong even backlight (most of my training is done in low light), and long batter life (to avoid backlight drain and lots of charging). For me that was 920xt and it sits low on my wrist in terms of depth and feels ok in terms of weight compared to some of the other watches.
I would like to try a cloth band option though on the 920xt. Not a fan of the rubberish bands. A good thing about the 935 and some other watches is a greater band selection, and that new snap-on band system. I could see myself getting a 935 but likely a few years from now when a newer watch gets released and prices drop.
Would be great if you could try on a 935. I had tried on a Fenix 3 and that thing was big and bulky. Glad I tried it on – helped me decide on the 920xt. If you can try on the 935 and compare to 920xt that could make your decision easy if one jumps out at you as simply being a better fit.
Clearly, the 920xt is cheaper than the 935. I’ve used the 920xt exclusively since Nov. ’14 when it came out. I’ve got a lot of opinions on it, and I’m one who always uses a 4-data point screen and hates cycling through settings.
I say go for the 935! Having 24/7 monitoring of heart rate is more important than running dynamics. Tracking your heart rate while you do all the non-exercising things of your life will let you know how well you’re truly progressing in fitness. It will also clue you into things happening in your life that you didn’t know were killing you, e.g. stress or diet. Especially now that the OHR monitor is every second vice “smart”… huge improvement. Want to go hiking? You can track your heart rate so you keep it low and keep your training impact safe. Want to hit the gym and you forgot your chest strap at home? No worries! Feeling crappy at work and want to get your HR? Got it! No need to count it manually, and no need to record it manually.
Every time Garmin updates the 920xt, I feel like something breaks. 24-hr clock, metronome, swim lap counter, alerts- it’s frustrating platform. Plus it doesn’t have Varia support. They’re clearly moving forward with the circular form factor on Fenix and Forerunner… don’t fight the wave even if you don’t agree. Circular watches still look more normal even though it’s not ideal shape for 4 boxes of data.
Skip the 920xt! It fared me well, but I see no reason to buy it when the 935 is superior.
Thanks to everyone for their thoughts/suggestions. I ended up ordering the FR935 (just watch at this point) from REI though I still have another week before I have to return the 920xt. I like the 935 much more than my vivoactive for the size and clarity of the text – I can actually read most of the numbers fairly well (its harder on screens (data fields) that display 7 items, but still readable with my older eyes. I like the 24/7 heart rate monitoring and the look and feel of the 935. And its nice and light.
Something that I appeared to have missed when I was reading all the reviews and debating watches was the fact that a HRM chest strap is still needed for heart-rate variability measurements. Part of the reason my wanting the watch was to ditch a strap for anything other than swimming, I have a TICK-Run HRM strap which is works with Elite HRV app to measure my HRV. But I hate to have separate apps to do everything and then try and import into Garmin Connect, Training Peaks, etc. I was also planning to purchase the Tri-bundle straps separately so I could get running dynamics and swim measurements but didn’t realize that it’s $50 more than FR935 tri bundle not including quick release kit and extra strap.
So now I have a few more questions.
1) is it worth upgrading to FR935 tri bundle for the extra $150 to save $ overall from buying things separately?
2) what exactly does HRV get me if I have the watch measure it vice using the TICKR-Run & app?
3) Am I being silly about all the data? As Ray has mentioned, I couldn’t find anything concrete about improving running dynamics so not really sure how to do it other than shorten my stride (to land softer and possibly reduce vertical oscillation) and try not to bounce when I run (reduce vertical oscillation). The data that I am most interested in is V02 max, (available on 920xt as well) and the Training Load and Training Status features, as well as Real Time performance and lactate threshold information. I’m not particularly good at determining whether I’m “just tired” or overtraining so something that helps me figure it out via physiological measurements would be nice.
Oh, the last reason for the FR935 is to purchase technology that will be supported for many years (updates and such) vs. buying 2 generation old technology. I suspect that the 920xt would be all I currently need but I like to plan for growth when I can. Thoughts?
Thanks again to everyone for their help! And thanks to Ray for trying to help fools like me make a “simple” decision!
DITTO! I had the 735 and sold it (for more than I thought I would), and got the 935 and could not be more excited. IMHO this is everything I wanted. I do golf when I can, and I am not a triathlete but I do swim and run 6 days a week and am a data junkie. The 935 looks great on the wrist, better than my 735 did. So I may not be the serious athlete this is targeted for, but I take my running serious, love the swimming metrics, love to golf, and love the look that this watch offers.
Great review as always!! Two questions: 1) I currently own the 235 and have difficulty reading the screen…is the 935 improved as far as readability and backlighting? 2) Forgive my ignorance, but does the 935 live tracking allow for someone to track my run at home without having to have it “attached” to another device such as my phone?
Many thanks!
Rex,
1) I haven’t seen the 935 in person but Ray stated the screen is significantly better than the previous generation watches
2) LiveTrack is the same as it is on the 235, it is still reliant on the phone for sending the data so people can view it.
Thanks for the response! Very helpful!!!
What aspects of the 235 display make it difficult to read? Is it the font size/shape or the weak/irregular backlight issues I have read about? I have the 920xt and it is easy to read in terms of the fonts, even with 4 fields displayed, and the backlight has no unevenness or dim spots. I typically leave the backlight on for the length of my evening/night training runs and it works well. (Good thing 920xt battery is long lasting.)
My son runs track, and I was considering the 230/235 if I can get it on a deal for him, but would want him to be able to read it easily at school meets and low light training runs.
Rex, the 935 has the same screen as the Fenix 5, which is pretty similar to the Fenix 3 before it (just a bit higher res than the Fenix 3). The screens on these watches are much nicer than the FR 235, 735 etc. They are larger, covered in glass, sharper, and the backlight is much much brighter. You also have control of the backlight from 5% to 100%, and you can assign the backlight menu to a hotkey which you can access at any time. So if you’re doing a workout and the sun goes down, you can hold the hotkey you have backlight assigned to, and quickly set the backlight to “always on, 100%” or whatever you want. You can also specify backlight settings for watch mode and workout mode. It’s nice and granular and makes a huge difference. There are lots of little things like this that make a big difference over something like the 235, and it really adds up.
Heeyyyyyy I’m now “Processing” on Clever Training and my CC’s been charged! Hope everyone gets theirs quickly
Just got my shipping notice from CleverTraining. Ordered March 29 @ 9:20AM CST. Can’t wait to have this new watch
I received mine from REI this morning!!! Ordered on 3/31 the morning it was available.
I got my shipping notice from clever training this morning as well and had ordered mine March 29th at about 2pm! Woo! Excited!
Ordered mine on March 30, at 10:54AM EDT from Clever Training…and I just got the shipping notificiation. I’m super excited to get it!
Starting to fall out with the Garmin Connect website.
I use a paid subscription service (OS maps) to generate routes to be followed whilst out running. I have my .gpx files. How the hell do I get Garmin Connect to create a course from them?
I’ve tried importing in GC (from + on dashboard.) It looks like it’s worked, but nothing shows up in either Courses or Activities – the latter being what I expected (create course from activity, delete activity.)
What Garmin ‘logic’ am I missing?
Looks like heart rate monitor USA has 21 in stock. I just overnightsed mine, shipped in 15 min. link to rwrd.io
And I think they are sold out now….what’s a guy gotta do.
I think Paragon sports has them in stock
link to paragonsports.com
I ordered a 5s through them and was able to return it with no problem, they only list items they have in stock.
OK, so I have the Polar A300 and want to upgrade… I don’t want to get a Mercedes Benz (Fenix 5) I want to get a Toyota FJ Cruiser (920XT) or I would like to raise the suspension on my current VW Citi (Just get a Bluetooth strap)?
I am probably over-complicating things, but at the end of the day: I want to get something that will last me for the next 10 years. I know the Fenix 5 is the most probable recommendation, but I simply don’t need all the features available in that watch.
On the other hand, I don’t want to be stuck again with sub-prime tech like the Polar A300 for my current needs.
I’m doing the Ironman next year and would like to get the middle ground (Bluetooth HR strap capability is a not-negotiable for me)
Any help out there? (Sorry the comment is so long)
So basically:
Should I wait for something cheaper than the 935?(Get a bluetooth strap)
Buy the Fenix 5 (Too many features, but ah well)
Buy the 935 (Can’t go lower – no bluetooth strap capability)
Any other ideas
The obvious step down from the 935 is the 920XT, given that you need the battery life. The 735 doesn’t have the same battery life as the 920. What’s your reasoning behind not wanting the 920?
Bluetooth HR strap capability.
Hi Danster,
Get a discounted Ambit 3 Peak or Ambit 3 Vertical, or try to find a deal on the Polar V800 (since the replacement should come out this year and you are already in the Polar envirmonment.) I had the Vertical and the V800, and I was happy with both. I don’t know if anything can last 10 years, though but on the Half Marathon I ran a couple of weeks ago, I saw a guy running with a Forerunner 305, and the Half Marathon last October, I saw a lady running with a Forerunner 201! I was surprised that the batteries still worked!
Regards,
Chris,
Anyone have any impression on first beat training load vs TSS/CTL and the PCM chart through training peaks? I use the PCM pretty heavily and track my ramp rates etc, and wondering how this compares to the new on watch features?
Is it possible to set the GPS frequency by activity type? Example – 1 second recording for running and a longer interval for hiking?
Yes, you just go into the activity type e.g. hike, press and hold ‘up’ and choose ‘Hike settings’ where there’s a GPS submenu. Choice then of GPS, GPS+GLONASS or Ultratrac.
If you change it for that activity it won’t change it for others.
***just to clarify – if you change the GPS mode it won’t change it for other activity TYPES. I believe it’ll stay in that mode for all future hikes (for example) until you change it***
Hi Ray,
went for the new FR 935 in hope to use more IQ Data Fields than on my previous FR 920XT.
Unfortunately the FR 935 is giving me also only 2 Fields.
You wrote in your review: “Connect IQ: Fully supports CIQ 2.2.3+, as well as a full 2MB for apps or 32 installed CIQ apps/items, whichever comes first.”
Thought the new device expanded for the Fields. I am a little bit disappointed, or did I have to configure that to increase the number of IQ Data Fields? If not, do you think this comes as an update, cause this is the only reason I’ve upgraded from the 920XT!
Best Regards…
I’ll ask if there’s anything planned there.
Thx Ray, I appreciate that!
Any news about the limitation extended? Would be really good, if.
Can anyone help me understand the rational behind the temperature sensor feature and related data screens. The sensor seems to be poorly placed. I am often seeing a temp 10-15′ F higher than the actual. The Garmin FAQ suggests I should take the watch off for 20-30 minutes to get an accurate treading! That is just not right. Perhaps the should go back and Liston to Ray’s CinnectIQ talk.
The temperature sensor, while neat to see the output, is mainly there as compensation/adjustment for the barometric sensor. If you need to rely on accurate temps, do not wear the watch on your body. Secure it to a backpack strap, or something else. Alternatively, Garmin offers the Tempe wireless pod.
The 935 can pair with the Tempe directly:
link to www8.garmin.com
Tks
Why does Garmin require a chest strap in order for the lactate threshold to calculate? Why don’t they use the built in optical sensor? It seems like it’s accurate enough.
I think it’s because lactate threshold calculations depend on accurate HRV (heart rate variability) measurement, and optical sensors aren’t (yet) able to measure that accurately enough.
Can anyone comment on the CPU speed and overall “snappiness” of the FR935 compared to the Fenix 5 and the FR235? Wife has the FR235 and at times it seems slow to respond to button presses…
Thanks!
Subjectively, my FR935 is very snappy compared to the FR630 (which I assume is no better or no worse than the FR235). I used the FR630 for a year, but I’ve only briefly tried out my friends’ 230/235s.
Switching pages was always very slow and frustrating for me with my 630 (maybe because I always use 1 or 2 Connect IQ datafields?). I haven’t had that problem with the 935 so far.
If this helps, according to the “Tree Benchmark” app:
link to forums.garmin.com
FR235: 770
FR630: 830
F5: ~3200
I ran Tree Benchmark on the FR935 and got 3184. I dunno if I’d say it’s “4X as fast” as my old watch, but it’s def “fast enough”. If I press the up/down buttons fast during an activity, the pages change just as fast, without too much lag.
Thanks, Will. The switching of pages/screens has been slow on my FR235, like you describe with your FR630, and I look forward to a nicer consumer experience with the FR935.
Does anyone have any knowledge about the CPU speed in the FR935 vs the FR235?
Thanks!
I know it sounds redundant but can the 935 transmit the HR data to an Edge 520? I prefer to use the edge 520 during the cycling portion of a triathlon and would prefer to see the HR data via the edge rather than having to look at the 935. Thanks.
Yup, it can. It’s called rebroadcasting, and is available within the sensors menu of the FR935.
Great review! Thanks!
Are there any downsides to changing GPS sampling from GPS (default) to GPS+GLONASS for most activities? Any battery life hit etc? If my understanding is correct GLONASS allows faster locking so I was surprised to see that it doesn’t default to that.
GLONASS takes about 20% more battery. Effectively enabling it gives more sats to lock onto but unless you are in a very poor reception area (or indoors) then probably won’t make much of a difference with the initial lock.
I was using the Garmin FACE IT app to customize my watch face on my 735 .. I now have the 935 and do not see that as a watch choice .. Do you think it will be added or is this something that cant be done with the 935?
Hey Ray Et al,
Really sorry to leave this here, but I think your review is too neutral. It needs to bit more like the run pod one
I’ve just spent £450 on the watch and it’s the most dissapointed I have ever been with any garmin product ever.
I know you mention watch being plastic, but cheap and nasty would have been more accurate. The watch strap alone is the most flimsy I’ve ever seen and not sure how long that will last! Not long at al i’m guessing.
Are Garmin the new Apple? Sad face.
James
I too, have the 935 and personally, I think the build is fine. I did consider the fenix, but it was too heavy in my opinion.
The build is no different to previous Forerunner products I have had. My last watch was the 235.
Interesting. In my opinion, it’s the best Garmin product I have purchased, and I have purchased a few over the last 15 years. Solid software. Solid build. Nice simple look without the bright accent colors they’ve used in the past. Full featured (great for almost any sport or multi-sport). Solid GPS accuracy. Light weight. I’m pretty sure the strap is like it is by design, a little on the stretchy side to allow it to be snugger for the HR accuracy. Were you hoping for a rigid strap that would be uncomfortable?
His review is dead on with my experience.
Yeah, I’m with ekutter. Thrilled with the 935, and I think the elastic-like band is by design to help with a snug fit for the HRM.
Yeah, I guess I’m with pretty much everyone else: It’s a plastic watch. Thus…it’s…well…plastic.
That said, I think the build quality feels solid, which is honestly like most of Garmin’s plastic watches. It’s likely to be my main running watch instead of a Fenix 5 unit, I really like it.
I never understood people not liking plastic. Sure some plastics are cheap and crappy but it can make a much more durable product then metal.
You may be wondering what I mean when plastic can be scratched way more easily then metal which is true, but slight scratches aren’t that important to me. The watch working is much more important and plastic can deform and rebound much better then metal allowing it to handle shock better. Plus its lighter.
I’ve had a 920 since a month after it came out and where it basically 24/7. While I’ve had to replace the strap almost every 6 months the watch itself works great. The back of the watch is black now and no idea what the serial number is anymore but still in pretty good shape.
Tempted to get the 935 but I think I’ve harped enough on my worry about it which has nothing to do with build quality
Why don’t they use carbon composite materials? Then it could be light weight and make those who want no plastic materials happy. (think duraace pedals)
It would be also interesting the use of titanium. I saw that Garmin used it with the Cronos, but it was really really expensive. But other brands (Seiko, Citizen) do great watch in titanium without this big increase in price. Garmin could try titanium for the Fenix5 (but not so expensive as Cronos!) and carbon for the 935.
Since they already used Ti I’m sure they would if they could for a good price. Those other watches still seem a good $100+ over their non-ti watches
100 $ would be still a reasonable increase in price. But I don’t understand why the Garmin Cronos titanium costs so much more than the other Cronos. To contain cost, they could also make just the watch body titanium and the band plastic, maybe it’s the band that pulls the price up in the Cronos series.
Compared to what other Garmin products? Agree with ekutter – for me it is the best Forerunner I have had and I have had pretty much all of them since the original 201. The strap is “flexible” (my description!) as you are advised to wear these watches tight if want to give the OHR the best chance of working reasonably.
I want to show an example of one of my wrist only HR-runs I did.
As you can see in the picture, the heart rate graph is pretty stepped and not that what I usually get when I do my workouts with an heart rate belt. The road I was running was overall flat pavement, no humpbacked underground. I’m also pretty sure (I think I know myself pretty good) that the max out of 167 HR is far off reality. My run was (for sure) in between 10-15 beats and I doubt this rogue max and min values (I had no stops in this run). I will make another test with the parallel use of my older 920XT. For me so far the optical heart rate is not valid enough and useless. Anyone else with same experiences?
You’d definitely want to try and record data from two units, otherwise it’s honestly hard to compare. When doing so, a few quick tips:
A) Put the watches on seperate wrists, do NOT put them side by side on the same wrist
B) Pair your FR920XT to a HR strap (obviously)
C) Ensure that the FR935 doesn’t try and autopair to the same HR strap (it will try, and you’ll want to decline)
D) Pro Tip: I actually let the FR935 pair to my HR strap…but then I set the HR sensor as disabled. This prevents any future test fails.
E) For comparisons, you can use free 3rd party sites (MyGPSFiles is one), or the DCR Analyzer to quickly whip up comparisons (link to dcrainmaker.com)
I first though about a comparison with this Data Field:
Auxiliary Heart Rate, from IMGrant:
A simple data field that connects to ANT+ heart rate monitors, displays heart rate (in bpm), and records it into the FIT file.
This was developed so that I could use the built-in optical heart rate monitor on my Forerunner 235 and an external ANT+ chest strap at the same time, logging values from both for comparison.
link to apps.garmin.com
But you are right, it might be better to do the test with two different watches.
In my recording above, no heart rate belt was in the list of the FR935 as a heart rate sensor! I deleted all HR sensors in front of this run.
I will post my run from tomorrows here, have a nice eve!
Another tip before your next run: do a hard reset of the watch. It’s the first thing that Garmin Support tells to do when they hear complain about heart rate accuracy. In my case it solved my issue (with another model of Garmin)
Interesting, that’s a cool data field. Never seen that before! Awesome.
I’ve long been asking for someone to give me an Edge data field (or heck, even a full blown app) that allows me to pair to multiple power meters and then log them to individual .FIT files, ideally with the name appended to them
Someday…
Great ConnectIQ data field! It worked and I can see both HR plots separately in Garmin Connect. But so far I have not succeeded in exporting the data in text files (ideally CSV) that I can easily analyze on my end. What do you guys recommend? Thanks!
@gijom, the data that AUXILIARY HR saves in the Fit file are separated in a developer data fields. If you use Golden Cheetah (http://www.goldencheetah.org) for example, this can read those kind of fields.
From there I copied the values into Excel and made my graphs.
Hope that helps!
@ray have you tested the AUXILIARY HR data field? does it also connects to powermeters when in range and active? would be really cool indeed!
Thank you. It worked. Here is my first plot. Was just living my life at home except for when HR goes up as I did some squats. I lost the Chest HR signal at some point. Interestingly after I stopped squatting the Optical HR was faster to show slower HR. Will try to setup a better experiment now that I have setup the “flow”. Thanks!
Nice, good to see! I’ve got it on my list to try out tomorrow. Looking forward to it!
FINALLY! A decent use for CIQ!
I’m not sure if anyone is still having trouble locating a unit, but they had them in stock at Moosejaw online. I just put my order in for it.
I have been having a few issues on runs with OHR. On this run I tightened the strap after about 25 minutes of running but it still took another 5 minutes for the HR reading to drop down to where I knew it should be.
Good & useful analysis. Helped me decide on 935 over. Fenix 5 🙂
So, today in the office I did another Test Optical-HR VS HR-Belt:
Here is my result (aprox. 4min. sitting, walking in the office)…
Another test is following this afternoon while running 13km.
So far same conclusion as I doubted yesterday. Optical-HR is laggy and slow and not on point!
Just out of curiosity – is the watch pretty snug? And did the optical unit have HR lock before you started running?
So here is the result of my 15km run from 5 o’clock:
Of course I tried to wear the watch as tight and firm as possible. More would be really uncomfortable,
Pretty amazing, that the final 2/3s of my run are pretty accurate. Looks like the same issue Dan Morley showed in his posting above, from 10:22pm today!
I think you agree with me, that the first part does not look good at all.
Yeah, I’d agree, doesn’t look good. Almost looks like cadence lock for the first part, though hard to tell without knowing your cadence values (but typically inflated HR values are cadence lock).
Here is the graph from Golden Cheetah inclusive SpM:
Cadence is round about 186, equal to 93 SpM!
And the summary inkl. all the details:
Of course this heart rate in GC shows the optical measurement!
Here is more details from my run on Saturday. When I started the run, I would say the 935 was snug. When I tightened it at the 26 minute mark, I would it was then tight enough to leave strap marks/indents on my wrist by the end of the run.
How do you know or make sure you have a HR lock before starting the activity? All I know is that before I began my run, the HR screen was reading my HR and at around my normal resting HR.
On my run today, I made sure the 935 was snug and reading my HR prior to starting my run. For the full 40 minute run the OHR was reading too high and never did drop back into a normal range. I guess the only way I can produce quantifiable data to Garmin is if I start wearing multiple devices.
Perhaps I will upgrade to the beta firmware and see if that makes any difference.
I have a 735 and the optical HR sensor has been largely a huge disappointment.
I was using before a Mio optical sensor with very good results (provided that I wear it with the sensor in the “under” side of the arm).
So once the 735 came out, it did look like a godsend solution…
I noticed that 735 optical sensor works poorly especially in case of high sweat rate (like for the tropical weather here…) with very poor accuracy (either too low or too high). This despite wearing it tight up to the point of leaving marks on the wrist
Now I did resort to using the 735 with the Mio HR band (yes, it looks crazy) and it works well..
So, my question is: does the 935 optical HR sensor works better than the 735 ?
is any HW or SW improvement ?
Thanks for the great review as usual! Have you looked in to how much the new gyroscope improves ultratrack accuracy for this watch and/or the Fenix 5? I can’t find any info anywhere. I’m racing my first 100 mile ultra this summer and trying to figure out if I need to pack a battery or if this new technology will make it “good enough”.
I switched my Fenix 5 to a 935 yesterday and only for the look and feel, I could not be happier. On my average wrist, it sits much better and is far more comfortable, especially when worn at night. Since I am wearing my watch 24/7, I am thinking of investing in QuickFit bands. Would be interested in seeing the watch with the QuickFit leather 22 band to check if it looks silly or not. With a watch face like the “Ranger” from frtimboli, it may look legit.
I also noticed the difference of screens when starting an activity does not exist anymore after the 2.90 update. Looks like the Fenix 5 and the 935 strictly have the same firmware which is good news!
Another detail: Garmin Face It is apparently not yet enabled for the 935.
Finally any good recommendation for a quality screen protector?
I see that with the 4 fields data page it is not possibile to hide the field titles to increase the size of the numbers. In the 3 field data page it is possibile to display the number without field title. Do you think that in the future it will be possibile to display also for the 4 fields data page the numbers without field title? Do you think that it could be an interesting option for people who would like to have bigger numbers?
Whatever anybody can do to get bigger numbers would be a huge improvement, I don’t wear glasses or need them yet, but coming from a Forerunner 910 the 935 is a let down with the small numbers, and what is the purpose of the black ring around the screen, surely make the display full size… I can see them, but on rough ground mountain biking, using a bike mount it’s just not as good as the 910, not even close.
This is where Connect IQ data fields come in really handy. A programmer can make the screen look exactly as you want. If you don’t personally do programming, look at the list of data fields in the Garmin Connect IQ store to see if anything works better for you. The best approach is generally a single data field taking up the entire screen, containing multiple metrics drawing in the location and size you want. In most cases, developers use this technique to get more than four pieces of data on the screen. There are likely data fields that do just what you are asking for as well. If you having any programming skills, creating such a data field is pretty simple and you can customize to your hearts content.
When I gained knowledge of Connect IQ, I thinked that I wouldn’t need it and it was just a complication. I was wrong.
Currently the 935 (base) is only available for pre order, for example in Clever Training or Amazon. Does anybody know when is it going to be available? thx.
I got mine from Clever Training on monday. Their update from last week was
”
Thank you for your recent order for the Garmin Forerunner 935. We have a large shipment that is scheduled for delivery, to our warehouse, at the end of this week. We will fulfill most orders with this incoming shipment and provide tracking details for your convenience.
For any orders that are not available for fulfillment with this shipment, we anticipate more units leaving the Garmin facility at the end of April and processing remaining orders with the following shipment.
“
Indeed, it’s already been shipping for a month now. Just in very limited quantities. Garmin has long stated their plans were for more units at the end of April, so this seems roughly in line with that.
So if I already have the Garmin 630 with the premium heart rate strap, why would I want this? Optical heart rate, I understand, but you still have to wear a heart rate strap or new pod (yay! another $70) to get the advanced running dynamics that are already on the 630. Sounds like a lot to pay for “extended battery life”.
Please convince me why I need to spend my money. I’m willing, but not yet convinced I should.
I don’t normally do this (because I hate sounding like a shill), but here goes. First off, TBH, if you need someone to convince you to spend your money, you probably shouldn’t.
Having said that, I actually upgraded from the 630 myself, so I can tell you why I did it and what things I liked the best (your mileage may vary):
What I like best (and why I bought it)
– 24/7 HR monitoring (I care about my resting HR), with 1-second sampling
– UI is so much more responsive (e.g. no more unbearable lag when switching between data pages or widgets!). To me this is huge.
– Brighter backlight (even at the default 20% brightness)
– Stronger vibration
– course navigation with simple turn-by-turn directions (there’s a good app for this, but native functionality is almost always better, since you get to keep all the other features in the regular “run/cycle app”)
More pluses:
– No more touchscreen issues (sadly the 630 touchscreen is probably a nice idea, but has too many issues for me, especially in the winter or the rain). (Combined with the above lag, the touchscreen is not ideal to use. e.g. Try scrolling 2 data pages over during a long run — you have to be very patient to avoid scrolling 1 or 3 instead.)
– magnetic compass (630’s GPS compass only works while you’re moving)
– better battery life (to be fair I only need this because I am wearing it 24/7 now…)
– practically unlimited # of data pages (as opposed to 4) — some connect IQ fields take up a whole page, so it isn’t crazy to want 5 or more pages (or so I tell myself)
– Sharper, more colourful screen with nicer fonts
Other things I like (which are more of a bonus):
– barometric altimeter (nice to have, for counting stairs or trail running/hiking)
– Training load info (yes, there are other ways to get this)
– Anaerobic training effect
– UI in general is much more customizable (e.g. reorder data pages, reorder activities, use black background for activity, multiple layouts for 3/4 fields)
– Built-in watch faces are much more customizable (can add/remove fields such as steps, battery indicator, move bar)
– stopwatch/timer (which can be used at any time, even during a running activity)
– ability to return to clock/widgets page during an activity (useful for long runs when you want to check something else without saving your activity). With the 630, most things (e.g. widgets, custom clock face) are not accessible during an activity/app (except settings). With the 935, most things are accessible during an activity/app
– quick shortcut menu (e.g. toggle bluetooth, do not disturb, etc. during an activity, which is impossible for the 630 afaik). With the 630, if you forgot to turn off your bluetooth before the big marathon, you’re just SOL.
– support for latest version of Connect IQ going forward (background apps, watch faces with 1s updates at all times — lack of a “second hand” is a big complaint many ppl have of the current custom watch faces)
– hotkeys (e.g. return to widgets during an activity, take a screenshot)
– ability to take screenshots! (great for saving recovery HR, etc.)
More reasons (which don’t apply to me right now, but might be important to others):
– Multisport/triathlon support
– (Native) swim support (you can get a swim app for 630, if you really want it.)
Honestly most of the UI customization/shortcut stuff probably should’ve been in the 630. I think a basic stopwatch should be in every garmin watch. But they aren’t. And I won’t pretend any of that is “worth” the money. It’s an expensive watch.
But those are the things I like about the 935. Ever since I saw the features the Fenix 3/5 had, I wanted them in my Forerunner. But the price, size and rumours of poor GPS tracking soured me from getting the Fenix 5.
For me, the 935 is basically the Garmin runner’s watch I always wanted, and everything the 630 should’ve been. I wish it had existed when when I bought my 630 because I do feel bad about the price. I’ll probably hang it to this one for a lot longer than my 630. It isn’t perfect — some people point to a dimmer screen (without backlight) compared to Fenix 3. I think that entering text with the virtual keyboard is still a pain. And of course there are still bugs with the current firmware — hopefully they’ll all be cleared up eventually.
But who knows? Maybe there’ll be a successor to the 630 which is similar to this. Seems like most people think *this* is the 630 successor. Maybe the 230 successor will be almost as good. I remember that the 230 inherited *most* of the advanced features of the 620 (at a lower price), so you might want to wait for a 240/245. I’m sure a 230 successor will omit 1 or 2 things that the 630 has, such as advanced running dynamics. But features from last gen’s high end watch always seem to trickle-down to this gen’s mid range watch.
I know I would’ve felt really bad if I got the 735 6 months ago (for example). And if you’re happy with the 630 and don’t need any of stuff the 935 has to offer, I would stick with it or wait for the next mid-range watch. If I didn’t want 24/7 HR monitoring, I wouldn’t have upgraded.
I feel about the same about the 935, but I upgraded from the fenix 3.
What I like most is oHR accuracy is good in spite of the bony wrists I have. Had my first run today and compared it to regular chest HR with the “Auxiliary Heart Rate” data field and it was almost spot on (except for recovery in intervals). Really surprising given the fact that previous Garmin models did not perform well.
Even indoor bike oHR accuracy is acceptable. The Cardio workout was less than stellar, however.
Great summary and useful to know as I am also coming from a 630. But you forgot to mention one of the biggest differences: size. The 935 is a much larger watch, and even though it maintains a similar weight to the 630, it may not suit some people with particularly small wrists.
If they produced a smaller version of the 935 with the same feature set, it would be the perfect watch for me, even if battery life had to be compromised.
Ray,
With the Training Load/Stress measurements, do you need to wear the watch 24/7 for the metrics to work, or is it just calculated off of workouts?
No impact on Training Load/Stress. Purely workout based at this time.
Perfect. Thanks.
Wasn’t sure if I was going to have to get a Vivosmart 3 as well.
Can you load in previousworkouts from the Fenix 3 or will it get them from Garmin connect or is the new software different
This might be a silly question but I just got the HRM run strap with the Garmin 935. When I am running and have heart rate as a data field, how do I know if it is broadcasting from the strap or the optical? Does the optical get automatically turned off when the strap is connected to it?
Alternatively, if I don’t want to wear the strap for a run but have it close by (i.e. in my backpack) before I start will the optical HR kick in once it is out of range?
The strap will override the optical. If in your sensors menu the strap shows as connected it will win.
When the strap is in your backpack, you should have the sensor disconnected from the strap. Saves battery life, and would prevent a false connection.
The latest HRM-RUN strap doesn’t let you disconnect the sensor, but I *think* it won’t even start broadcasting unless you are wearing it (i.e. it is reading valid data). It doesn’t even work if you are not moving (it times out after maybe 30s of not moving, even if you are wearing it, as I found when I tried to use it to measure my resting HR).
If you want to know for sure you can go to Menu (hold Up) > Settings > Sensors & Accessories and check the status of your sensor there. You can even disable it if you are sure you don’t want to use it. (Although because of the above reasons I don’t think it’s necessary.)
Hi,
I have the 935 and just wondering why my watch keep resetting settings – such as I change the time from 12 hour to 24 hour or km’s to miles. If I don’t check the watch for a while or put on the watch the next day for a run, I find it has reverted to km’s and 12 hours.
Is this normal? syncing issues with Garmin Connect?
Just thought I ask before I attempt resetting the watch and see if I’m being an idiot.
Thanks in advance.
Yes, there are known syncing issues with GC (especially with alarms). Try changing the appropriate setting in GC to what you want, before you sync.
I saw on the Garmin forums that you can create routes on your phone using apps like Wikiloc and routeCourse, that will transfer routes direct to the 935 without the need for a computer. Does anyone have any experience with these? I think they require an annual fee ($10?) but it would mean I wouldn’t have pay the extra for the 5x and it’s maps.
Routes, maybe. Maps, no. The maps on the 5X are there for a reason and it’s the only current Garmin wrist device that takes maps (the Epix and the Fenix 1 and 2 are the previous ones that would, although the 1 and 2 were very limited and couldn’t navigate from maps). You’ll get a route without context, and good luck if something goes wrong.
Note that you can still get *turn-by-turn* directions with the 935, one of two ways:
1) Import route and navigate using dwMap (same dev as routeCourse). dwMap gives you turn-by-turn directions, regardless of where the route was imported from. This is the most user-friendly way, but you’re using the dwMap app on your watch, not the native run app, so you lose some features like Connect IQ data fields, metronome, etc. And you have to pay for a subscription to get turn-by-turn directions.
2) Create a course in GC (website) or save an activity as a course in GC, then send to device. (GC adds the turn-by-turn directions to the course automatically.)
There is another way, which is to create the route (with embedded TbT directions) “somehow” (there are a few different ways) and put it in on your watch using a computer and the USB cable, but that’s even more complicated than 2).
Currently, routes imported with routeCourse do *not* have turn-by-turn directions, which is a deal-breaker for me. The dev is looking into it, tho.
In the review, Ray said there wasn’t a way to create a route on your phone and send it to your device. But it looks like these apps are claiming just that, no computer needed. I don’t really need the maps of the 5x if I can create a route on my phone and send it to the 935. I have a 310xt so I’m used to following a breadcrumb trail without turn by turn directions. It would be much easier than having to check my phone every time I’m running in an unknown area.
I was referring to native ways.
There is a slowly growing collection of apps either just out, or soon to be out, that can accomplish this. Wikiloc being one.
Thanks Will. The subscription is less than what I would have to pay for the 5x and the smaller size of the 935 makes it more appealing. There are times I would need to create routes at short notice (holidays/different work locations) and these apps would make it easier to create a route to follow.
Hello – I’ve been mulling over purchasing the Fenix 5 for a while now and typically follow your product reviews as the end all be all for sports watches. Just a general question – when doing a side by side of what the Forerunner 935 has vs. the Fenix 5, it looks like they are basically the same (save the 5X that has the mapping technology). In your opinion, what’s the actual difference that drives the difference in price points? I want the watch mainly for running, HR tracking and other work outs while also being able to wear it every day (home, office, out).
Thanks – and congrats on the continued success of your site.
Mike
Check out the garmin fr935 forums on the fenix5 to 935 cross over club
link to forums.garmin.com
Is there a possibility to use the 935 for pacing while swimming? So instead of using the Finis tempo trainer using the vibration alerts on the 935?
Now that the watch has been out for a while, is there anyone out there who uses it in conjunction with Android? Specifically I have a fully updated Pixel XL. I have a Fenix 3 that connects and disconnects seemingly willy nilly. I’m concerned Garmin just sucks at the bluetooth connection since my ELEMNT connects just fine and never loses connection.
No issues with my Samsung S7
My Forerunner 935 arrived on Friday, just in time for this weekend’s marathon. I am highly impressed, love how light it is, not too massive on my smallish wrists (lady), and loving the always on optical hr. I’m truly impressed by the battery life : 3 full days, including a nearly 5 hour marathon with Run Dynamics Pod, sleep tracking, and I’m still at 65%! Wow!! The biggest challenge is getting used to the different button locations, having used the square watches for the last 10 years, but I’m so happy with my 935
I have a Fenix 3. I love most of the watch but what is really bad is the tempo indication during running. Way to much fluctuation. Not usable. Maybe my personal device was bad but there were more people complaining.
Ray?Or others? Is this watch accurate in “tempo indication during running” compared to fenix 3?
Hey Paul
I have the same issue. I’m using now run race screen (link to apps.garmin.com) with different pace smoothing settings, depending on what I’m doing. For longruns I leave it at 15-20s, for intervals I set it to 5-10s.
Sorry a bit late but Thank you! That helps a lot!
Do I upgrade my 920 for the 935?
Yes, unless you want metal instead of plastic. In that case, you should get a Fenix 5.
For me, I LOVE the look of the 935. This whole plastic vs. metal was certainly an issue with my 735. As much as I loved the 735 (except lack of golf), it did indeed look plastic…thie 935 looks great on. My two cents
Anyone know what is going on with this watch and shipments? Bought on Amazon over a month ago and still says it is on backorder. Lame.
Bundle or base?
Bundle’s weren’t set to start leaving Garmin until Apr 28th, which was Friday, which meant the absolute earliest you’d see retailers receive them was May 1st. But that’s assuming the retailer paid to upgrade their shipping from Garmin’s distribution hub to the retailer. I’d suspect a company like Amazon would probably just leave it at the defaults.
Also assumes those orders went out on April 28th, and further assumes there was a lot of quantity.
Same for me. I ordered the watch only on March 30 and I am still waiting for Amazon to ship it.
Amazon today started to show availability of the Base version starting May 10. I wonder if they will fulfill the back log of preorders from now. I hope so.
I have just received my new 935. To my surprise the active display is smaller than the on my 735. But the black ring is now bigger and the watch face the fill out the face look ridiculous compared to 735, due to the larger black ring around the face.
735 active face is 31,1 mm according to Garmin and 935 is 30,5 mm. I was looking for a bigger watch face not a smaller. As some has said 935 has now a round face but the price has been a big black ring. The ring is approxly 5mm wide. Why Garmin cannot use the watch face area better, i cannot understand. It is the same as for Fenix 5 as the watch face size is the same as for 935.
The actual display area is still larger because it doesn’t cut off the bottom/top. Plus the resolution is higher and display is crisper, along with a much better back light. I too wish the display took up more of the watch but I’m sure they did this for technical reasons. A bigger display would use more battery. A smaller watch body probably wouldn’t be big enough for all the electronics and battery. Look at the Fenix 5s where they slightly shrunk the watch body, but also reduced the battery life. They are always balancing size with functionality, and for me this was a home run, given today’s technology.
The first thing that struck me when I saw the 935, coming from a 630 owner, was the size. It’s noticeably bigger than the 620/630/735, and almost the same size as Fenix 5. Interesting point that the increase in size was necessary to fit the larger battery and cram in all the sensors, but this may not be a welcome change for guys with particularly small wrists or women. I initially thought about delaying the purchase of the 935 in the hope that Garmin would release an update for the 630, or is this the new 630? I wonder if this size will be adopted for all future Forerunner watches?
I’ve got slim wrists and I haven’t noticed it as being especially chunky – the slim profile makes a real difference there. It doesn’t look obtrusive to my eyes, and it doesn’t get in the way – getting slim shirt sleeves or tight longsleeve top sleeves over it isn’t a problem.
So for me the size is a complete non-issue. Perhaps the F5 – having a bigger profile – would be more of an issue?
I have tiny wrists but for some reason the 935 looks really just fine on them.
I also tried the Fenix 5 and it wasn’t bad either. The 5X on the other hand, that was ridiculous!
Ray, my new Garmin 935 from Clever Training arrived today, replacing my trusty 310xt which finally gave up after 6 years. Can the metronome feature the 935 be set to function in the swim mode or does it work just for running? Sure would be nice in lieu of the Tempo Trainer.
Thanks for the awesome website! It’s the first place I come before making any exercise related purchase.
Pete Holahan
Ray, have you had a chance to test using Garmin’s UltraTrac mode? As an ultrarunner who needs more than a 24 hr. battery life, I’m curious as to the accuracy of the UltraTrac mode.
You ever find out the answer to your question? I’d be interested in knowing.
Hi all, just got my 935 which is pretty awesome. Except i have one problem the battery is draining quit fast during normal daily usage. In hour i lose around 4% battery per hour is this normal?
My watch is not draining battery that quickly. I recharged the watch Tuesday afternoon, and have worn in since then (~40 hours), including a 25 minute run yesterday, and I’m now at 90%.
Thx, for the response. I guess i will be sending my watch back. Probely a connection problem with my iphone ;(. Aldough it worked fine with my 630.
make first factory reset, and test it again. It should work.
I’d also recommend a reset and full recharge again before swapping it out.
As a follow up, I’ve been using the 935 with an iPhone 7+, connected via BT throughout the day. There are likely other settings that effect battery drain, but I at least wanted to clarify that part.
4% / hour is about what you’d expect with GPS turned on. If you are just leaving it on a standard watch face, it should be under 0.3%
I personally run a CIQ App 24/7 (rather than a watch face) doing regular web communication and various sensors enabled and I’m only seeing 0.8% / hour. No way a basic watch face, no matter what it’s doing, should be higher than that.
Hi, soft reset did not work.
However an hard reset below did the trick.
5. Hard-reset or Factory-reset – Option B
Turn OFF the Fenix
Press and *HOLD* LAP button.
Yep, HOLD it.
Power on
You will get the menu “Clean user data: Yes/No?” release LAP button.
You know what to do….
Thanks for the feedback, soft reset or master reset?
message for user who have 935,
After each swim workout the barometer and Altimeter give wrong values.
Example : 43 meter before session 957 meters after and barometer 1017 before and 1190 after.
Someone have the same issue like me ? i already made a call to french garmin support but they don’t know this product and no feedback for this problem !!
I had the same problem 3 times already but randolmy in the day and not after a swim
I had the very same problem with a fenix 5 this morning after a swim: 1011mb before the swim and 1048mb after…
Here the same problem, yesterday, before a swim, the pressure was around 1018mb and 1045 after…
How long does it take that it becomes normal? The next morning it is still 2 high….
Some comparisons to the 235 – hope its helpful. link to midpackgear.com
Got my 935 and noticed, in the right light, very fine surface scratches on the optical heart rate sensor (only in the black area). Anyone else seeing this issue? Any cause for concern, or should it be fine as long as they don’t get deep? Pic of the scratches (as good as I could get a shot, haha): link to imgur.com
Thanks all!
Yes, i had the same scratches and i do not know where they can come from. Did you get any reply? i’m having trouble with wrist HR and hoping this is not the cause;
Hi Ray,
Thanks for another exhaustive review. I’ve purchased the 935 and so far so good. The one question I have though – in your opinion – is why are Garmin watches getting more and more expensive. E.g. for the 935 at £469 it is not that different to say an iPhone 7 (£599). There are way less components in a Garmin, and clearly lower production scale, but are they now positioning themselves as a premium brand, or are the production costs of their watches relatively high given the components used?
Hi Ray great job done as usually (this review cost me 500€ 🙂 but watch is FANTASTIC ) but now that I have my brand new 935 since 3 days I have a question. I did 2 training and during these training after around 30 minutes I take out my HRM with the aim to use the watch ones. result was horrible because in both cases the watch wasn’t switching from Hrm to the watch ones. Watch was quite tight on my wrist. I tried to move the watch from left side to right side but result was the same few seconds of info then no more. Do you or someone else any suggestion? Is it better to avoid the switch on the fly so use one or the other from the beginning? Is there something in settings to be done? Bottom line I’m worried that unit doesn’t work properly.
Tks so much for any help here.
I have had the 935 for about a month now and all is good, but I am having sync issues with the GC app on the iphone. When I open the app I get the blue bar saying ‘syncing’ but after a short while it goes red and says ‘problem connecting with the server’. This happens every time, so it is not a random problem.
Has anyone else had similar issues?
Thank you
Hi Karl,
we have the same problem with an fenix 5 (or FR 935) and Motorola Moto G3.
It looks like it depends on the mobile phone connection or missing wifi connection.
The Garmin Connect App isn´t able to sync without a stabile internet connection.
Sometimes the GC App can´t finish trying sync, and the result is:
– mobile phone get´s very hot, and
– battery get´s very fast down
That´s not good and may be dangerous …
Anyone can help?
Hi Ray have you tested if the connection to for excample will be more stable if connected via bluetooth sitting in triathlon position ?
should be connection to Stages sorry
No, at present the Stages is on my road bike, not my TT bike – so I haven’t tried it in that BT/TT bike configuration. Sorry!
could be great if you could give it a shot
im wondering if the bluetooth smart connection might be better than the weak ant+ signal on the stages
Can the signal from Stages be boosted in any way? I have issues on the TT bike with Stages/935 as well
Asked Clever Training UK, when they will be shipping tri-bundle of 935. Well, they’re waiting for head office to notify.. So, early May might turn mid-end of May.
Hi Ray!
Short question abour quick release kit (I am completely new to these kits – never used one for my other garmin watches): Will the 935 quick release kit make use of the quick fit feature or do I have to use screws?
Really cannot figure it out based on the pictures shown by garmin.
Thanks for your feedback, Björn.
Yes, you can use the Quick Fit 22 band on the 935, although you will need to use the screwdriver to take the original 935 band off. Once you take if off, you simply just screw the poles back together and then you can take advantage of the Quick Fit bands.
Thx Adam,
I know and already own 2 quick fit bands – works like a charm.
But now I am considering buying the quick release kit (for easy bike mounting) which would be uncomfortable if not working in the “quick fit ecosystem”
Has anyone tried a less expensive 3rd party 22mm quick release band? 50.00 for a band seems a bit steep. I had used a 3rd party for my 735 and had no issues with it at all, not sure if anyone has tried that with the 935
Hi there- I just got my 935 from REI. I already have issues with it. It randomly turns off and won’t come back on unless you plug it into the charger. The battery life tells me it’s fine so it’s not that unless it’s not reading the battery life correct. Happens during workouts or just randomly during the day. Anyone else have this issue?
I’m sad to say if I can’t figure it out it’s getting returned.
Sorry to read this, Jordy.
Mine is rock solid. I would recommend a hard-/factory reset and a full charge. On which firmware are you?
If that doesn’t work there is for sure a hardware issue in your unit.
I love my 935 – best garmin I ever owned (and I had a lot of them ;-))
This sounds like it’s likely just a dud device. Mine has had no issues. Good thing is you got it at REI who will exchange it no questions asked. Hopefully you have an REI near you to make it completely painless. I’d definitely not send it to Garmin for repair or exchange as you would risk getting a refurbished model rather than brand new.
So if the reset doesn’t help, get it exchanged.
I have twice over 3 weeks had my watch just freeze (2.90 and 2.95 firmware).
I had to do a hard reset the first time.
The second time I needed to plug in the watch.
I have contacted garmin but did not hear anything back.
It seems to be retailers have received units from Garmin to work in the preorders. Amazon says now that mine arrives this Friday!. Looking forward to use it.
Hi, is the actual screen (without the black border and bezel) of the 935 bigger then the screen of the forerunner 630?
So I mean the screen without the black border.
So I’m strongly considering the FR 935 to replace my old 910xt. I was hoping for a rectangular display but this watch looks pretty sweet.
Question, though. I can get it in a bundle that includes the HRM-Tri and HRM-Swim. However, the HRM-tri seems to do everything the new running dynamics pod does. So should I save some money and get the 935 with the dyanmics pod rather than the bundle? I don’t see what the advantage of the bundle is…
You would get the Tri, if you intend on using it in, or training for, Triathlons. It basically does everything the HRM-Run and HRM-Swim does, in one strap. It saves having to swap out the straps between swimming and running, because the HRM-Run isn’t waterproof. But if you don’t do triathlons, then the HRM-Tri is a waste.
Mark, for HR accuracy some people still use the band even though the 935 has the wrist HR monitor, something that the pod can’t give you. As Ray mentioned in his review the wrist HR monitor still has some issues especially with the bike.
Does anybody know yet if the quick release kit will block the optical heart rate sensor?
Just got shipping notice for the 935 Triathlon bundle which I ordered from Clever Training Apr 14th.
Would anyone mind giving me some instructions on how to track sleep? Mine is not tracking. Do you need activity tracking on? I only use mine for running so I just leave all the activity tacking off. But I set up slee times and entered into “do not disturb” but still no info.
Hi Alissa, activity tracking needs to be on. Needles to say wear the watch at night ?
Thought readers would be interested to see that battery level percentage tends to decrease slower at low levels than at high levels. See the plot… Note that I have not be very active and used GPS only about 4 hours over the week because of an injury. I mostly swam.
Hi everyone,
after going quickly thorugh the review, I am not sure about the quality of the HRM sensor. Is it upgraded, or somehow different (appart from sticking out less out of the back of the watch), compared to 235? I had a chance to test the 235 when it came out, but it was a disappointment for me, it didn’t work well enough…
Maybe an estimate on how the Suunto Spartan Wrist HR might compare to it, HRM-wise?
Many thanks for any opinions!
Not sure I would ever trust any wrist based HRM over another solution whether a chest strap or even something like the Scosche RHYTHM for accuracy.
That noted, my view (grain of salt view) is that it is nice there is a built in heart rate monitor in situations where in a pinch I decide to run or do another activity and want some general sense of HR.
But when I go for a run, cycling, etc., and am prepping, I usually will then use a strap and/or the Scosche which I think is more dependable given it is attached farther up on the arm.
I have the chest strap which I have used for years, and I know and trust its strengths well (very accurate and precise most of time), but am aware of shortcomings (when not sweating and when cold needs to be artificially wetted — but before a critical race the pre-wetting may dry out, causing dryness artefact; conversely when very very wet, in rain with a wet jacket, there is over-contact artefact, and lastly due to a tapering chest to waist profile, my strap tends to slip down during a run).
I have tried 2 MIOs and when they work they are accurate enough, but during running the surge artefact from swinging the arms or deceleration on foot-strike tends to overcome the sensitivity of blush detection. Biking is much more tolerant for wrist-wearing detection. But for running I have tried all kinds of solutions. My best results have come with getting an extra large strap for my MIO LINK and wearing it just above my elbow on the inside of my biceps where my skin is paler, and maybe a little thinner. But I still get sudden losses of accurate heart rate when the displayed value suddenly jumps to my running cadence, especially when cold (?capillary vasoconstriction?) or when running hard (greater vertical oscillation?). Very Frustrating.
The Scosche may indeed be better because it is worn higher (less centrifugal force on arm swing), but the real benefit is the 3 LEDs, one with a yellow in addition to the 2 greens, better to detect the blood light wavelength absorption thorough the skin of people with pigment. I am of East Asian descent and my skin pigment is a contributing difficulty to the HR pickup I think. However the Scosche is an old model, and I am reluctant to pull the trigger. Also the battery may not last the duration I would take in a full Iron Man race; so I am reluctant to get one.
Ray, great review as always. Really like the FR935 even as only a running watch. I am only skeptical about the optical heart rate. What is the user experience so far for running beside the issues mentioned by Ray.
After about a week, my 935’s back and down buttons are no longer clicking. The still work, they just feel harder to press and don’t make the click feel anymore. Very cleaned them and nothing changed.
Anyone else?
Yes I have the same issue after a month of owning my 935. Still functional but you don’t get the same feeling that you have actually pressed the button. Quite annoying.
I’ve had it 2-3 weeks and I feel like all my buttons (with the exception of the start/stop button) have stopped truly clicking. Once and a while I get a nice click but usually they’re very soft. They still work fine and I’m pretty sure they’ll hold up, but it’s a slight bummer. Other than that I love the watch.
Same here. My down button is noticeably soft and less “clickier” than before. I’ve had it 5 weeks and this makes me nervous. Today I actually had to change the angle at which I clicked the down button for it to respond. This is not a good sign to me.
Yup, I contacted Garmin and they said the feel of my “Down” button would not get better, and offered to exchange. They also said I could go through the retailer I bought it from (Amazon). I thought Amazon had stock when I initiated the exchange, but unlucky, they’re now back to out of stock, so looks like I’ll be waiting a bit to get my 935 back!
I’ve got a support request in with Garmin Australia.
Just after a week of ownership my down button is no longer clicking.
My up button is starting to go that way.
They tried to do the “we haven’t received any other calls about this” as though this was a reason for not giving me support, I argued my point and they insisted I provide photo’s, proof of purchase, serial number and a video….
Well video can’t help with the tactile feed back, but I managed to capture the clicking noise, or lack thereof.
link to 1drv.ms
Video is mostly out of focus, I was more interested in capturing the audio.
Have a look on the Garmin forums, I believe others have reported similar. Not many but I’m sure I’ve seen a thread on the subject.
Hello everyone,
Just ordered my 935 and it should be in next week! I plan on wearing it outside of traditional activities for sleep tracking, HR, etc. (and because it looks sharp) Do current 935 owners find value in a screen protector? I hadn’t planned on getting one, but I’ve read mixed reviews about how easy the screen scratches. Thanks!
I wear mine ALL the time 24/7 – one of the first things I did was put a screen protector on it. I think it holds up better (granted only 2 weeks) than my 735 did – I rough house with my 55 lb dog with no scratches yet.
IMHO I think the protector makes it look better and this watch looks great on the wrist.
Hey Tim,
Check out this thread on the garmin forums: link to forums.garmin.com
I’m a triathlete. I want a good device that’ll work across all three sports. I want it to be a reliable HR monitor, and not on my chest (under a wetsuit and tri suit.
Is the 935 worth the money?
Should I buy a 735 or Fenix or Sunntu, or ?
Thanks for simple responses. This review is way too much for me! LOL. I just want the damn thing to work and work as simply as possible!
@Gregory, you still need a HR monitor (strap) for swimming by default this will not work with the wrist one.
As was stated by someone else, for swimming you will need a strap. Also for cycling given all the bouncing around, I get the impression NONE of the wrist based HRMs work all that well, though I never have checked closely.
I myself either use a chest strap (Garmin or Wahoo) or more consistently these days just use the Scosche RHYTHM+ which is further up on the arm and somehow doesn’t seem to get the spikes and issues I have seen with wrist based.
I have also read though have no data to support the idea that somehow if you are darker skinned these optical HRMs don’t work as well. I am darker but have not experienced that issue, but perhaps if I used a strap same time to compare data I might find differently. Who knows.
Hi Everyone –
A question on Strava integration…
My wife is keen to get a GPS watch for running, and one of her chief considerations is simplicity of syncing with Strava. Looking at Garmin’s whole range, which model(s) can do it the most seamlessly (i.e. fewest steps)?
Ideally, syncing would happen without conscious effort, either via automatically connecting to our home wireless network, or from being paired with her iPhone via Bluetooth (assuming pairing is ‘set it & forget it’ ).
Thanks for any and all input !
-Mike
Mike,
It is one time setup which is done in the Strava page. After that it is transparent because each and every time you synchronize an activity with Garmin it will automatically will be sent it to Strava within seconds.
Synchronizing activities with Garmin can be done easily via bluetooth using the mobile Garmin connect app or via Wifi or via you desktop Garmin express. I typically use the first option which is seamless, once the 935 and my iPhone are close the sync happens.
German –
Much thanks for your reply and insight.
Glad to hear that your sync experience has been so smooth over Bluetooth and the Garmin App. I have an Edge 510 that also will sync via Bluetooth, and honestly it’s been equal parts nice bonus feature or alternatively, an unreliable source of frustration. Hence my desire to figure out if I was the either the norm or the exception.
It does sound like WiFi sync requires the absolute least amount of user intervention to sync with Garmin Connect – Let me know if I’m wrong on that one though.
So in summary, from a purchasing perspective, if I was content with Bluetooth sync I could go with something as inexpensive as the Forerunner 35, but if I really wanted the WiFi option, that would push the price point up toward the 935 I guess.
Mike,
The Edge 510 uses Bluetooth 2.1 which was antiquated even at the time of its release (I think it was Ray’s biggest issue with the 510 in his review), so it wouldn’t shock me if it was a pain for syncing.
I’ve not actually noticed if the Wifi Autosyncs on the 935. It is easy enough to trigger a sync (Hold the light button to bring up the menu ring, and hit the Sync button), but I’ve not had any issues with just opening the Garmin app on my phone to sync. The run usually appears on Strava before the Garmin app says it is done syncing.
Your final conclusion is correct though. In terms of just syncing runs, anything from the FR25 to 935 will get the job done. Obviously a wide price range between the two, so it depends on if the additional features are necessary.
Mike, note that the difference in features between the 35 and 935 are huge and it is not only wifi; of course the difference in price is appreciable. The 935 is almost the top of the line for Garmin and it targeted for triathletes, hard core runners and data geeks 🙂
It depends on what you want for her, if you want something simple to track pace, time which uploads data to strava the 35 would do the job.
Ended up buying a 235 (only $15 more than the 35).
Ya’ll were spot on with saying that syncing via BT to Garmin Connect is a complete non-issue (post-pairing and with the App running, it ‘just happens’).
Very different days than my experience with the Edge 510, although I think I had especially bad luck for some reason as I have several teammates that sync exclusively via BT on their Edge 510’s and seem happy with it. Thanks for the help.
HRV stress. How is it the Vivosmart 3 can do the stress test with just the optical sensor but the 935 says I need a chest HRM to measure a stress score?
Looks like I need to do more research first, thats the old app, not that functionality from the Vivosmart 3 ported over. Need to wait longer
I’ve just got this garmin and there are a couple of things that have lost me.
I have the 820 so I’m used to group track showing on maps. I see on the 935 there’s a setting for group track to “show on maps”. How exactly do I get those maps and see the other riders?
Also struggling with the training status. I have an injury which means I can’t run but can bike. Do I need to run do set this up? It keeps asking me to do 2 outdoor runs for it to work.
Thanks
JS
@dc rainmaker
Any news on this? I’ve looked at forums stating that there have been issues with the Fenix series not picking up Vo2max workouts, therefore not giving training status.
Maybe you have further details?
I also have the same issue. Since I do not have a power meter on my bike, the cycling VO2max cannot be calculated. And I still have not run with the 935. It is also showing me the same that I need to run twice to get the status.
link to media.dcrainmaker.com mentions that it should be 2 runs/rides, but it seems it needs min 2 runs. Even if I run 2 times, what is the guarantee that it will show the correct status, if i only bike?
Would be glad to get your feedback.
The 920XT had a “Mute Notifications” option which would enable the Vibration, Sound or Sound/Vibration. I can’t seem to find this option on the 935XT, am I missing it or does it not exist? Is there another work around that I am missing. Currently have an iPhone 6, if that matters.
Go to Settngs, then Phone, then Smart Notifications
In the owners manual it says there is a data field named “lap pace per 500m” I can’t find it, is it really there?
I’m guessing that too do this, you’ll need to set your lap distance to 500m, then you’d get your place per lap like normal
I want to get my 935 connected as a Bluetooth device so it can be added as a trusted device, when unlocking my phone. I already know it has to be added as a Device through Garmin Connect, I’ve already done that, but that doesn’t add the watch as a BLE device.
How can I turn Bluetooth on, on the watch, so when I scan with my phone, it gets picked up as a BLE device?
Don’t tell me to pair it within Garmn Connect… I’ve done that already and that’s not what fixes this problem.
Thx in advance
Open settings in Garmin connect, long press the watch, then choose update connection. This will pair it as a BT device on Android at the system level. It does allow smart unlock. I use mine every day like this 🙂
When you say ‘long press the watch, then choose update connection’, what do you mean? What button do you ‘long press’ on the watch? There is no ‘Update Connection’ option inside Garmin Connect. Thanks.
Sorry about that.
Open Garmin Connect.
Open the menu in Garmin connect.
Open Garmin devices.
Long press the line with your 935.
Choose update connection.
Perfect.. thanks! That might help someone else as well 🙂
Any chance of getting pictures of the quick release kit mounted? I wonder how much thickness it adds and if it stays wearable all day with it. If not, I think I would prefer a Fenix 5.
Definitely, unfortunately I don’t have a quick release kit yet. But as soon as I do – I’ll post pics!
Here you go. Ask and you shall receive! I have attached some pictures.
I have a longer post and more pictures here: link to correrunamaraton.com
And if you are not proficient in english, you can use some Google Translate magic: link to translate.google.es
The 935 Quick Release goes back to the design of the FR305. Similar concept but much improved, and in my opinion, it’s held in place more securely than with a quarter mount Quick Release system.
You could use it all day… but it would look a little bit funky.
Another one
And the last one. Again, there are plenty more on the link if you are interested.
Thanks Eduardo!
Seems borderline, but I think I will go the 935 over the Fenix
Just to be sure, the quick release kit is similar to a quick fit band? So if I get a quick fit band, I can switch it off within seconds? That would eliminate every hesitation I have.
Maybe a small follow up video to show the usage of the system would be nice!
But I guess until then, I will have made my decision already 😉
Is similar in concept, as both will hold the watch by the pins. If you have a quickfit band yes, you will be able to take the band off the watch in a matter of seconds and place it in the Quick Release mount, and no need to worry about using the screw driver.
I don’t really understand why this quickfit band is not included in the Tri bundle, as it would make much more sense.
About the video… it would be too silly! :-). Really, it’s very simple. You just slide the watch on the bottom of the mount and click on top. That’s it.
I typically use a Garmin 820 with chest strap for bike rides and a Garmin FR235 (no chest strap) for everyday and runs. I like the addition of Training Load to this new watch and am considering upgrading my 235. But does the training load use data from other Garmin sources such as my 820 or will it only pull from the 935?
Will the 935 ignore 0 cadence when determining Avg cadence when used in bike mode?
Thanks Ray. Awesome report as always. I keep referring everyone to your site when they ask me about toys for sport.
My 910XT gave uptake ghost yesterday. And my IWatch v1 has a very cracked screen. So I was thinking of combining both watches into my next purchase.
I think either the 935 or the Fenix 5 Sapphire are the way to go. Probably the later as I seem to be pretty hard on watches and faces in particular.
Again . . . thanks for all the time you put into all your reports.
Thanks Ross – I appreciate the comments!
Hello, maybe I missed it but how can we change sport whilst in activity? Like from bike to run to bike…?
Thanks
If it’s not a standard triathlon, then set it up as a custom activity then just press the lap button to transition between the activities. Just like on any previous forerunner multisport watch
I don’t want to create a custom workout but change sport during the activity like in a multiple Brick session. Think we could do this in the 920…
Well if time isn’t of the essence, then just stop one activity and start the next one.
Right. So there is no one button to toggle between activities…
I found it….a long press at down button when you pause will let you toggle between other activities…
Okay… but… I don’t see the point of that? If you are finished an activity, why not just end it and start the next one? Wouldn’t it keep timing the activity you’ve toggled from?
In a triathlon (or other multisport race or training day), this allows you to have a total race record with all the individual sports within it.
Yes I understand that.. but what’s the difference in that, and setting up an activity and using the lap button to stop / start the activities? Surely that would be better??
You might want to do 4x(bike / run) splits…easier to toggle rather than set this up…
…to have it all in one activity rather than multiples…
Hi All,
I’m ready to pull the trigger on the 935 with the TriBundle
Does anyone know the where I can buy it from currently to get it in my hands the fastest… Thanks so much
Clever training was really fast for me, but admit I didn’t do the tri bundle.
Tri bundle will be tough. I know CT is expecting to have any remaining backorders for the tri bundle within about two weeks. All early-ish backorders (for tri bundle) have been fulfilled, and they actually had some stock I think it was about 7-10 days ago on bundles too.
Hi Ray,
You wouldn’t happen to have insight on Clevertraining’s european inventory and backorders? Ordered my tri bundle on 31st of March and still waiting for the shipping notification… Oh, the pain of the long wait!
I ordered 29th of March from Clever Training UK and still haven’t received my Tri Bundle. Based on customer support emails Head office in US is handling all the transactions to Garmin. So my guess is that CleverTraining US gets first and UK what’s left. (Wiggle UK already has bundles in Stock.)
Actually, US and UK sales are totally separate for Garmin. Distribution for UK is handled via the UK Garmin distributor channel, and US via the US side.
Wiggle had some sort of early deal there, which I believe is set to expire shortly. It’s why the dates were a bit later as listed on the site initially.
That said, I’ll get some clarification on when the bundles are expected in. Thanks for the support!
Based on UK customer service, they were waiting on confirmation from head office with Garmin (3 weeks ago)..
What is really not cool is that Clever Training took full money at day 1.. They should have taken some 10% and rest when delivered.
Hmm, the US site doesn’t. Let me find out why on the UK site.
So, Clever Training US says Early June. I’m expecting Clever Training UK to fallow in couple of days.
I’m calling to cancel my order and get it from Wiggle UK. Sorry about that, but it’s unacceptable.
I’m really psyched about the 935, I prefer it over the fenix 5 because of its size. But I wonder, do you think Garmin will keep updating the 935 at the same time as the fenix 5? As you mentioned, they are pretty much the same, but since Garmin tends to give preference to the fenix lineup, not sure if they will keep updating both at the same time.
Hi Ray,
I enjoyed the review of the 935 and other reviews you have made.
Well I bought the 935 and updated it to the latest software.
I like it but have noticed a few minor anomalies you may be interested in.
After and ocean swim the altimeter seems to lose calibration.
After re-calibration (using GPS) both the Altimeter and the Barometer seem to return to normal.
I selected auto-calibration and it either does not work or I am too impatient to wait for it.
The optical HR reading seems a little high after an ocean swim until the salt water is rinsed away.
It seems to read OK if wet but not if there is salt water present.
Wi-fi works OK as long as the SSID is broadcast, however the auto connect does not seem to work.
I waited 24 hours and gave up, then connected manually.
I have noticed the maximum HR in a run is not reflected in the 4 hour HR plot.
hi DC R
when i view the compass in Open water swim it tracks north as you would expect however whwn i press the start button for the activity the compass seems to fix on one position. just wondering if you saw this.
cheers
With the HRM-Swim, do you get Swimming recovery metrics? Swiming training load stats?
After asking in the Garmin forum with no luck, I would like to see if you have noticed spikes in the pace chart in garmin connect using the 935?. See for example this run during the weekend:
link to connect.garmin.com
It has several spikes, amazing paces (1m/m, 3m/m, etc) during the run. I have the same setup that I had with my 235, hr band and tempe pod and no issues noted before. Have you seen this with the 935? Any other insight will be appreciated. Thanks.
I think I figured this out. I had set up 3D Speed on and only when on I am having the spikes in the speed graph. Once I put it back to off (default) everything is back to normal.
Hi,
When using the 935 with a H10 strap, would you be able to use the new load and HRV measurements or is that restricted to Garmins own straps?
Thanks
Gerard
after the last update via garmin express (something with sensor and chipset, fw is still 3.30) i lost connection to my polar h7 strap and can’t connect anymore. the 935 just don’t find the strap. anyone else with this problem or even better, ideas?
Hi there!
I’m torn between the 5 and the 5X, but would like to understand something regarding the display size. Since the 5X measures 51 mm, does that mean that the display area is a little bit larger than the 5, or is it because the screen size is the same, but the bezel and case is a little wider? I haven’t been able to try on an actual set for comparison and have tried to use your photos for indication.
Thanks!
Hi Ray,
Do you know if these Garmin Quickfit Bands fit the 920xt?
Cheers.
@Oliver – it does. You can find out more information on the Garmin website – link to buy.garmin.com
I currently have a Polar V800, which I bought on preorder in 2014, so it’s getting a little old. My plan was to wait until the new v800 was released but that doesn’t seem to be happening anytime soon. In your opinion, should I wait and see what polar does or pull the trigger on the Garmin 935?…
I replaced my V800 with the Garmin 935 a couple of weeks ago, although haven’t been looking for a new watch at all.
I’ve read so many good things about it, and the watch works like a charm straight out of the box and don’t have to wait for software updates with the promised functions like we did with V800.
So I am really happy with the watch, but at the same time after 15 years of using Polar products, it broke my heart to go with the competition this time.
Hello Judith, this is interesting. I changed 3 years ago from Polar RS800 to the Garmin FR620 because I wanted a watch with GPS. The V800 didnt offer anymore value for money and a lot of things have been missing or not working. The Garmin 620 works fine, except it the elevation, since it doesnt have a barometric sensor. Therefore I was looking to change and the 935 came to my attention. I dont like very often to use my heart rate strap and like therefore the concept of the optical sensor, but it many reviews it doesnt seem to work well. How do you like this feature. Thanks for you feedback. Peter
Hi Peter,
I’ve upped my training at the beginning of this year and I started to have serious problems with the heartrate strap…so much that sometimes I had to skip wearing it till my skin healed enough to wear it again.
At the same time I’ve been following Ray’s reviews on optical heartrate watches and now was the time to venture in it…So far I am a lot happier with OHR. Obviously I don’t analyze it as much as Ray, but it satisfies my hunger for information on my runnings. Having 24/7 heartrate measurement gives me some guidance where to go next too.
Same thing for me : even if my v800 is still ok (used twice a week for running, once for swimming and 2 times a month for mountain biking on average), I would like to “test” a new watch. Not sure if it’s a geek desire, or the fact Polar HR sensor is getting worse and worse each time I use it (today it recorded a 214 heart rate max while it’s actually hard to get to 190 !) that makes me eager to buy a 935. Garmin platform is one of the best, with good mobile apps. The watch offer everything I am waiting for. And embedded HR sensor could be great for running. But I would have to buy a HRM-tri monitor for mountain biking and swimming activities. Therefore the total (€) amount could be higher than expected. That’s the only thing that slowed me down for the moment to be honest…
Forerunner 935 bug while swimming? I experienced now two times the forerunner 935 is not recording (openenwater activity) geo data (location, Distance) after proper recording bicycling stop and store this recording and jump after 5 min into 15 degrees water, after starting openwater activity and acquiring GPS signal. Later after a while of rest sminging again it seems to work with the openwater activity. But i have the impression aquiring GPS signal while swimming is very very bad, and inaccurate, and this in an open sun lake. Is that normal or are there any specifics in handling the forerunner 935 before go to swimming? At this time i’m totally frustrated and do not know if it is a bug or a malfunction.
The 935 sounds great from the review and people’s feedback after buying and running it though its paces. I probably have some questions.
Is the Stryd so much more accurate in terms of distance, pace and cadance than the Garmin footpod?
If you purchase both the 935 bundle and Stryd will it take the data from (VO, GCT, distance, pace and cadance) HRM-TRI strap or the Stryd footpod? Which one is more accurate?
Anyone using the Garmin 935 bundle and Stryd footpod together? And how are you finding it?
Many thanks DC for your hard work
Would it make sense to buy a third party heart rate monitor with the 935 ?
Indeed, the garmin ones do not give me the functionnality I want (I think …) i.e.
– Can record without the watch and transmit after (during strength workout for example)
– Can provide correct HRV/RR data to the watch
– Can do everything else a garmin chest strap does and as good as they do (autonomy, accuracy)
! except running dynamics and transmit HR in water as I don’t care about those parts
Thanks for the feedback !
There are some funnies with the 935 and open water swimming (not using the HR strap).
Sometimes in the swim results I get both average and maximum HR readings and sometimes not.
Both readings are the same when I get them.
For my 3.2km swim last Sunday the watch recorded a maximum HR of 75 and an average HR of 75.
This data was uploaded to Garmin Connect.
The watch should not record any HR data without the strap (from my understanding). You guessed it, the watch recorded NO aerobic benefit for that swim. Other swims record no HR data (as expected). I have no idea how the open water swims are treated WRT my overall Training Status.
As usual the open water swims muck up the altimeter readings. The other day I returned home and I noticed I was at minus 126 metres height. At the start of a swim I notice a sharp drop in both altitude and barometric pressure when observing the graphs of this data.
After a swim I notice the HR reading is generally too high and takes sometime (say 20 minutes) to recover.
So far I have not noticed and problems with running and bike riding.
I have firmware version 3.3 and can’t wait for the next update.
Just picked this up, great gadget so far. Does the quick release kit block the optical HR?
No it doesn’t. It’s a 3 part system, as opposed to the 2-part system of the 920: The watch, the wrist bracket, and the bracket which sits on your bike. The wrist bracket has a circular hole in the back which doesn’t block the HR sensor. You then lift the watch out of this bracket, and place it into the other bracket which sits permanently on your bike. This uses the same 1/4 turn mounts as previously, but it’s been rotated 90 degrees, so you’ll need to modify your existing mounts.
Thanks, just ordered the kit.
So is this going to be the new high end running watch too or are Garmin going to release a new top of the range running watch in the next 6-12 months?
This is that watch.
Interesting. My wife has a Garmin 620 she has used a few years, and is holding out for a “new” version of it versus the 935 (skipped the 630). I actually tried to get her the 935 but didn’t really work out, she just wasn’t that interested.
Thinking maybe she could like the fenix 5s better, but besides expense I keep getting concerned if people are really finding issues with GPS on it because of the metal. My 935 is working out great.
Interesting if they really have decided to ditch a premium running watch, must be a heck of a lot of serious runners who don’t want/need a tri watch. So now they have to buy a multi sport watch even though they only do one sport. Maybe the tri scene is growing?
I suppose from a price point of view in the past I think there wasn’t a huge price difference between the top running watch and a dedicated tri watch and Garmin think runners will now end up buying a tri watch.
I think the cross training push for runners is helping Garmin to steer people to the multi-sport watch. I myself have a general fear of biking and only do it if my car breaks down :). However, I have taken up swimming so a stand alone running watch was not in the cards. Also I love the walk and golf features to boot which my 735 was lacking.
I am 100% sold on my 935. I feel that it is way more rugged than the 735 was in terms of picking up nicks and scratches for some reason – same level of playing around with the dog and wearing it 24/7 for the past month and not a single mark showing anywhere.
Even the running watches have effectively been multi sport watches, just with minimal features removed that made it easier to do a sequence of sports for multi-sport events. 90% or more of the features were already there. I actually think this is a great move by Garmin to simplify their lineup. Some that only want to do a couple sports might get confused because they don’t need a multi-sport watch, but I think many more got confused before by all the different versions of their watches.
I don’t understand why they would release something running specific – I don’t see the gains. The differences as best I can tell are entirely software based, the hardware would be identical so it wouldn’t be any cheaper would it?
The features that make it a tri/multi-sport watch don’t in anyway hinder, obstruct or clutter it’s running functionality. They’re just extra modes that you can either hide by removing from your favourites, or remove from the watch full stop.
I’m a runner, 5 of my top 6 sports modes are all variations of running – I’ve set up different ‘apps’ with customised data fields for long runs, races, trail runs etc. I don’t see the need to remove Open Water swim modes etc even though I’m unlikely to use them anytime soon because they don’t do any harm being hidden in the bottom of what is effectively an app drawer.
Ray, do you think they will move the vivoactive HR up in terms of features and price, or will it remain designed to compete with the apple watch? Also, I’m surprised that this model hasn’t been refreshed yet. Do you think it’s too late for this year, unless maybe September? Lastly, as you said, going for a round format would allow for faster upgrades, but it seems that they’ll stick to the rectangular model for tactile screens instead. Is that a mistake? I personally don’t like this format. Thanks!
I don’t we’ll see a shift in pricing, since it does really well at the $250 price point (allowing it to undercut the Apple Watch for most fitness reasons). I don’t know on futures for it, but at the moment it handles itself well, save the lack of music when competing against things like the TomTom series or the Polar M600 (+ random other Android Wear watches).
I’m having trouble to connect my Wahoo Blue HR to my forerunner 935. Is there a setting to activate BLE sensors or what am I missing. And yes, the sensor is fine and I can connect it to Wahoo fitness app on Iphone.
same for me with a polar h7 strap.
before the last update via garmin express (sensor and chipset update) it worked without problems.
so hoping for the next update
I used the 935 for the first time today on an indoor bike session and the HR was way low on the hard intervals, ranging from 100-120 when it should be around the 170, could I be missing something or is my watch defective? 🙁
In the Review its mentioned about free-style multisport mode. This does not work for me, when I press the left centre button during a workout it takes me to the current settings but I cant see where would change the sport. Can anyone give me any ideas as to what I’m doing wrong?
Hold Down (left bottom button) to switch sports. (This hotkey, and others, can be customized under Menu > Settings > System > Hotkeys).
Yup, exactly.
Ordered the base model from Amazon May 24, and as of today, June 4, they still don’t have an estimated ship date. Every model I’ve checked is similarly vague about when they’ll be back in stock. Anybody know what this is about? Seems unlikely to be just a problem of too much demand. Manufacturing problems, maybe? Sure would like to have my new watch.
I felt that both REI and Clever Training were pretty quick even though they didn’t specify a date on their websites. I ordered one from both (one for me and my wife), and they came pretty darn quick in both cases.
I think they have rolling stock coming in daily so they are able to keep up with the demand real time.
Has anyone else had their 935 quit working when not on external power? I received my 935 on April 5th and it has worked great – may favorite Garmin watch to date (after owning the 910 and 920). June 2nd did an OWS and then noticed on my drive home the screen was off and no response to any button press. When I got home plugged it in and it powered on and it works but no activity/blinking from the HRM. Unplug from power and it immediately shuts off. Short version – I talked with Garmin Support and they were unable to bring it back to life. So the 935 is on the way back to Garmin and new one will be shipped to me – bummer is it may be a couple weeks but I’m hoping they can find one sooner as I have a 70.3 on June 10th. Anyone else with a similar experience?
How often do you clean it? After every / every other training session? I think giving it a 5 minute dunk in a glass of hot tap water (not boiling hot) every so often may help to clean out any sweat / salt build up in any nooks and crannies, and help with keeping the buttons acting as they should. I certainly found this helped on my 920XT when I felt the buttons weren’t quite right.
Hi Ray,
How do these watches compare to the Quatix 5? Im assuming they’re the same except the Quatix has the additional sailing functions?
Thanks.
Mark.
The Quatix 5 is basically just a Fenix 5 with the added boating features.
Thanks Ray! Now to convince the wife 😀
Hello,
nice reviews and tests.
I have one question.
After wearing Fenix 5 for about 14 day and now wearing Forerunner 935.
Is it possible that OHR on Forerunner 935 is more stable and more accurate than in Fenix 5 due to lighter watch and more stable watch because of weight of Fenix 5.
Fenix 5 looks definitely better and more solid build than Forerunner 935, but for daily use and more exact HR data, I think FR935 is better.
What do you think about my thoughts?
Thank you
Best regards
Has anyone had issues with the distance not keeping up during an open water swim, it takes a few minutes after getting out of the lake to catch up, if I press the lap button to move onto the bike it then just takes the current distance reading. Any ideas? Could it be because I mix between front crawl and breast stroke?
Hi Ray, I have been using a Garmin Edge 520 and just bought a Forerunner 935. I assume that if I countinue using my Garmin Edge for my bike rides and I use the Forerunner for my swimming and running, I will not get accurate stats such as training load & stress. And I believe Garmin Connect will not integrate them using The Firstbeat software from the Forerunner 935. Is there a way to integrate all my workout data? Thanks
I’ve been using the 935 for a couple of weeks and it consistently reports lower mileage and slower miles splits than the Strava iPhone app (iPhone 6s Plus). I have the 935 set to use GPS and Glonass, and AFAIK the iPhone uses the same. Some of the mile splits are ~30 seconds slower on the 935, and the mileage is often .1-.2 lower per mile. Has anyone else noticed this or compared the two? Thoughts? Same for cycling, btw, longer distance and faster avg speed reported by iPhone.
You may take GLONAS out of the picture to see if it improves. It may sound odd but just do a search in this page and you’ll see that there are reports of affecting accurancy.
I assume your first part refers to running? In any case, are you talking trails or road? On trails, my 935 is always short compared to my Edge or FR630, biking or running. On the road, all 3 are generally within a fraction of a percent of each other.
Mini-review of the quick release kit for the 935:
Pros:
– Very solid mount in watch and bike modes.
– Super easy and fast to switch from watch to bike.
– Accurately tracks HR after it’s installed.
– Seems durable, though I’ve only used it for a couple of weeks.
Cons:
– It’s less comfortable than the standard watch and kinda bothers my wrist bones, so I end up wearing it higher on my wrist than I normally would.
– Any fashion value that the 935 had before the QR (very little, IMO) is completely gone with this thing on…it makes the watch seem significantly bigger/uglier on the wrist. I personally don’t care as I only wear the watch for running, but it’s a consideration if you wear it 24/7.
– $30 seems a bit pricey for what it is
That’s the coolest part of the 935 quick release system when paired with a quick fit band. Outside of a triathlon, there would be little reason to use the watch part of the quick release. Just about as fast to attach the quick fit band as pop it in to the watch cradle.
The $30 seems pretty reasonable to me. It’s the $50 for the quick fit band that seems really excessive.
Good point, I didn’t know about the quick fit band. And I agree $50 seems totally ridiculous for that.
Looking for advice.
I just sold my Vivoactive HR device (which I loved!) in order to upgrade to a multisport watch instead as I have ambitions of doing some triathlons in the near future. Currently i’m a gran fondo / touring style cyclist who just picked up running this year. I have completed one 1/2 marathon and am starting to train for a full which i’m hoping to do by the end of the year. Swimming is my weakness but i’m hoping to jump in the water a bit more often over the summer as well and then we’ll see where things go from there.
I’m a bit torn on whether I should go for the Forerunner 735xt or the 935. I’ve checked out the product comparison tool and read just about every review online there is. Obviously the 935 is the latest and greatest, but it’s not that much different and i’m not sure it really makes sense for me to justify the extra cost.
The reviews on the 735 have left me with mixed feelings and am a bit hesitant on choosing it. But should I really be concerned?
I’m not a fan of the GPS altimeter over the barometric but in fairness I have no experience with the GPS version. Does it make that much of a difference? It’s not like i’m living in the Rocky Mountains. We have some hills here, but it’s
I’m also concerned with the battery life. Realistically, I think 14hrs should be fine. It’s actually slightly better than the Vivoactive HR was and i had no issues with it, but as i get into triathlons, will this become an issue? It might take me 14hrs to swim a km! 😉 (obviously joking…) I guess as long as it’s fully charged before starting, I should be fine?
Price is also a bit of a consideration. I have seen the 735 watch only for $450 CDN where the 935 is $680 watch only. It’s a pretty big price for a barometric altimeter and battery life. I realize there are other benefits, but does it really add up?
I guess my biggest concern is with the quality. Is the 735 as flakey as I’ve read in many reviews (buttons, blank screens, plastic cracks, etc.)? Do we expect to see similar issues with the 935 as it gets more use (we’re already hearing about button issues)?
Will I have any regrets with the 735? Or should I just suck it up and go with the 935 instead?
Thanks in advance!
I only swim and run so I can’t talk to all the advanced “stuff”, but I did sell my 735 to get the 935 so I can talk to that:
1. The 935 seems to me at least to be far more sturdy and able to take the constant wear and tear of wearing it all day. I had some small marks and such on my 735 pretty early on and my 935 has survived more advanced activities with no scratches or anything. Not sure of the factual nature surrounding this, but it just seems better. I love the look of it over the 735.
2. If you golf, that added feature is huge as it was for me I love the golf GPS tracking it is awesome. The added battery life makes a massive difference when you do play golf or go on long runs/walks/bike rides.
3. The screen quality is way improved over the 735. the resolution makes a really big difference for me.
I’ll keep it short and sweet but those were my reasons for switching as well as my reasons for being so happy that i did so. I have had the 935 for about 45 days now.
I just upgraded from F3 (non HR) to 935, and I love it! The F3, IMO was not comfortable for everyday wear due to its weight, and it did not function as an activity tracker. I’m also not a bling guy and the F3’s bezel was too showy for my tastes. The 935 is very very comfortable to wear, even all day. While the 935 is slight thicker than the F3, it actually feels smaller and more comfortable. Functionality aside, I think these are important considerations.
Regarding the altimeter, I find the GPS altimeter much better than barametric. From other barametric watches I’ve had in the past, I had to calibrate before every activity since weather affected readings from day to day, and I was never certain if the gain/loss were acurate. But if I were at some unfamiliar place, I had to guess the calibration. Part of the fun of running or biking at a new place to to see the true altitude you’ve summited. I also love it for skiiing as well.
With previous training watches, battery life was always an issue. I had to constantly plan ahead to charge the watch. With these new Garmins, I can do several short workouts a week without being worried about charging the watch. One less variable to deal with. Worth it IMO. I’m also starting to use the 935 as my everyday smart watch in place of my trusty Pebble Time (so sad). Most smart watches are a joke due to their battery life. (How good is a watch if you’re always worried about it dying on you. Both the 935 (still testing) and the F3 would easily last 2 weeks if not using the GPS (Pebble would last 5 days). Functionality is still limited tho. We need more apps!
Price is important, for sure. But if you can swing it, go with the 935. It is the best multisport watch I’ve ever owned (my first was the Polar 625).
Hi.
I have a suunto that i use for triathlon. Movescount have an app that you can add into your running menu screen created to predict current triathlon race finish time over olympic, half and full ironman distances. This is handy when you’re on the run instead of trying to do calculations in your head. Does the 935 have a similar app to download or in build software that does the same?
Thanks
Hi all, seeking some help with Garmin 935 and the iOS connect app.
Had the 935 for just on a month and has been fantastic for all uses, but there has been a major issue of late I suppose more so with the app than the watch and looking for any help anywhere. I’ve put a post on Garmin forums and even emailed support with no responses. So here goes.
Lately the app has been using MONSTEROUS amounts of data doing who knows what, but it appears streaming high def movies or downloading the Garmin backup server. I have a 12gb data plan on my phone a month and the app completely blew it apart in two nights without me noticing until I awoke one morning to find msgs from my provider saying I had used all my data. After investigating and begging my phone company for more data I deleted the app and reinstalled, monitored it closely for days, turning off data for the app unless I wanted to sync activities. After a week of close monitoring I let my guard down and forgot to turn data use off for the connect app and again over night it used 3gb doing god knows what and blew my data cap again. So now I have no data left and cannot figure wtf the app is doing.
So my question is, has anyone else had this problem or knows what is going on? I’m scratching for answers as this is quite a problem and it is silence treatment from Garmin on this problem. If anyone else has experienced this or knows anything about it please help a brother out!
Cheers.
So I assume as long as the app isn’t running, no extra data usage? Where does it show up in the settings/Cellular options? Is it actually showing all the usage as coming from Connect or is it something in System (look at the bottom)? I had a similar thing happen a couple months ago where suddenly I plowed through 2GB of my 2GB plan in 48 hours while using the iPhone mapping (so no Garmin device involved here). My normal usage is less than 200MB per month. I believe it was under Settings/System/Mapping Services. But I use navigation all the time and had never had this happen before or since. In my case, Verizon support bumped my 2GB plan to 4GB for a month for free so I could still use my phone.
So it could actually be some randomness on your phone where multiple apps, or even system services, are interacting with Connect.
On Android you can see the specific app data usage, you don’t need to guess or speculate.
Settings->Data Usage. Breaks it down app by app. Or you can go in via the Apps menu, look at Connect and see there.
For what it’s worth, over the last month my GC Android app has used less than 60MB of data, of which about 1/3 was foreground use (i.e. when I was physically using the app, as opposed to background use.) So I would be concerned by the numbers being quoted.
It’s broken down app by app in iOS as well, I hadn’t reset the figures for months but when I went investigating the first time the usual culperites where there (safari, chrome, YouTube, Spotify, Facebook etc) for data usage, but connect had used 16gb which I thought was strange. So I reset the values and watched them like a hawk. In 5 days connect barely used a MB, then all of a sudden one night it used 2.4gb and blew my cap again. Everyone I know who has Garmin connect on there phone has been watching it s I asked them and none of them have had any issues, a few people are posting on Garmin forums about this and it has been meet with silence as well so I am perplexed as to what is happening.
I assume you are just using a watch face when this happens (CIQ or stock) but not actually running a CIQ app? Connect IQ apps can request web data but watch faces and data fields can’t.
This sounds like a serious bug in Connect. I’d contact Garmin support if you haven’t already. There is no way it should be accessing this kind of data.
Just running stock 935, haven’t installed any apps or widgets etc.
I contacted garmin via email who said to contact there phone support who basically denied it’s the app and my phone is wrong. I asked the person to escalate this quickly as I’m not the only person who has seen this and the developers need to know asap and look into it. That was meet with resistance as well.
So I’m hoping DC Reads this and uses his garmin contacts and get some them to look into it.
Cheers everyone!
Do you have a screen-cap by chance of it burning through data?
Got some screen shots, I reset my data stats on the 12th June (so it reset the 16gb connect had previously used and I didn’t take a screenshot of it, also don’t judge me for some of the apps I have installed haha) and for the most part ive had to turn data use off for the app to avoid it burning through more data. As I said I watched it like a hawk for a few days and it barely used a MB, let my guard down one night and left data on for it and it used 2.5gb as the screenshot shows.
Really appreciate the reply and any help you can gather Ray!
Hi,
I would like to raise my concern about the accuracy of the GPS on the 935
I just bought one to replace my 910XT and it seems that the accuracy is way worse for me using the same settings ( smart recording and GPS only)
I am running almost always the same course at lunch time that goes around wharf and the last 3 times were with the 935.
They all have the same issue I have never seen ( I checked the map because I saw each time my pace dropping from 5.xx min/k to 4.10-20 min /k.
link to connect.garmin.com
link to connect.garmin.com
link to connect.garmin.com
The same run with my phone
link to strava.com (same than 1809787142)
and 910XT
link to connect.garmin.com
link to connect.garmin.com
You can see than both my phone and my 910XT are way more accurate between Dawes Point and Miller point
It is the 3 wharf around 30min
Anyone experienced this kind of issue ?
I called Garmin and they asked me to change the settings to recording 1 per second and GPS + Glonass.
I will do that later this week but I would expect at least the same accuracy between the 910 and the 935 when using the same settings
Thoughts ??
I see the same sort of errors even with glonass turned on as well. Also saw it with 735. Seems to be related to any course with something like switch backs–the tight back and forth seems to confuse it. My iphone however is perfect on the same course at the same time so not sure what it is. I thought about turning OFF glonass to see if that would help, but sounds like it wouldn’t.
For information I have done more test
GPS + Glonass + Smart recording : link to connect.garmin.com
It is almost worst !
GPS + 1 per second is pretty bad as well : link to connect.garmin.com
I am pretty disappointed so far by the GPS !
I have screwed the test GPS + GLONASS + 1 per second. I did only the reverse course so I will have to run it again.
To me there is no excuse to have a less accurate GPS than the 910XT …
In all the activities, bar one which was down to me as I arrived late at a race and had to start the activity as soon as the circle went green (I normally leave it around four/five minutes), I’ve found the GPS on my 935 to be on par, if not slightly better, than my 910XT. Settings are with GPS and one second recording, and with no added widgets/apps installed.
Those tracks from your 935 look like mine from my Magellan Switch!
Hi,
I have a Garmin Forerunner 935.
I have found that I need to buy the HRM strap because the OHR has flaws.
I have firmware 4.10. and wear my watch on my RIGHT wrist.
The OHR is erratic during an event like Walking/Running.
The OHR reads too high after the end of an event eg running.
It seems that there is an algorithm that hold the HR artificially high after an event; for a period of approximately 10 minutes.
The OHR reads erratically during an event. Yesterday I walked briskly at a constant pace.
My HR was approximately 115 to 120, however the OHR reading varied from 70 to 120 back to 70 back to 120 and so on. The variation was somewhat gradual ie it did not jump from one extreme to another.
The cycle of changes were approximately 30 to 40 seconds.
The OHR operation needs to be reviewed.
It seems that the OHR operation is affected by skin colour. I have a light skin colour.
If Garmin are trying to find an algorithm that is ‘one fits all’ then this may not be possible.
I suggest Garmin provide ‘switches’ in the code to allow the user to set the correct skin colour.
During an event like running I may get a HR reading maximum of 143 as an example.
The HR widget will record its own maximum that is different during the same period; say 132.
I suggest Garmin make the operation consistent; there is only one maximum.
The firmware should have a ‘global’ variable that is shared amongst all apps and widgets so that the watch displays consistent data.
There may be a bug in connecting with GPS satellites during open water swimming.
I had the watch setup for GPS+Glonass and have undertaken several open water swims (over 20) since getting the watch.
On two occasions the watch lost satellite contact completely mid-swim; once with version 3.3 firmware and once with version 4.10 firmware.
I have since changed the setting to just GPS only and will review this.
On both occasions I had stopped mid-swim and looked at the current status.
It seems like this ‘gesture’ may have turned off the GPS sensor; I know this sounds silly.
The watch had some 20 to 30 minutes to regain satellite contact but failed to do so.
There may be an issue in the firmware where there is a race condition when connecting with GPS or Glonass satellites.
I trust the feedback will help others and finds its way back to Garmin developers.
Nicko
@Nick I do not recognize the problems you have with OHR. Reading are always spot on no strange fluctuations. Even with intervals the readings are acceptable not as good as with a band but still acceptable. The readings i have during an exercise let’s say 21 kilometer are always consistent with the HR widget. I did several comparisons between old tracks with heartrate band and the OHR they were all pretty consistent or acceptable margin.
The IQ watch face with constant visible heartrate is pretty good indicator of recovery after hard training or illness that alone is priceless.
After +6 weeks of usages I must admit that for my needs Cycling, hiking running it has been a blast, an almost a bug free experience
All in all this is the best Garmin watch I have ever owned and I had several of them.
Hi Mike,
I am glad you are enjoying your watch.
As an exercise perform an activity where your HR is say 120bpm at the end.
Save the activity and then go and look at the widget’s OHR reading.
Use the watch and your pulse to measure your HR.
When you go back to the widget are the readings in the same ball-park.
If so my watch may be faulty.
I also am curious about your skin colour.
Regards,
Nick
I’m on my 2nd 935 and have same problems with both, the heart rate I record during my activities do not match up with the max readings in the HR widget, this has been same for both watches
Hi Nicko,
Sorry i missed your response.
I did check an 80 Kilometre cycle activity and hike activity both activities end low 125 and 130BPM in the all-day stress overview they are consistent. Tomorrow i wil do a recovery run that so it should be no problem to check against 120 at the end. Although i don’t think i won’t see any huge difference between widget, all day stress and the actual activity.
I am white male with rather thin wrists
Hope this helps
regards,
Mike
Hi Nicko, Did run yesterday and today last kilometers i did walk or dribble with both runs. I switch back and forth between the heart rate widget and IQ watch face. I must admit there was difference of 2 so 118 to 120. But other then that it was pretty consistent.
I hope this helps.
Gr
Mike
Hi Mike,
Thanks for doing that little test. I would be happy with those results if I were you.
BTW there is nothing magic about 120bpm; it was meant as an example.
I just noticed that after an activity I was getting a HR reading of 100+ from the OHR widget and actually measuring 70-80bpm using the watch and my pulse. The OHR readings gradually settle down after 5 minutes or so. My HR falls quite quickly after exercise and I have also noticed the OHR seems to lag behind fast changes in HR even during exercise; at least it does for my watch.
I am using a HRM strap now so I am not too concerned with the OHR readings during exercise. For resting HR the OHR is pretty good.
Regards,
Nick
Hi
How does the FR 935 compare with the Vivosmart HR+? Is there a significant difference between the features and is it worth upgrading?
Kamil
They almost couldn’t be more different products. It’s like comparing a golf cart (Vivosmart HR+) to a sports car (FR935). There are too many feature differences to list, but this will get you on the way:link to dcrainmaker.com
Overall: Vivosmart HR+ is an activity tracker that sort of does GPS tracking. FR935 is a top of the line GPS runner/triathlete training watch. Every bell and whistle they currently have (beside mapping).
This may be a bit off topic, but I do love my 935 and would like to use it in a more robust fashion as I prepare for an upcoming marathon. My previous two races were 1/2’s and I simply put my training plan to a calendar and tried to adhere to what that said each morning.
My question is does anyone use training plans for marathons? I am using a 20 week plan (like the longer timeframe), so I would have to put 100 entries into the training calendar – would these all show up on my 935 when I go to menu under the run option and go to Training>My Workouts? What is the best way to set it up so I don’t have 100 workouts on my watch?
@Mark Young – I create all the workouts on Garmin Connect web, then transfer a month at a time to the watch.
First of all- thank you so much for all you do here. I can’t imagine all the time it must take. What a wonderful resource! The best out there!
I’m debating between a Forerunner 935 and a Fenix 5S (sapphire). It’s basically coming down to a choice between price and size. I am a woman with a fairly small wrist. I saw the pic of the Fenix 5S on the girl’s wrist. Does there happen to one of the Forerunner 935 on her wrist that I missed?
Do you have an REI around? They, or many running stores have the Fenix 5S as well as the 935 on display and you can judge for yourself. I would say that the weight of the 935 vs. the 5S is almost 20g, what I love about the 935 is that yes it is “plastic” but it does not have the look, feel, or sturdiness of plastic compared to my old 735. I get compliments on the watch all the time.
So, taking the in the fact that your wrist may be slimmer, it may also be impacted by the weight.
Yes, the weight difference is worth noting, for sure. I was planning on going to REI to check them out but their website says the Forerunner 935 is online only, unfortunately. I’m also just not sure if seeing it in the box will do much more for me. If you know of a place with both on display for trying on in all ears!
At least our local REI here in Bend OR has display models of all three Fenix 5 models and the 935. Not sure which ones they actually have in stock. But that would let you see them in person for size.
I have used both the 5 and 935 and I much prefer the 935. I have a small wrist and it doesn’t look huge on my wrist. I find the band is more comfortable than the quick fit and it can be adjusted more for smaller wrists. Also, if you plan on using the watch for biking, I would go with the 935. I tried two different Fenix 5’s and neither would work with my P1s and I have had zero issues with the 935. I returned the fenix and couldn’t be happier with the 935 plus it saves you $200.
Good to know – thanks! It does seem a little silly to spend $160 more (5S is discounted on Amazon) for a few mm less diameter). Went searching for in store models yesterday and couldn’t find any. I’m going to mull it over for a few more days but will probably order the 935 online.
I am following a post I made on 21st June.
I completed an open water swim today with GPS only enabled ie Glonass not selected.
I lost satellite contact again, this time at the 3.4km mark.
I tried to restart another open water activity 1km from the finish (while in the water) but no go.
I could not get a satellite connection.
At the end of the swim I found we had done 5.18km by asking a swim buddy what his Garmin 910xt was reading.
Either my Garmin 935 is faulty (I have issues with the OHR as well) or the firmware is flakey.
I have given the watch a fair go since getting it on the 10th May; I have used it for 24 open water swims, 17 runs and 7 bike rides.
Nick
Hi Nicko, I would contact Garmin since i have zero OHR problems and the 935 should be minimal on par with a 910XT GPS wise. You might have a faulty unit.
Ditto what Mike’s said, seems you may have a faulty unit as in all the activities I’ve done the GPS has been spot on and I’m a stickler for accuracy. Can’t comment on the OHR though as I don’t use that feature. All the best in getting it sorted.
Hi Mike,
Thanks for your feedback.
I am going to experiment a bit more and wait for the next firmware upgrade before considering a replacement unit. The OHR works quite well for resting HR and I have since bought the HRM straps (tri and swim) for activities where HR gets higher.
Skin colour is white for me too, so there no real differences there.
Regards,
Nick
Thanks for your feedback ZOOG,
I had an open water swim today and all was OK (1.7km).
I am thinking the problem may be related to when I stop mid-swim; I probably let my arm sink and lose satellite contact. The watch does not seem to recover from this. I think this may be the cause because each time I have lost satellite the distance did not increment from what I read at the last stop.
We often stop in a swim to regroup.
I am going to ensure the watch stays near the surface from now on and see if this fixes the problem.
Regards,
Nick
Running a 100 miler, the battery won’t last long enough. Can the 935 be charged while it’s recording the activity?
Yes it can, but not while wearing it, as the charging port is on the back. You will need to put it in your bag or something while it’s connected to your battery pack.
I’m trying to decide which model to buy. I have had some atrial fibrillation issues so I am primarily interested in very accurate and timely heart rate readings. I do not run but do bike (mainly indoors) and swim (pool only). I also would like to monitor my resting heart rate with great accuracy.
I realize the 935 is overkill but I tried on the Vivoactive HR and did not like the feel. It also cannot pair with the HRM-Swim monitor and it seems the OHR is not as accurate as the 935 so I’m willing to pay for the 935 unless there are better choices? Any thoughts?
A pretty cool watch but does it also tell the time?
Hello. Thanks as always for the epic detail in your reviews! I’ve had this device for about 2 weeks now, and either there is a feature missing, or i can’t find it!
I want to be able to Auto Lap by Position. Is that not possible with this Garmin? I like to ride to a point, and while I keep riding, hit the lap button to ‘mark’ the start of the lap, and then each time I pass that location, a lap is automatically completed. I can do this with my Garmin 1000 (and with my older 510 as well) Thanks for any help!
I have just noticed that DCR promo code: DCR10BTF works for Garmin 935 @clevertraining.co.uk but is still useless for clevertraining.com.. This makes it the cheapest place to buy 935 in Europe (along Rakuten.de that has some prmo codes lowering the price by 10%)..
I wonder if we are getting closer to Garmin US getting rid of firm price restrictions? The EU price policy by Garmin makes the watch to expensive anyway (so 10% off doesn’t make much diference) and I may be travelling to US at the end of summer – that’s why I am curious of the price loosening date…
In the US you can use the DCR/CT VIP program to get back 10% in points. Up till about two years ago you could use the coupon code in the US, and then Garmin changed some policies which restricted that further. So now the VIP program is where it’s at for US folks.
Meanwhile, for the rest of the world, such manufacturer pricing policies are considered illegal. There’s zero plans in the US by any companies to change that (European companies are generally envious about it).
As for arguing pricing in the US vs Europe, there is a simple reality that it costs more for businesses to do business in Europe than it does in the US (trust me, I know, we own a business in Europe). Of course, European consumers also get better rights than most US consumers (things like standard/min 2+ year warranties/etc…). It’s give and take…
Great review!!! I’ve been looking intently at the FR935 to replace my VivoActive.
I was wondering if you have looked at all at the rowing functionality? I’ve been looking everywhere for any kind of information/insight into those types of workouts and can’t find anything online or anything in the official Garmin documentation.
Thanks!
The FR935 has a dedicated mode for rowing. I use my FR935 on an (indoor) WaterRower machine and it works perfectly giving you accurate data such as total strokes, average pace/500m, max. and average stroke rate as well as a full graph. The only change, compared to my FR920XT, is that I had to wear it on my wrist instead of having it on the handle in order to get good measurement. I also have to enter the distance manually in GC since it’s an indoor session.
Ray, have you had a chance to test using Garmin’s UltraTrac mode? As an ultrarunner who needs more than a 24 hr. battery life, I’m curious as to the accuracy of the UltraTrac mode. With my Ambit2, increasing the battery life has resulted in poor GPS accuracy to the point of making it useless. Using the UltraTrac mode in my Fenix2 was the same – useless.
Just find it weird that Garmin watch keeps getting bigger and bigger but no real improvement to screen estate size. Was hoping it to be around the 42mm range and it seems pretty pointless to have a 47mm oversize watch for activities when the internal is exactly the same as the F5s(but the long lug make it pretty pointless either) with a slightly beefed up battery and 0.1 display advantage. Can’t Garmin for once think of runners with moderate size wrist?
Got my FR935 few weeks ago and I really enjoy the ultra low weight. You just dont’ feel it on your wrist. The only thing I miss from my former 920XT are the front buttons to start/stop activities.
So I have noticed some delays when using the OHR. I usually select the activity and wait for GPS and OHR icons to go steady before starting to record. During the first 2’30” or so the reported HR if off the track. It will for example say 110bpm, like before starting the activity, and then even go down to 109 or 108 althought I know that, for that particular part of the track (hill), I should be starting seeing 150+ bpm right away. Then after approximately 2’30” the reported HR suddently jumps from 108 to 160bpm and from there tracks my heart rate accurately for the remaining hour. Same thing happens at the end of the exercice when I experience a rapid HR drop but OHR seems to be unable to pick it up.
So is this a normal behavior for OHR?
I do understand that OHR may have limitations and will rely on the strap for some exercices when I need accurate HR tracking.
When paired with a Varia radar light, how does it alert you? Does it just flash, or does it beep and/or vibrate?
I have traveled the entire Internet looking for an answer to this very question and come up empty. Your question has been hanging out there for a month. Seriously, anyone?
It beeps and vibrates to alert you – just did a quick test to confirm on my F935.
I tested this watch over the weekend, but returned it on Monday.
Although using DCR advice on how to wear it, the OHR was not accurate at all for me. Approximately 50% of the time, it was more than 10 beats off compared to my Polar V800 and H7. This was both while running and during ‘non-activity’. In the cases it was more than 30 beats off, I checked my HR manually to confirm which device was wrong and which one was right.
A pity, since it was a nice and convenient device to use. It is also much lighter than my V800 which feels great while running. But given the bad HR readings for me, it didn’t make sense to keep it.
After the Scosche Rhythm+, this is the second device I bought after reading a DCR review. Both were unfortunately failing to read my HR optically very well.
I have my FR935 TriBundle about a month now and love it. However, I have just discovered a problem. I use the OHR for normal running but use my HRM-Tri for triathlons and bike training. I recently took part in a bike race and had my FR935 mounted on the quick release bike mount, but forgot to put on my HRM-Tri. To my surprise, the device still recorded a heart rate! Does anyone know how this could be possible? It obviously couldn’t have been my actual heart rate, as the watch was not on my wrist and I wasn’t wearing a heart rate strap. Strangely, there did seem to be some correlation between the recorded heart rate and the elevation of my bike ride! My guess is that the OHR was still somehow active, but the measurements were due to the vibrations or elevation or something else like that… any thoughts?
There are a couple threads on the Garmin message boards about this. Not sure exactly what it is picking up but it certainly isn’t heart rate. The interesting thing is that it actually is picking up numbers that at first glance almost could be reasonable for HR. My personal belief is that Garmin should figure out how to filter these signals out in this case as bad data is often worse than no data.
Hi ekutter,
Thanks for the info. I can’t seem to find those threads, would you be able to share a link?
Is this issue specific to the FR935 or do other OHR devices (e.g. FR735) have the same problem?
link to forums.garmin.com
link to forums.garmin.com
Just following up on my post of the 21/6
Garmin asked me to run more test (so I did with GPS+GLONASS+1per sec and it is still crap), to do a full reset of the watch ( so lost all my estimation, data … :()
But it is still pretty bad.
I have done more research on the segment I am looking at and send them quite of lof of comparison between garmin devices and tomtom that I found on garmin connect and strava
So I agree with DCR … GPS wise it is on par with the 735, the fenix3/5 meaning it is not great at all
While browsing this segment I have found few people using the 910 and it is always spot on …
They want to replace it … but quite frankly I have found few 935 and the track look always bad ( same for 735, 235, 225, Fenix3 , Fenix5)
GPS+GLONASS+1per sec : link to connect.garmin.com
For your information …
Hi Nicolas, i dont understand why you kept this watch. This is not normal behavior. You seem to have problems al over the spectrum. Problems that the most of us dont have. Just get a other unit.
My point is that it seems that it is not a problem of my unit but a problem of deisgn(or soft?) of the 935 and all the most recent garmin gps watch
All the segment I have found ( every single one of them) are as bad if you take 735, 935 , fenix 3, fenix 5 …
And every single one of themusing 910 are spot on
To me I either accept that 935 is way worse than 910 ( at least in this context) or I ask for a refund and go to tomtom or Suunto … or I buy an other 910
quick update … Garmin is now telling me that they are trying to fix the problem in a coming firmware upgrade so I will wait and see
it means that they don’t believe it is a problem of my unit so glad I didn’t send it to be replaced for nothing
Hi,
thanks for the great article, they are alwasy really useful. I was wondering if you could help…
My Dad is looking to buy one of these but he doesn’t have an internet connection in his home (no wifi or mobile data). Will he be able to get the data from the watch to his laptop and/or phone without an internet connection? (maybe by using Bluetooth?)
Thanks,
David
He can plug it in via USB cable and download the .FIT file that way. Though, he’ll need some app on his desktop to view the file.
I’ve had the 935 for 5 days now and I’m having problems with the OHR in certain instances and wondering if anyone has suggestions. I do not run but comparing with my polar chest strap, the resting heart readings and the outdoor and indoor bike heart rates are spot on but when I simply walk or get up from a seated position I seem to get high rates. I used walking as an activity and one day saw erratic readings into the threshold and max range up to 150 bpm when my actual rate was 65-70. The next day the OHR was spot on between 65-70 followed by today when the same erratic readings occurred. I wear the watch exactly the same. I’ve called Garmin support and they tell me to give it more time and try the opposite wrist and turn the watch face inward but none of that has helped so far. Could it possibly be a defective unit?
Hi DC,
thanks very much for the reply, appreciate it.
I just need to persuade him to get this thing called ‘the internet’ now… 😉
Thanks,
David
I really wish Garmin would accept the fact the optical heart rate monitoring is garbage data at worst, and at least, unreliable for many people and make a less expensive version using a good old reliable chest strap! Then I would buy it in a heart beat! (Pun intended) :-). But there is no way I’m going to drop that kind of cash when there are so many complaints regarding functionality and accuracy.
I was a bit concerned with all the comments but I find it very very accurate.
Been running in a river valley with very thick vegetation and the GPS is spot on. Same with HR. It is clear that the response to a sudden change in HR is a bit delayed so not ideal for interval training. But for those of us interested in training at a somewhat constant pace it works great. I am very happy with how it works.
Probably adds very little expense on their part to include the OHR and may even be cheaper than having two separate products. It also probably adds only minimally to size and nothing to battery drain if you turn it off. So if you don’t like it, just don’t use it. Still can use any chest strap you might have laying around. And from a marketing stand point, it is basically necessary today to compete with all the other watches that also have marginal OHR. I too have issues with all OHR devices but many people seem to get very reliable data.
I personally agree with you that it is mostly useless although it does seem to provide reasonable resting HR values. But for me it is definitely useless when combined with the recovery adviser as I can have no confidence that it has reasonable data.
I just don’t agree with this. Anyone who reads online reviews (including Ray’s) knows that there is a limit to the accuracy of OHR. It’s not Garmin’s version of it, or Polar’s, or Apples – it’s just the technology.
Loose rule of thumb: for steady changes in HR, OHR is fine. For sudden changes – it’s slow to catch up.
Basic stuff that you have to accept. If you’re serious about your training and it involves sudden changes in effort intensity (which most will) then you’re going to need a chest strap.My interpretation from poring over various reviews and comparisons is that it’s change that OHR struggles to pick up on as quickly.
But that doesn’t mean that OHR doesn’t have its place. For long slow runs, I’ll often use OHR. And for recovery runs I just don’t see the point in sticking a strap on – there aren’t going to be any significant changes in effort, so the OHR is good for that. Accuracy has always been where I’ve expected it to be and perfectly acceptable; if it wasn’t I’d be looking at things like positioning first, faulty unit second. Because I’ve found the tech reliable.
For races, effort sessions or on the bike then the chest strap comes out.
Different tools for different jobs.
Side note, the 24×7 monitoring which is pretty much a base expectation of a huge chunk of consumers buying any fitness tracker or activity watch only comes from the OHR – there’s no other way to gather that data. So it’s worth having for that reason alone.
Mr T., thanks for the reply. I agree with what you said. I purchased the watch for all its features including activity tracking and resting heart rate and agree the OHR is needed for 24X7 tracking. I find it very accurate for resting heart rate. I also find it very accurate for indoor biking and road biking so no issues there.
My problem has been with walking and normal every day movement. My concern is not the time it takes to catch up to real hear rate but rather inaccurate readings. I’ve gone for walks at 18 minutes per mile, never changing pace, yet two of the three times the readings have gone from the 60’s to 150’s, back to the 60’s and up to 130’s, etc., throughout the entire walk with no change in pace or movement. The other time the readings stayed in the 60’s the whole walk (30 minutes). I wear the watch exactly the same.
I think I can accept I will get sporadic readings rather than return the watch because I assume if readings are accurate for sport activities and sometimes for every day then the watch is likely not defective???????
Hi Jim,
I have had a few issues with the 935 including your reported fluctuations in OHR readings during a brisk walk. See one of my posts above dated 21 June.
I have determined that the OHR has a place but at present (without firmware updates) it does not report (for me) accurately during activities where HR is elevated and/or fluctuating quickly.
So I bought the HR straps Tri and Swim. Now I am getting sensible results.
That is results that I can identify with when viewed on Garmin Connect.
Garmin suggested I disable OHR (in the settings) during a run after describing to them the following anomaly.
If I start a run activity with the OHR enabled and wearing the HR strap, at the end of the activity (when saving) the OHR data is used until you select the option “Download Heart Rate”.
I have saved the activity with OHR data then selected “Download Heart Rate” and viewed the differences between the two results. Apart from differences in average and maximum HR values “Training Effect” can be quite different. Last Friday after loading the HR strap data the Aerobic reading decreased from say 3.0 to 2.3 and Anaerobic increased from 0.3 to 2.0.
I don’t want to spoil things for those of you that have confidence in the OHR readings during a workout, but you wont really know the accuracy until you get a HR strap.
Nick
I just came across a research study in the Journal of the American Medical Association Cardiology. Researchers looked at the accuracy of wrist-based monitors using 4 different monitors. While I didn’t see which brands they used, they found them to be quite inaccurate while running at various speeds as compared to a medical grade ECG monitor. They were off by 9-17%, at times being off by as much as 40 beats! They also tested chest strap monitors and found them to be 99% accurate in the same study. Interesting.
I reckon you are right about the OHR Scott but 9-17% error may be generous.
Today and last Monday I watched the OHR widget measure HR readings that gradually crept as high as 250.
I went on an 11km bush walk last Monday, nothing too strenuous, and noticed the OHR readings 150 plus. I saved the Walk activity and noticed that I reached a max HR of 180 and recorded Aerobic and Anaerobic training effects both 5.0. My Intensity minutes were boosted by over 200; crazy! Garmin are investigating this.
Any chance it was this study? link to dcrainmaker.com
Read the above to see why they screwed up.
There are some good studies out there, but most screw it up a lot. Which, as I note isn’t to say that all optical HR sensors are good (hardly), but that you still have to follow the instructions…especially researchers.
No, actually the one I found was not the Stanford study but one published by Marc Gillinov, M.D., of the Cleveland Clinic. The study compared readings collected by four different types of wrist-worn monitors – the Fitbit ChargeHR, AppleWatch, Mio Alpha, and Basis Peak – against readings taken by Polar H7 chest strap monitors.
You sure this isn’t the same? The Stanford study uses the exact same devices.
I’m pretty sure Ray linked to the study Scott’s referring to a while back in a “week in review”, and it wasn’t the Stanford study. But I don’t have a link. Basically they were comparing accuracy of OHR vs a medical grade EKG, with a generic chest belt thrown in (I don’t recall that they actually identified the belt). The Apple Watch came out best, but the takeaway that struck me is that a chest belt is better than any OHR by a significant amount, nearly as good as the EKG.
Ray posted the link above.
link to dcrainmaker.com
I agree with your take away from the study. The authors of the study pretty much said the same. They indicate the OHR is ok for everyday, around the clock monitoring, but not so good for strenuous exercise.
But the studies looked at wrist based OHR devices, no?
How about something like the Scoche Rhythm which is on the upper arm? That is frankly what I am pretty much consistently now using, and i have found it to be accurate enough for me to feel confident whether running or riding.
But maybe I am just being fooled?
I admit I only use the Garmin 935 OHR more for spot checks and if I just happen not to have the Scosche around.
First, thanks for always doing such a great in depth review. Secondly, I logged into the TP piece and it keeps saying no workouts loaded. I clearly have them on my schedule, but am unsure how to fix this or even log out on the app on the watch and log in again. Can you help?
Hi Rai,
did you try to upload a course or track from Garmin connect to the device, in best case using an iPad? That would be a general use, if you travel and plan to use the navigation to do a run or bike ride.
I did not find very recent information about that feature. Most reports seem out-dated.
Thanks,
Mark
PS: Your reports are unbeaten good.
I’d say the worst case would be to try and use an iOS device to do course planning on Garmin units. It’s just horrendous. The best is simply a desktop/laptop computer. I haven’t tried on Android, but I can’t imagine it’s any worse than iOS.
The problem is that you can’t really use the Garmin Connect Course Creator on iOS, it just sucks. Especially if you have to tweak/change/undo a point. You can actually see it in some of my screenshots up above where I tried to fix a course data point from the car at the trailhead that was an accidentally click I made. I eventually gave up and just left with this wonky incorrect route portion at the end of my route. Sigh.
Oh, and I fail to understand how the single company in this entire segment that easily has the most GPS device/technology experience is the one that has the worst GPS route creation experience. And using ‘experience’ is a bit of a strong word, since that generally implies some sort of cohesive occurrence. I can’t say that occurs here.
(As a side note, during this very high I actually filmed an entire rant on this as I hiked along…but the sound came out like crap.)
Rai,
have you ever tried http://www.gpsies.com?
That site is really great and even free. A one man work. Garmin should hire him.
So I’d take the Garmin connect just as interface to the watch, no need for for map data and creation. Maybe Garmin has even an interface protocol how to send course data to the watch using Bluetooth or Wifi. Do you know?
Mark
Yup, familiar with it. There’s lots of good sites like that. But it’s still missing the most important thing: Getting it to the watch.
For that, there’s no solution except wired cable, or first creating it on Garmin Connect (really a desktop – not mobile). Garmin doesn’t support any 3rd party Bluetooth Smart access, except limited Connect IQ things, if you have a Connect IQ app for your platform.
The CIQ app RouteCourse by Mappicus, lets you get routes on to your device wirelessly from a variety of sources I believe. It was mentioned in an earlier comment here. I haven’t personally used it but sounds like what you might be looking for. Given Garmin’s resources and position in the industry, there really is no excuse for not providing better support here, but at least through CIQ functionality, they have made it possible for 3rd parties to fill in some of the gaps.
Completely agree. It’s a total faff going through the routine of making the course (on something other than GC because it’s got poor mapping, in the UK at least), exporting a .gpx, converting the .gpx to something GC will swallow, turning it into an activity, then from that a course…a complete nonsense.
These are the market leaders.
Even Lezyne – newbies to this market, whose back-end software was at best ‘incomplete’ when the first GPS units were released – have better options for courses. At the very least you can just import a .gpx file and have your navigation. Basic stuff that Garmin can’t do.
But…they do a load of other stuff well. It just feels like right now they’re relying on 3rd party developers such as DWMaps to do their job for them.
Exactly. And now with the updated Garmin Connect website, I had to click dozens of times to get to the last activity (2009 is default date for GPX trace with no date) and delete it. Of course, if you do not delete the activity, you cannot upload a new GPX trace… Only geeks figure that out. Nonsense indeed.
One option are the Connect IQ apps like dwMap and routeCourse that allow route creation and upload from phone and PC – unfortunately to follow that course, you need to use the CIQ app, too.
I don’t think that’s the case, that you need to use the dwMap app to follow the course. Garmin added a CIQ feature that allows CIQ apps to hand off courses to a standard activity. My understanding is the only real reason you’d use dwMap would be on a device like the 630 that has no native course support.
Have you used this, does it burn out the phone battery while riding, do you need to be using 3G GPS on the phone for this to work?
thanks