Gear review: Garmin Forerunner 210

I debated for a long time about whether to get a GPS watch. On one hand, I liked running without a lot of stuff. On the other hand, I knew that GPS watches can be very useful training devices. When I was training for the 2012 Oakland Half Marathon, I initially used the RunKeeper app on my iPhone, which I found to be pretty handy especially as my runs got longer. One downside, though, was that it meant carrying my iPhone on every run that I wanted to track. Oh, and another was that I couldn’t take a quick peek at the data without stopping, getting my phone out of my Spibelt, and unlocking it. So, after a little bit of internal debate, I decided to take the plunge and get a GPS watch.

The following describes the process I used to determine which watch to get. You might want to skip ahead to the actual review if you don’t care to know the details; don’t worry, my feelings won’t be hurt. *sniff sniff*

1. Asked 3 of my trusted running friends what kind of watches they owned and how they felt about them. All 3 owned Garmins, but each owned a different model, which gave me a nice sample. All 3 were happy with their watches (minus a few minor glitches). Only one used her heart rate monitor (HRM), and mostly when she was backcountry skiing. Decided to skip the HRM, which costs an extra $50 and would be one more device to worry/think about.

2. Looked around on REI for reviews. The Timex Ironman got pretty decent reviews, so that stayed on my radar in addition to the Garmin Forerunners. I decided that I wanted something simple and without too many functions (examples: GPS-enabled altimeter, mapping capabilities on the watch, wireless connectivity), so I eliminated the 310 and above.

3. Looked online for reviews. There are whole websites dedicated to reviewing GPS watches (for example). Runner’s World was also very helpful, especially since they had videos of a few of the watches I was interested in. After watching the Timex video, I decided it had way too many buttons and was not very intuitive at all. The Garmin 210 video, on the other hand, showed a watch that seemed very straightforward to use.

4. Went back to REI (where I had a dividend to spend) to choose between the Forerunner 110 and the 210. I went with the 210 because of the interval function, which in retrospect was super worth the extra $$, allowing me to run intervals anywhere. This is especially useful since I don’t have easy access to a track.

Me and my trusted running partner: the Garmin Forerunner 210.

Before I go on further, I should note that I’ve only had the Garmin Forerunner 210 for 6 weeks, so the following is based on that limited amount of experience.

– Easy to use. Set up took about 5 minutes, and I spent another 10 perusing the user manual. Most of the functions I’ve figured out just from fiddling around with it. Very straightforward.
– GPS satellite links quickly. I think I’ve had trouble with it once or twice, but it usually finds a satellite within 1-2 minutes.
– Garmin Connect, the online software where you can upload run info, is super useful for tracking run information (distance, time, pace, GPS map, etc.) and very easy to use.

– The USB connector is terrible. There is a 4-prong clip that hooks up to the back of the watch, which is used for charging and uploading data to the computer. There’s a lot of leeway so one can never be sure that the watch is hooked up properly. It’s not impossible; I can usually hook it up in less than a minute, but it often takes me at least 3 tries to get it hooked up. I know the higher end models have wireless ANT+ technology, so this might be a reason to choose those watches over the 210. However, it’s really not that big of a deal and frankly not worth the difference in price (to me anyway).
– “Current pace” function is useless. It appears to be the least reliable out of all of the pace functions (you can choose between current, lap, or entire run). Again, not a huge deal, and not one of my motivating factors to buy the watch.
– It’s sort of bulky, but I kinda expected that.
– Pricey. At $199, this thing better make me run faster and longer, as well as making my hair shiny and teeth whiter. Just kidding. I think it’s a good product and worth the money… I’m just not sure I would’ve gotten it had I not had REI dividends to spend.

RATING: 8.5/10

As a side note: The Gypsy Runner recently bought (and returned) the New Balance GPS Runner watch. It was deeply flawed — not only was the GPS untrustworthy, but it didn’t even calculate the pace correctly! It also kept resetting itself to Hong Kong time, for whatever reason. The user manual was cryptic. The one pro was that it was inexpensive. That’s about it.

Update (9/27/12): Just a tip — I find that my Garmin finds the satellite MUCH faster if I stand in one location rather than move around. For instance, it usually takes 30-60 seconds to find the satellite when I’m doing a dynamic warm-up in place, whereas if I start doing a walking warm-up, it can take up to 4-5 minutes. Hope that helps!

Disclaimer: The above review is my personal opinion. I have not been compensated (in merchandise or money) to endorse these products.


Howdy! My name is Jen and I live in the San Francisco Bay Area. I like to eat, run, and blog, but not usually at the same time.

Tagged with: , ,
Posted in Gear
14 comments on “Gear review: Garmin Forerunner 210
  1. Nadia says:

    Thanx for your review, im looking at gps watches and your review was great 🙂

  2. Julie Dihm says:

    Do you know how to keep track of the calorie count during a workout?

    • Jen says:

      I don’t know how to do that, sorry! I know you can see total calories after the workout is complete, but I’m not sure how to display that while you’re running.

  3. Mark Beattie says:

    Prior to your workout: if you are near a window facing the sky, put your watch on the window sill and leave the watch there for 5 minutes to lock satellites… get all your running stuff together… then go workout. Bingo Bango.

    Also, it should be added that with an optional ANT+ foot pod and HR strap you can analyze even more data, and have indoor workout data from a treadmill that is reasonably accurate. Supposedly the foot pod also helps accuracy in tunnels and heavy tree coverage areas if the GPS drops out. But yes, you’re looking at ~$300 with the added accessories; a lot more expensive than simply running by feel.

  4. viktor says:

    this post sounds exactly like me when I run I found it quite funny

  5. […] never been attracted to using a HRM until recently. The extra cost (I opted not to get one with my Garmin) and having one more thing to wear were the biggest deterrents. And then there was the […]

  6. Christine says:

    Can this watch be used to set up intervals of different lengths (ie. ladder training: run hard 1min, rest 30sec; run hard 2 min, rest 1min; run hard 4min, rest 2min; etc.)? Or can it only do run 1 min, rest 30sec & repeat X number of times?

    • Jen says:

      Good question! I just tried to set a ladder interval, and it wouldn’t let me. I’m not sure if there’s a way around it — it’s possible that only the more advanced models support variable intervals.

  7. Thanks, good review. I have been looking around for a gps/pulse watch. Been serious walking for more than a year and really like tracking my walks. Using smart phone for that but getting really tired of making sure phone in contact with the satellites during the workout. That plus I plan to get into running next year screams get a watch. This one always comes up as a the one to get for one like me. This review confirm the big con is the usb connection, if it is flunky new how will it be after one, two, three years use?

    • Jen says:

      Thanks for your comments, Arne. The funny thing about the charger/dock is that it seems to be connecting easier as time goes on. I don’t know if it’s because I’ve gotten used to it or have gotten better at hooking it up, but it now consistently syncs upon the first or second try. If you’re thinking about getting into running and already like to track your walks, I really recommend getting a Garmin — it’s SO much better than a smartphone.

  8. […] should point out that my review is from the perspective of someone who used the Garmin 210 for 4 years, so most of my pros and cons will be based on my experience with the 210. For a super […]

  9. […] had a Garmin Forerunner 210 for 4 years, and I was less than 2 years into the Forerunner 235 when I came upon extreme watch […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Howdy! Welcome to my blog!

follow us in feedly
Follow on Bloglovin

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 347 other subscribers
On the docket…

4/28/19: London Marathon

%d bloggers like this: