Garmin Colorado with HR/cycling functions?

[toddm]

Has anyone had a chance to use their colorado unit with garmin's HR or Cycling units?

 

I was interested in the new edge 705 but since the colorado also works with HR/Cycling units I was thinking that might be a better way to go, because I hate the fact that the 705 is lithium only.

 

I guess part of my question is how much fitness function is there with the colorado, if anyone has had a chance to check out how much of the data you can evaluate, and if you can get a graphical ride report that would give speed/cadence/alt/HR/etc.

 

Thanks

 

Todd

[+qlenfg]

Has anyone had a chance to use their colorado unit with garmin's HR or Cycling units?

 

I was interested in the new edge 705 but since the colorado also works with HR/Cycling units I was thinking that might be a better way to go, because I hate the fact that the 705 is lithium only.

 

I guess part of my question is how much fitness function is there with the colorado, if anyone has had a chance to check out how much of the data you can evaluate, and if you can get a graphical ride report that would give speed/cadence/alt/HR/etc.

 

As a lark I put on my Polar heart rate transmitter to see if the Colorado recognized it -- Nope!

 

Switch to the fitness profile and poke around to see whats in there. I suspect any software to display any non-GPS data would be included with the heart rate or cadence sensors.

[+comphelp]

As a lark I put on my Polar heart rate transmitter to see if the Colorado recognized it -- Nope!

Darn. There goes my hopes. I was secretly hoping that the Garmin HR sensor was Polar compatible. What a shame.

[+apersson850]

As far as I understand, the Colorado can show cadence and/or heart rate in a data field. Period.

 

But I don't have any suitable such sensor, as I have the older style Forerunner 301. The sensor supplied with a Forerunner 305 is compatible with the Colorado, but that doesn't help me.

[+jotne]

I have tested heart rate and cadence sensor on my Colorado 300.

 

The GPS had no trouble finding both sensors. But as Anders note, you only see heart and cadence at the GPS. No average, no max, no calories, no nothing compare to my Edge 305.

 

But I did ask Garmin, and from the vague answer (as usually), they may add support for Colorado in the Garmin Training Center program.

 

I do hope Colorado records this information in the log files

[+apersson850]

That wouldn't be difficult to find out, as they are simple gpx files. Can be read with any text editor.

[+trekster]

I asked Garmin "Will Heart rate data from the Colorado be reviewable on Garmin Connect?" and received this response:

"We don't support heart rate data from the Colorado right now. It will be supported when MotionBased migrates to Garmin Connect -- the new site we're working on right now. MotionBased will migrate to Garmin Connect in April/May this year."

Hope this helps.

[+jotne]

YES

 

It does record "Heart rate" and "Cadence"

(and GPS internal temperature as well)

 

Here are two waipoints from the current.gpx

 

<trkpt lat="xx.750916" lon="yy.182019"><ele>243.83</ele>
<time>2008-02-22T16:01:15Z</time>
<extensions>
	<gpxtpx:TrackPointExtension>
	<gpxtpx:atemp>26.6</gpxtpx:atemp>
	<gpxtpx:hr>109</gpxtpx:hr>
	<gpxtpx:cad>47</gpxtpx:cad>
	</gpxtpx:TrackPointExtension>
</extensions>
</trkpt>

<trkpt lat="xx.751120" lon="yy.181503">
<ele>242.39</ele>
<time>2008-02-16:01:25Z</time>
<extensions>
	<gpxtpx:TrackPointExtension>
	<gpxtpx:atemp>26.6</gpxtpx:atemp>
	<gpxtpx:hr>112</gpxtpx:hr>
	<gpxtpx:cad>47</gpxtpx:cad>
	</gpxtpx:TrackPointExtension>
</extensions>
</trkpt>

[toddm]

Oh well, looks like I'll probably go for the edge 705 when it comes out. I don't need all the fitness features of the edge such as being able to race a digital partner etc. but I do want more ride data than just a current HR, speed, cadence. I'd want averages, max/min, and the ability to bring them up in a graphical overlay.

 

While garmin may add those features with software/firmware down the road, I've learned before that you cannot count on garmin to add features, they may, or the may not, but to me if it's not in the unit now, I will not assume they will add it.

[+jotne]

I think you should hold your investment in a Edge 705.

It will only take a Garmin engineer 5 minutes to add average functions and other cool stuff.

The only drawback I do see on Colorado is the size. (705 are also bigger than 305)

Edge 605/705 are no more than 2 months delayed??

[toddm]

I had a question "answered" by garmin the other day on the 705 and at that time they said 705 units had already shipped to REI's last week, but as of yesterday my local REI or their web page does not show them. I wonder if they are going to do the REI only thing for awhile with the 705 as well. So it could be the person at Garmin told me wrong information too.

 

I can't really see garmin adding too much cycling function to the colorado, just because then no one would buy the edge. My big complaint about the edge is it's lack of AA batteries, at the very least a removeable lion battery so a person can carry a spare, and I will certainly check one out before buying.

 

The colorado is not without it's problems as well and I will check that one out also. Concerns for me with the colorado are unit water resistance, runtime...it seems like a lot of people are having to use the backlight in outdoor conditions and I've read really poor runtimes with the backlight on.....so if I can only get 5-6 hours of runtime with a set of AA's using it on the bike, that's really not much better than having to recharge the edge every 10.

 

The real appeal for me with the colorado was if it had a more cycling function I could replace my cycling computer, my etrex I use on the bike, and my 76 that i use hiking and in the truck with one unit. Maybe the next colorado version will get there or even this one with enough software updating.

[gratefulHIKE]

in all honesty I think the lithium cell is a much better option, I mean seriously how long are your bike rides?!? more than 12 hours?

 

you cant beat being able to recharge through usb, a standard wall outlet or your car

 

no longer needing to swap out batteries

 

I have the edge 305 as well as a 60csx and a vista hcx, I prefer a standard small and sleek for my bike due to vibration and everything else thrown at it...........not like the screen is that hard to read Ive tested the 705 and I like the resolution and the colors as well as the easy push buttons on the front as opposed to the dial while riding

 

I use my 305 mostly for interpreting data anyway for measuring where I slowed down so I can note that for next time

[+jotne]

I going for this ride this summer:

http://www.styrkeproven.no/

560 km

est time (for me) 20 hours.

 

I do have an Edge 305 and 60Csx.

I would like to store the entire track.

This can not be done on the Edge.

1. Battery do not laste more than 4-5 hours

2. Do not store more than 10000 track points.

 

Colorado with heart rate and cadence sensor seems for me a good option.

This is on asphalt, so very litle vibration.

 

I do have an external 4 x AA USB battery compartment that can be used

with the Edge, but then it need to store the entire run.

[toddm]

It's not so much about the length of my rides, however I've heard at the 305 did not last anywhere near as long as it's 12 hour rating, more like 6-7 hours. If the 705 goes the way of the colorado and it only gets 5-7 hours of battery life with the backlight on while cycling that to me is a pain, cause I will have some rides longer than that, and those are probably my most important rides to make sure i have data on. A 1 hour ride around here I could care less about, but a 6 hour ride in Moab I want data for, or a 100 miler on the road. There are also a lot of trip days we do 2 rides a day, 3-4 hours in the morning and 3-4 hours in the afternoon/evening I'd rather not be forced to recharge my bike computer between rides. Also I do a lot of my biking out camping, etc. I'm not at a hotel every night to make sure I recharge my bike computer daily. It's much easier to carry a few spare AA's already recharged.

 

If the 705 can truly get ~12 hours of function while reading a wireless bike and HR sensor, and with backlight on "if" needed in daylight conditions great it probably will not be a big issue, but since the 305 was a disappointment in this area, and the colorado seems to be getting about half it's stated life with a backlight on, I'm skeptical.

 

My other issue with internal lion batteries......a year or two from now when they are getting half their runtime, the unit has to be sent in and the battery replaced, usually at a large expense. Worse yet as time goes on you are always loosing runtime, with a AA unit it's easy to buy a couple new rechargeable AA's for a few bucks when the old ones loose their performance. I guess if you buy new stuff every 6 months that's not an issue but there area already a lot of reports of 305 units getting no where near the runtime they did when they were new. Good marketing, it promotes people buying new units but not a feature in my book.

 

I don't mind the lion propriety battery pack, but at least make it user removable so people can carry a spare and easily replace it down the road.

[gps_dr]

.....

If the 705 can truly get ~12 hours of function while reading a wireless bike and HR sensor, and with backlight on "if" needed in daylight conditions great it probably will not be a big issue, but since the 305 was a disappointment in this area, and the colorado seems to be getting about half it's stated life with a backlight on, I'm skeptical.

 

I took my 400t on a 23 mile test ride Wednesday alongside my 76CSx & DeLorme PN20.

 

I was leery of the 400t in the sun. It was better than expected.

My polarized prescription sunglasses seemed to help make it more visible.

 

The White background on the PN20 USGS maps was most visible.

(With sat photos not that good)

76CSx (old topo) showed local streets more visibly. (400t shows them light gray)

I did like the 3D view on the 400t. I could see terrain bumps via shading & hills nearby.

I did not try my HR monitor on that ride.

Converted the 3 tracks to gpx (& joined segments together) - viewed in Google Earth.

The PN20 displayed the most accurate log

76CSx second - 400t third.

The two Garmins were almost touching with the 400t using a lower mount. This may account for differences.

On my next ride, I'll use an external antenna on 400t to eliminate it's being "shadowed".

[+jotne]

It looks like my bike

I do also have two big led light..

 

I have not tested my Colorado on my bike, since it's snow outside here in Norway

I do have both a 60Csx and an Edge 305 on the bike.

[+qlenfg]

I think this dude has you beat: