First Look: Garmin's New Edge 530 and 830 Cycling Computers

Apr 17, 2019 at 14:39
by Mike Kazimer  

Garmin has announced two new additions to its cycling computer lineup – the Edge 530 and the Edge 830. As you'd expect, both devices keep track of the basics – speed, time, distance, and elevation, along with heart rate and power when paired to compatible devices, but that's just the tip of the iceberg. The navigation capabilities have increased, and they now come pre-loaded with Trailforks data for trails around the world, including difficulty level.

The overall size is similar to the Edge 520 and 820, but the display is now 13% larger. The battery life is a claimed 20 hours, and the devices are compatible with Garmin's Charge power pack, which can bump that up to 44 hours for those ultra-long epics.
Edge 530 & 830 Details
• Pre-loaded with trail data from Trailforks
• Touchscreen route planning on 830
• Measures jump count, distance, hang time
• Heart rate, power connectivity
• 20 hours of battery life
• ANT+, Bluetooth, wi-fi connectivity
• Size: 50 mm x 82 mm x 20 mm
• MSRP: Edge 530: $299.99 / Edge 830: $399.99
www.garmin.com

The list of features between the two computers is almost identical, but the 830 has a touch screen, which allows for on-device route planning. The 530 is priced at $299.99 USD for the unit alone, and the 830 is $399.99.

There are several training tools built into the computers, including the ability to sync workouts from Garmin Connect or Training Peaks in order to see what to expect in the week ahead. They can also be configured to send alerts when it's time time to rehydrate or refuel, a feature that could be useful for races or tough training sessions where it's hard enough to keep turning the pedals, let alone remember to take a drink of water.

The 830 has a touchscreen that allows for on-device route planning.
Both units have Trailforks trail data pre-loaded, including trail difficulty.

Have you ever been on a climb that feels like it'll never end? The 830 and 530 both include a new feature called 'ClimbPro' that displays the grade and ascent remaining on a route or course, so you'll know exactly how much more suffering lies ahead. When it does come time to head downhill, the devices can keep track of metrics like jump count, jump distance, and hang time. They'll also display a Grit score at the end of a ride, which is calculated by using GPS, elevation, and accelerometer data, and a Flow score, which is supposed to measure how smoothly a rider descends a trail.

A new bike alarm feature has been added that will send an alert to your cellphone if your bike is moved, perfect for those times when you're craving a donut but didn't bring a bike lock, along with a 'Find My Edge' option in case an unplanned tumble sends it flying off into the woods somewhere.

It's also possible to add apps like Accuweather, Yelp, Strava Summit, or Komooot to the device from Garmin's Connect IQ store.

The weather function makes it possible to view a forecast without taking out your phone.
Along with speed, distance, and elevation, the Edge 530 and 830 display Grit and Flow scores, along with calories burned and rehydration suggestions.





157 Comments

  • + 108
 Incredible how primitive these still look and function in 2019. $400 for a 2001 internet explorer interface. Please somebody make a $75 computer already and dispatch of garmin once and for all.
  • + 30
 they also have the shittiest touch screen ever
  • + 3
 hammerhead has developed one, although, it's IMHO too big.
  • + 62
 You're not paying for the display or user interface, but for the sensor integration and the gps nav.
  • - 1
 @matadorCE: my 7 year old iPhone can do everything you just mentioned at the same performance level. It even has accuweather to tell me if it’s raining. Doesn’t have a grit score though, that seems worth $400
  • + 9
 @TeamRicky: not quiet!!
you cant update many of the mapping and navigation apps on my iphone4 which IMHO has the best form factor of any phone created.
Which will force you to use your daiky phone for mapping and that drains the battery quite fast.
Garmin however is not the solution, hammerhead is almost there, but the price is obscene...
  • + 7
 Many of the GPS units in use, including those in use on the World Cup XCO circuit, have simple monochrome displays. Apples to apples, Garmin is at a minimum, on par with the rest. That said, I've personally found the touch screen interface to be frustrating to operate. I sold my Edge 810 after a couple of weeks and went back to my old-skool Edge 800 as it has physical buttons that were much easier to operate, particularly since I could just leave my gloves on.
  • + 1
 @denomerdano: get an app which is compatible with mapsforge vector maps - there are tons of vector maps that can be downloaded for offline use (openandromaps.org, openmtbmap.org, 4umaps.com etc), and they get updated periodically
  • + 1
 @f00bar: and voila!
  • + 8
 Apple will make one and it will be $1500, or if you sign a 5-year contract it can be yours for the low low price of $600.
  • + 1
 @salvafc: and too expensive.
  • + 1
 @f00bar: i highly recommend trailze and oruxmaps
  • + 3
 Look at the Bryton 530. Not touchscreen but has a lot of features without the hefty price tag. Also the battery life is phenomenal
  • + 1
 @denomerdano: Pretty sure iPhones have volume buttons
  • + 9
 @TeamRicky: your 7 year old iphone also wouldnt get half the battery life and the GNSS and sensor suite integration would be garbage.
  • + 21
 I understand why you want it to be like your phone (or feel less primitive). But I think these units are designed very well for the bike. My wahoo bolt has better battery life and integrates seamlessly with my cadence, speed, heart rate, and power meter. It’s aerodynamic so I can use it on my road bike as well and if I crash I don’t have to worry about a phone mounted to my handle bars smashing into pieces. It allows me to keep my phone in my pocket for emergency phone calls without worrying about it dying out on a ride either from battery failing or a crash taking my phone out of commission. Funny enough I have no interest in any of the map features, so I find my little black and white computer to work perfect.
  • + 28
 For those saying to use an old iPhone, they are far less accurate than a Garmin or other dedicated GPS device. Yes you can get standard distance and speed data, but the recording intervals are significantly longer which leads to much more drift.

In addition, for those of us that spend a significant amount of time working from our phones usually are sensitive to battery usage. Also I don't want to ride with my phone mounted on my bars for a variety of reasons due to size, cost, etc, but I do want to see my statistics while I ride. For those talking about touchscreens, they suck on cycling computers especially while riding with gloves. That is why they removed the functionality between the 510 and 520.

Last piece is that if there were a way to make these devices for less money with the same functionality it would have been done. Plenty of competitors out there like Wahoo that are competing and make great products. Even though these companies are trying to gain marketshare they still are similarly priced. There are $75 computers out there, they just don't use GPS, support power meters, rely on wheel sensors, etc.
  • + 15
 If it was possible to get all this tech inside a device and sell it for $75 and still make money, people would be all over it. But it's not.
  • + 3
 @TeamRicky: Agree that an old phone is more than capable of doubling as a cycle computer, nav, music player, internet browser, etc. But you still have to use multiple apps to do the same thing that a garmin does, plus once you lose reception then all bets are off unless you have downloaded maps on the phone. Garmin isn't perfect and is certainly pricey but this is a tough market, just look at smart watches with a HR monitor--the only low cost option that worked just as well as Apple or Samsung was bought out by a bigger company (i.e. Fitbit buying Pebble).
  • + 4
 Quality is IMHO good enough, what else do you need? The advantage of this display is that it will save a lot of battery life compared to an iphone.
  • - 5
flag denomerdano (Apr 24, 2019 at 7:13) (Below Threshold)
 @f00bar: I use 5 different mapping apps on my Android phone quite successfully (Osmand, gaia, backcountry, trailforks, google maps).
Pair that with a watch based GPS system(amazfit Stratos) i have a solid system that works for me very nicely. in both my hometrails and in the remote backcountry.
A 23000mah battery pack is always in my backpack out in the bush.

As I said GARMIN is never the answer. as their software is way out of touch and instead of firmware updates, they just release a new model every year. NEVER is my answer for them.
  • - 5
flag woofer2609 (Apr 24, 2019 at 7:16) (Below Threshold)
 @salespunk: not true. The gps in iphones is on par with Garmon, and I avoid Apple like the plague and own a garmin, so have nothing to prove. Countless hours of testing were done by MEC executives, and the iPhone GPS was as good as as the Garmin. You can set your intervals for gps coordinates on Android anyway.
  • + 1
 @denomerdano would you suggest buying the stratos? i heard it has some altitude problems
  • - 4
flag f00bar (Apr 24, 2019 at 8:24) (Below Threshold)
 @salespunk:
Nonsense. The recording interval is determined by application settings and has nothing to do with the actual GPS chip.

Not to mention a $150 Android phone will have a brand new battery, the latest GPS chip, and will be 10 times more powerful than these dumb devices from Garmin. Many people have already switched over to cheap Android phones because Garmin sells simply overpriced outdated crap.
  • + 4
 @f00bar: For my final year project at University I actually made a phone mount suitable for MTB so that you can mount a phone to your handlebars rather than a Garmin, seeing as phones are better tools for the job in a lot of instances.

https://www.pinkbike.com/photo/17033182/
  • + 2
 @salespunk: Lezyne make some feature-complete cycle computers for far less money, but no, even they aren't 75 dollars.
  • + 4
 @matadorCE: that's not quite true, is it? You're paying for both. Sadly you can't have the one without the other. The hardware is impressive; the software is appalling. I've been using garmins for almost 20 years; there's nothing better, but that's not to say that it couldn't be better. Fewer features, that actually work, would be nice.
  • + 1
 @f00bar: The worst and best about it is that data from OSM is open for anyone to mess with, I was quite found and contributed a lot in my country but following a row with a guy that mass changed path attributes and removed names that would mess proper render with most MTB maps I quit OSM altoghether.
I think there's an (hidden) option to download Trailforks as a vector KLM per country basis, that in conjunction with Openandromaps (for base map with countour lines) and Oruxmaps (best free GPS android app) would really be perfect, but never got an answer on how to download it.
  • + 2
 Everyone: its a lot more complicated than whats being said here. This is an interesting article:

www.singletracks.com/blog/gps/gps-distance-accuracy-test-smartphone-apps-vs-dedicated-gps

Still tho, I can buy an android phone with a flagship Qualcomm processor/antenna SOC for under $400 with a bigger, infinitely better screen, or a smartwatch with a more expensive chip and better screen for under $200. There is something fishy about the Garmin pricing.
  • + 2
 $100-150 iPhone SE or $400 Garmin? hmm...
  • + 1
 @TeamRicky: Does it get 48 hours of GPS tracking?
  • + 1
 @TeamRicky: it also overheats and shuts off, and when it gets too cold it shuts off. Both potentially life endangering problems. No thanks.
  • + 3
 Our iPhones that everyone is raving about as better are like $1000 dollars. And a lot of people replace them often. $300 for a Garmin that lasts for years isn’t bad in the long run.
  • + 1
 In actuality if you are bikepacking you need a Garmin and a phone as back up. In all other cases I don’t see the benefits of an additional gadget.
  • + 1
 Add a couple zeros on that price, and the new apple car will shuttle you too. @yupstate:
  • + 2
 @sos-dirt:

yeah, that's why I use a freaking $200 Android phone with Locus and all the necessary offline vector maps.
It has a lot of more features and better screen & performance than these $400 toys from Garmin.
I get 30+ hours of tracking per battery charge. That's a lot more than I need.
  • + 3
 @Nefar: Latest firmware updates(updated quite frequently) with amazing online support makes it very accurate. Within +- 20meters off actual altitude. No problems. In Spain, Peru and western Canada for me.. And battery is good for 30+ hours.. Heartrate monitoring is a bit of a joke however...but thankfully i can check my pulse manually in 10seconds x 6...
  • + 0
 @f00bar: and will break in the first crash. I destroyed so many 150$ android phones it is ridiculous. Now I'm using a rugged android phone but it is so heavy, was more expensive and I wouldn't want it on my handlebar.

Additionnally those android phones have a hard time lasting a day with regular phone use. When I am in he middle of nowhere in the mountains I prefer keeping the battery of my phone plenty enough in case of emergency.
  • + 1
 @salespunk: Iphone less accurate than garmin? Can you back that up with data? I've found the opposite to be true though i hear your claim often from garmin owners.

I have written interpolation algorithms for gps traces and believe the iphone 6s and later make the best data.
  • + 1
 @captaingrumpy: @f00bar: run them side by side and then compare the GPS bread crumbs and take a look at how much drift there is point to point. I have actually done this a lot to compare with Strava, GarminConnect, etc all set to the shortest recording interval. The drift gets very bad once you get into GPS/Cell coverage shadow areas.

I have also had issues with accuracy once a phone drops off the network and has to rely on GPS only. The phones are capable of being very accurate, but they are not designed to leverage the HW for this specific purpose. Phones may or may not have access to GLONASS systems and many only use the US systems and not European or Russian satellites. See the following image that shows real GPS waypoints on a very simple 1/4 mile track that allows for use of the cellular network

images.singletracks.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/gps_test_aggregate.jpg

You can see how rough the iPhone waypoints are vs the other GPS dedicated devices.

For everyone stating you can buy a new Android phone for $150/$50/etc that is with a contract that locks you in to a payment stream of 36 months. Try and buy the phone without getting a contract and see what the price is.

At a high level if you already have a cell phone and want to run Strava/GarminConnect/etc it is good enough as long as you are not too far from a network. If you want more accuracy, care about battery life for reasons other than the ride, use Ant+ sensors or ride in areas where cell coverage is less than stable, a Garmin or other device is a better option.
  • + 1
 @salespunk: Post the link to the whole story, like i did above:

www.singletracks.com/blog/gps/gps-distance-accuracy-test-smartphone-apps-vs-dedicated-gps

THe biggest issue is when you upload to various services, they mutate your data. Its not just about polling frequency or exact accuracy per reading. Its a lot more complex than that
  • + 1
 @salespunk: Also, no one buys phones on contract anymore. Here is a borderline flagship spec'ed phone for $200:

www.aliexpress.com/item/In-Stock-Global-Version-Xiaomi-Redmi-Note-7-6-3-Full-Screen-Snapdragon-660-AIE-4GB/32891010865.html
  • + 1
 @hamncheez: I'd say people buy phones exclusively on contract because that's the way carriers are set up. New phones cost $1000 for the latest iPhone or Samsung, and that's what people want so they're ok with making monthly payments on it. If you buy an off-brand phone, you're running the risk of not only all your data being sent back to whoever and no updates to Android, etc.
  • + 1
 @matadorCE: None of the major carriers sell contracts anymore. They do have payment plans for phones, but it doesn't lock you into a contract.
  • + 2
 @hamncheez: You're correct but it's all a shell game. It used to be you got locked into a service contract and got the phone heavily subsidized. Now you have no forced service contracts but the phones are so expensive that you're forced to finance it and therefore locked into a contract per the phone. At least back then you could break the contract, pay the penalty, and keep the phone to go somewhere else. Now you have to pay the rest of the balance or brick the phone.
  • + 1
 @matadorCE: True that, but at the same time, in my experience, more and more people are just paying full price for phones. In the early days of smartphones, a two year old phone became a buggy nightmare that was considerably behind a current phone. Now, a two year old smartphone is an iphone X. Anyone think that is dated and buggy?

The point is the used smartphone market is booming. Most people I know now buy used phones (except my fellow develoepers; when you make your income off of a device you can justify owning the latest and greatest) now, and most don't pay more than $300.
  • + 1
 @opignonlibre: I crash all the time and have yet to destroy my first phone.
I use a Spigen Rugged Armor case and a protective glass/foil for the screen. 4 years and counting.

@salespunk: Activity profiles take care of any drift - for biking, I use a minimum interval of 10 meters and 5 seconds between two trackpoints. The resulting tracks are pretty much the same as those logged by buddy's Garmin. Sometimes even more accurate.

Not to mention that the comparison in your article is absolutely irrelevant for mountain biking - you don't ride 250m laps, do you? A trackpoint 3 meters off on a 40km ride is absolutely irrelevant.
  • + 0
 @f00bar @hamncheez you both asked for data points that show phones are less accurate than a dedicated device. The data I provided (no or limited GLONASS support, specific examples of drift on a very simple route) shows that phones are less accurate and why. I also provided other examples of why people would not want to use their phones for this functionality.

A 5 second interval is an incredibly inaccurate and would suggest that you only want basic time and distance without regard to small interval accuracy for applications like Strava. With that recording interval any of your leaderboard numbers are merely suggestions. I understand that you may not care about things like that, other people do.

Strava as an example absolutely does not correct drift in the manner you are saying. I have seen specific examples of friends riding with me where their track shows them riding in 40' circles on a singletrack multiple times while using an iPhone to record.

Again I go back to the fact that a phone may be fine for your use case. Awesome, but that does not mean it is the best way to record a ride for everyone or the most accurate. Accurate enough for some people is not accurate enough for everyone. That is why there are also devices like LitPro that are even more accurate than a Garmin and provide NO screen or even basic functionality other than position.
  • + 1
 @salespunk: Read the article that your image comes from, please.
  • + 1
 @salespunk: I don't think anyone is doubting Garmins are more accurate specific to cycling data, especially when it comes to elevation. But for $500+ with all the sensors, its over the top expensive and specific tool for athletes or riders OCD about metrics. For $199 you can buy a new Moto G7 or Apple Watch 3, and have capabilities far beyond what any Garmin can do, just with a bit less cycling specific accuracy...which is fine for most
  • + 2
 @salespunk: your article does not compare GPS accuracy at all !!!

The only thing it compares is the logging frequency that various apps or devices use. I could set my logging frequency to every second and get a 5MB file for each of my ride. But I don't freaking need it!

Neither do I care about Strava or any leaderboards. I ride because I enjoy riding, and I want to keep track of the distance and elevation I climb, my heart-rate etc.

A waypoint every 10 meters and 5 seconds is as much as I want to have logged. Anything more is just a waste of storage space and battery for me.

You are confusing GPS accuracy with logging frequency.
  • + 2
 @f00bar: www.singletracks.com/blog/mtb-gear/gps-accuracy-gps-vs-smartphone-vs-cyclocomputer


Newer article. Similarly flawed as theyre round tripping through strava and linear interpolating between points.

What i see is that the raw data from the latest iphones (specifically the 6s and later) are simply better than the cyclecomputers. Interesting is that speed info from gps is more accurate than location, so is often best to bias location using speed.

I consider the strava round trip a huge benefit for common trails, they can average thousands of traces to pretty closly approximate the truth, then snap a rider onto the path.

Maybe the last 20 traces ive investigated, 100% have been from cyclecomputer gps just going haywire. I strongly suspect garmin specifically has childishly broken interpolation that is corrupting the data i see.
  • + 48
 Sorry for not being in pinkbike mode and pissing and moaning about everything unfair in my life but i think this new 5xx looks awesome
  • + 4
 @rajcoont I forgive you, but make sure to make up for it tomorrow, you're a bit behind and that's unacceptable.
  • + 2
 I never had a problem with my Garmin 810. Road, xc, enduro, even ski!
Changed to Wahoo to give it a chance and it let me down 3 times on races (I think it's a problem with the altimeter hole/sensor). It died with "low bat". You had to warm it up, give a little bit of carge and it would show up 80% again. lol
People praise Wahoo a lot but it doesnt even have a basic alarm/alert or a battery charging percentage, you have to turn it on (it takes ages). Navigation is a joke.
So I bought a 520+ and I'm happy. Did a 5 hour ride, 67% of battery. Still, I must say the Wahoo interaction with the phone app was superb!
Garmin is not even close to perfection, like Wahoo, but people just bash it for fun. On the other hand the Wahoo crowd is simply out of control, don't even try to point a fault, you'll get beaten.
  • + 18
 A nice feature would be a pop up reminder to submit a claim before the warranty is up, and another reminder to put on eBay before the screen gets scratched.
  • + 13
 I've had my Garmin 705 edge for about 11 years now. It's been on almost all my bike rides with me and has stood the test of time. It's been crashed, dropped, rained on and still functions.
The battery is getting a bit tired but a replacement is on its way for a mere $25. It's simple, turn it on, ride your bike, turn it off. It gives me all the info I'm looking for and records my data accurately. I'm not interested in strapping a big, ugly and expensive phone with too many things going on into my stem. I have to agree that I have no interest in having a touch screen, thankfully mine just has buttons.
Yes these are expensive, but they serve a function. Worth the money
  • + 12
 So many phone comparisons. You can’t beat a dedicated GPS when you’re out in the backcountry.
  • + 7
 So, why would I upgrade to this from my current 520? I don't see much different other than the new ClimbPro and Grit features which seem kind of gimmicky and something I'd never use anyways. Coming pre-loaded with Trailforks maps is a nice feature, but again all of these maps can be downloaded and added to a 520/820 (although it does require a $15 donation for each province/state downloaded). I'm curious what maps it comes pre-loaded with (all of the US and Canada?).

I personally find the navigation functions of the current 520 using downloaded Trailforks maps to be awesome if you pre-plan a route with the Trailforks ride planner. Makes following a route very very easy, never get lost. Still doesn't compare to Trailforks on my phone when trying to navigate through unfamiliar trail systems when not using a pre-planned route. The Garmin is not easy to use this way, but pre-planned route navigation is pretty much the only thing I use it for and is worth the money just for that.
  • + 1
 I think you answered your own question. There are not a lot of reasons to replace a 520 unless you are going to use the TF integration, longer battery life or a few other newer features. They will be nice to have once the battery dies in the 520.
  • + 1
 @salespunk: Yeah, it was more of a question that I already knew the answer to. TF integration isn't new to the 530 though, as the 520 is perfectly integrated with TF already, just not pre-loaded and you need to download the maps first (not a big deal). For me battery life hasn't been an issue either with the 520, I just keep the backlight % down at around 50-60% with a 15 second shut off and it easily lasts 6hr+ rides. To me it seems like the 520/820 and new 530/830 are nearly identical.
  • + 4
 @freerider11: The target market is probably not people who already have the recent 520 Plus, but people without a Garmin or a much older device.

The maps are different though, the TF trail data on this new Garmin should be routable on the device, where as the downloadable trail maps on the TF website are not.
  • + 1
 @canadaka: What do you mean by routable on the device? Do you mean that you will be able to actually plan a route on the device itself?
  • + 0
 @canadaka: this here is the entire freaking problem.
Instead of a firmware update on the 520 for a simple feature add on, they rather suck new people who don't already have been down the Garmin blackhole of disappointment..
  • + 1
 @freerider11: When you come to an intersection and the trail splits into 2, it'll show you the profile of each trail. You can then set which trail you want and it routes you through.
  • + 2
 @salespunk: if this generation calculates routes in a time you can measure with a stopwatch instead of a calendar and fixes 99% of the bugs, that might in itself be enough reason for upgrading, irrespective of added features.
  • + 7
 I'm a (largely) happy owner of a 520 Plus, and don't see a reason to upgrade. I expect most 520/plus owners won't. The ClimbPro feature sounds neat, but certainly not worth $300 on its own.

Here's what would make me upgrade and buy more Garmin stuff: integration with their Inreach Mini.

The Inreach Mini is their satellite tracker/communicator. You can send text messages and stuff when you're out of cell range.

The 520 Plus does a great job integrating with Strava's Beacon via your cellphone, so when I start a ride, my wife gets a text with a link to follow my ride, and assumedly come get me if I'm out cold by the side of the trail for a few hours.

Great for her piece of mind, and mine when I'm out on solo rides. So long as I'm in cell range.

You'd think that if you had a Garmin™ bike computer and a Garmin™ satellite communicator, they might be able to talk to each other. So that if I was out of cell range, the Beacon/Livetrack could hand off to the Inreach, and keep updating the outside world on my location.

Stupidly, they don't. The Inreach uses a completely separate tracking system, and while it'll talk to some of the Garmin watches, it won't talk to any of Garmin's bike computers. I can't think of a user group to whom this would be more valuable to than mountain bikers, and DC Rainmaker even brought it up to Garmin's engineers when he reviewed the Inreach Mini a full year ago.

This was their reply:

"For its part, in my discussions with Garmin about this – they get it. They completely agree the use case for getting this in Edge devices is huge, especially in the mountain biking community."

So, Garmin knows this is a big miss on their part, has known for a year, and has done nothing to address it.

That's pretty emblamatic of Garmin in my experience.

The solo rides I go on outside of cell range tend to be the rides where sharing my location with someone would be the most beneficial. But I can't bring myself to spend more money on a device to do this, when Garmin can't be bothered to deliver an integrated ecosystem that actually meets the needs of mountain bikers.

Sadly, there's no real competitors in the space that offer anything like this. The Spot satellite trackers are the only close competitor, and they're pretty poorly reviewed.
  • + 1
 Just to add for others - you don't need Strava Beacon on Garmin. Garmin has a similar Live Tracking system that is available free of charge. They also have incident detection that works with it. It's a bit annoying sometimes due to false positives, but it works whenever you crash. The comment about Inreach system is true. I have no idea why would they not support it. My guess is that someone there is working on it, but in typical Garmin fashion - it will arrive in couple of years.
  • + 1
 @noizz: They'll add it eventually. That'll be the 530 Plus and it'll be $350 in 2 years.
  • + 1
 @PHeller: Don't forget the InReach Mini 2 Plus that'll be another $500, plus monthly service charges.
  • + 6
 I have the 130 and it's the best GPS unit I've used so far. I just need something to read speed and distance accurately, while also coming in a small form factor and having no touch screen.
  • + 3
 Yup, 130 is the best! Love the minimalistic design. Too bad it lacks some basic features, for example: temperature.
  • + 1
 Best part is that they now added power meter integration. I have a 25 and love it, but it doesn't support that one piece.
  • + 1
 @PeaFunk: You're kidding right? If it feels hot outside it must be hot. Assuming the same for cold. Just saying.
  • + 2
 I have a 520, I had to add a sensor on the front hub of my mtb to get a consistent signal as GPS in the woods didn't work so well. The interface is convoluted and not glove friendly, the garmen connect software sucks balls and in general I'd hoped for better for the money than this.
  • + 2
 I dropped the bike mounted computer for a Fenix 5x almost a year ago. Only then did I realise I never actually look at my current ride stats unless they're in front of me. Occasionally looking at my watch is fine for HR and Distance etc. Has trailforks etc if I want it too. I can wear it anywhere also to read the time!
  • + 2
 I tried this but hated the watch bouncing around against my wrist and hand during rough DH sections. I did wear it high on my wrist but it slid down. Tried it with the face on the inside of my wrist but found that equally uncomfortable. Glad it works for you!
  • + 2
 @mtbgeartech: I use www.rei.com/product/769265/garmin-gps-watch-bike-mount and hr strap. If you want to be really cheap you can just use some rubber tube to strap the watch on you handlebars. A hr strap is more accurate anyways.
  • + 2
 I tried this, but I really needed something to give me directions. I have the fenix3 and although I got instructions on it to turn left or right, via various apps on my phone, it was too frustrating not to see the layout on a map, or the instruction came a bit too late. Especially in residential areas, I constantly took a wrong turn. I therefore got the edge 820. Its better but they must have the slowest processor available in there and the touch screen is frustrating. Routing home takes a good 10min calculation. But yes, Garmin need to put more money in interface, and processors, to speed up these devices.
  • + 2
 i can't help but feel Garmin has this market until a proper electronics manufacturer decided there's money in the device and then we get something good. Right now, compared to other tech (phones) we carry around they seem bad, hliariously so apart from the fact you go round in loops, down roads that are trails and trails that are roads with a touchscreen that doesn't work
  • + 1
 I have an edge 130 for my basic bicycle computer and really like it but I still use Trailforks to not get lost. I really like the 130 but I did have to disable most of the notifications. It would beep every time I would get an email, text or start a new strava segment on the trail, very very distracting.
  • + 1
 Recently tried a Wahoo Element Bolt after years of feeling like Garmin was the only viable choice. I’m not sure what it’ll take from Garmin to bring me back, but these two devices just don’t have it. Though I will say the Edge 130 may be the best, most reliable Garmin there is.
  • + 2
 Well my thoughts exactly. Instead since we are dealing with road cyclists a lot more than mtbikers, I was introduced to Wahoo since the launch of the Elemnt. For the very first time since the Garmin brought the Edges, they have a real competitor. Not that long ago we have to go with Garmin because of the lack of mounts with the competitors. Good thing is that now, Garmin was forced to open its Edge line on the software side of things to third party app and developers.
  • + 1
 @DrPete , I currently have a Wahoo ELMNT (full size, not the Bolt) and was considering switching to Garmin after I've been impressed with the Forerunner 935 watch. There's not much that I dislike about the ELMNT, but I was thinking it would be nice to keep most of my data on one platform (Garmin Connect). What is it about the Bolt that would keep you from going back to Garmin. I'm really looking for a comparison between Wahoo and Garmin. Thank you.
  • + 1
 I used Edge 520 for more than two years, battery was far from claimed 15 hours and at the end of my ownership it was almost dead around after merely 5h. Bolt was a refresher in that regard, it handles whole day like a champ. Same with usability - changing datafields took ages, whereas on Elemnt it's a matter of seconds. Also - Wahoo sent me a new unit when I broke the old one, so kudos to them.

Recently however, I started noticing that the B&W screen sucks big time when it comes to maps, especially for trail riding. Live tracking requires the companion app to be open manually on the phone (annoying) and incident detection feature is not available on Bolt (even tho it was 90% false postives for me it saved my ass once).

I'll be watching what people say about 530 and might get back to Garminland, unless Wahoo releases their teased Roam or whatever the next device is going to be with Trailforks support.
  • + 1
 @noizz: Regarding Live Tracking, when using a Garmin device, like the 520, you didn't have to do any special steps to send your live track? I ride by myself a lot. I like that my Garmin watch will email my wife as soon as I start a ride or skiing, or hiking, or whatever. Last night I was using my Wahoo ELMNT, and stopped mid ride to connect the companion app so that I could text my wife the live track. It would be a major plus, if you said the Garmin Edge 520/530 would eliminate this step. I like to ride with my gadgets, but I don't like to fiddle around with a bunch of extra steps. I want to press "start" and go riding, not play with my phone to connect the companion app.
  • + 1
 @gooded: yes sir, you don't need to do anything for garmin device to automatically share your ride link with whoever you selected on the app (IIRC only emails). Just press "start ride" and that's it. No companion apps. Same with incident detection, sends messages automatically to your emergency contacts. I have no idea why Wahoo haven't made it work the same. I can complain about Garmin for hours, but they had that part dialed.
  • + 2
 @noizz: the incident detection though is a nightmare during MTB. It used to go off twice to three times a ride, only when stopping on the hill or resting the bike on its side. So I turned it off. I just need to remember to put it on each time
I’m going for a road ride.
  • + 1
 @mitochris: yeah, the incident detection was WAY too sensitive. Forgot about that “feature” as well.
  • + 2
 @gooded: I have a Fenix 5x that I use for all my other activities, Wahoo on the bike, and now use Strava as my main log since Wahoo and Garmin both feed it.

What’s made me a convert? Wahoo just WORKS. No weird glitches uploading rides, no turn off Bluetooth/turn it back on, great form factor, simple UI, and I do like having the LEDs set up with my HR zones as a reminder (especially during enduros) that I’m going too hard on a long climb. Changing those settings in the Wahoo app is SO much easier.

My Fenix syncs quite well and just doesn’t seem to have the glitches and hiccups of the Edge series—except the 130, which has been super reliable. I think Wahoo just nails it in terms of features vs reliability.

I do like the gimmicky jumping metrics and things like that but I wouldn’t go back to the Garmin platform and interface just for that.
  • + 2
 @DrPete: Thank you for the opinion. I guess it's not a big deal to connect the wahoo to my phone before I click start. Tuesday was the first "real" ride I've done since the snow melted, and I just forgot to do it that time, but normally, it's not too bad. I recently used a Garmin Tour on a Rental bike while I was travelling for work. I was unable to see the screen in the sunlight. I can always see my Elemnt.
  • + 1
 Someday, they'll figure out how to make a power button that doesn't shit the bed after a few years. Both my Edge 305 and 510 have gone tits up because their power buttons broke.

They're offering to replace my 510 for 20% off MSRP. Thanks for the attempt, but that's still more expensive than buying it retail.
  • + 1
 do you still have to stop the current track when you open the traislforks app? That's my biggest concern with the current 520/820 generation. Whenever you want to browse for a trail in trailforks, you have to stop the current activity.
  • + 1
 I think if you want to load a different route from your wishlist in the TF app, you still have to stop the current tracking. But now this Garmin has all the trails all the time on the screen as part of the map. There is also a trail search built into the Garmin menu's I actually haven't tried to see if that can be used while already recording a track.
  • + 1
 Worst piece of junk ever, bought a Edge 520 and only kept it for one ride. Quickly realized the « Trailforks App » is useless without a touch screen...common Garmin, get out of your prehistoric cave...you can buy anything now days with even smaller touchscreens for much less $$.

I simply added my Iphone 5 to my shared data plan, bought a Topeak stem mount and protective case for $40. Downloaded Trailforks with proper touchscreen this time Smile downloaded a bike computer app to get data from my rides ( i only wish one day Trailforks would integrate that to their app) and bam i got a way better setup than that crappy Garmin. Oh! And for those complaining about battery life, $40 and got a new battery which last me a full day ride...
  • + 5
 Garmin can suck my balls.
  • + 32
 Explains the price.
  • + 2
 @deadbeat: indeed... But seriously what an overrated, overpriced, underperforming pile of laggy, buggy unstable shite.
  • + 1
 @danlovesbikes: yep I hear ya, iPhone does the trick
  • + 1
 Wow, lots of hate here. Personally, I would never ride with my phone attached anywhere to my bike, and carrying it in a shorts pocket is annoying as hell. I've even messed them up being in a jersey pocket or hydration pack. I love my 800, even though I had to find my own maps. It's meant to be compact, rugged, and withstand the elements and the beating it should be taking on your rides. I'm no crazy shredder, but I can't imagine anybody but a roadie or commuter riding with a phone attached to their handlebars unless they really want to be replacing a $700 phone soon. I think these fit the bill perfectly. There hasn't been enough of a difference between models to warrant an upgrade until now.
  • + 4
 Does the touch screen really work now? The one on my 820 is an absolute pain in the ass, even in dry conditions.
  • + 1
 Agreed. They should flip the 500 and 800 series so people pay more not to have that touchscreen.
  • + 0
 I don't understand why it is so hard to make a good bike gps computer. I just wanted something that I could turn on, see a trail and follow it so I don't go down a wrong turn. Exactly like a car GPS. A lot of Mountain Bike trails have several forks that will get you lost when you ride them blind. Stopping to look at my phone just takes time. I tried the 520 and 820 and they were too complicated. I've heard Hammerhead is better. Anyone have any input on it? Thanks
  • + 2
 @lRaphl: I wouldn't buy Hammerhead after they lied to customers during their launch.
  • + 1
 @DrPete: I wouldn't either. My Garmin Edge 510 does everything I need for now and I will keep it until it dies.
  • + 2
 Can I configure a fluid lost/hang time screen with a corresponding text alert for my wife so she knows if if been hung out too dry.
  • + 1
 just bought a 510 motherboard on ebay (mine went on loop), recent models seem almost no different 5 years past, and every other cheaper option seems like buying a 80's casio watch.
  • + 0
 Best way to use a Garmin for off road rides is to upload IE Strava downhill / single track segments only into the Garmin, as courses, using Basecamp. Mark the course segments to "always visible" ( a bit of a pain as you can only do this individually ) and then give them a colour. When on a ride you can see the segments nearby and you don't have to follow someone else's route, of which Garmin are shit for MTBers.
  • + 4
 Those interfaces still look like 2005
  • + 2
 Do people really need that much information on a bike ride, as long as my old etrex tells me I’m where I need to be I’m happy.
  • + 3
 it's 2019 and a $400 Garmin navigation has a display resolution of 246 x 322 pixels
  • - 1
 I have a Polar 650 - it works great but the maps are a waste of time because the res is so poor. I can't see these Garmins being much use with maps either.
  • + 1
 thinking of just using my iphone with a backup power pack if needed. my rides are mostly under 3 hours anyway and the iphone is much more powerful and has apps like Kamoot and trialforks
  • + 1
 The concern is bar mounting your smartphone... I’d much rather destroy a cheap(Er) dedicated unit than my phone.
  • + 3
 all the people saying that an iphone can do the same...have never used a gps device !!!! is way more differente and accurate
  • + 1
 no it's not. Have used Garmin devices for 10 years. They are no better than phones.
  • + 1
 Garmin has the most no-user friendly software...in every product they made.. I think that in garmin theres a group payed just to make difficult to use it.
  • + 1
 For $150 I can buy an unlocked Android phone, a heavy duty case and a mount plus an external battery pack of I'm really worked about battery life. $300-$400 is ridiculous.
  • + 1
 I like the power pack facility. My mate has done the Taiwan KOM a couple of times and his Edge 520 has never made it up and down before being spent. This is a sweet idea.
  • + 2
 My 510 f***ed up after warranty was over...could fix it...trash...done with Garmin
  • + 2
 I've been using my 510 for the past 5 years (4 to 7 times per week, -40C in winter to +35C in summer) and it's still working perfectly.
  • + 2
 If they still have the blue halo problem in the screens they can go f**k themselves.
  • + 3
 Anyone used a Wahoo device over these?
  • + 2
 I’ve had 520, 820, and 130, and recently got a Wahoo. I’ve been really impressed so far with Wahoo, and while Trailforks integration is nice Wahoo’s maps do have trails and if I’m honest, I’m pulling out my phone and using Trailforks if I really need to find my way.
  • + 1
 When it comes to road cycling, the Wahoos are doing so much better over the last 6-12 months. If the Elemnt wasn't at its best at launch, Wahoo is supporting its devices in a way Garmin never ever did. Since we are a cycling tour operator, we do provide GPS units to our clients, and more and more customers are asking for the Elemnt or the Elemnt Bolt. We do rely on Oregon for most of our touring or trekking customers but for everything else, they want Wahoo because it is so much easier to use and to set up. Pull your phone if you need to have a look at the map if you're unsure of the route, like you will do with a real map. And what a pleasure looking at the map a smartphone's touchscreen rather than those crappy Garmin screens.
  • + 1
 WAHOO elemnt works great. solid device and very easy to use/setup. feels less antiquated and black box than garmin.

ill take solid execution over feature count.
  • + 2
 @Euskafreez: you lost me at "road cycling."
  • + 3
 Garmin is trash, long live Wahoo
  • + 1
 I have an outdated POS garmin watch and the app on my phone.That and the TF app is more than I need.
  • + 2
 That is the worst looking map I have ever seen!
  • + 2
 I wonder why suunto does not make a bike computer.
  • + 1
 Probably because they are one life support after the spartan debacle and can't financially enter a new market.
  • + 1
 There is this thing called strava. Its free and works as good and if not better than Garmin
  • + 1
 DC Rainmaker has long term reviews up for the new 5, 8 as well as the new sensors that are finally here.
  • + 1
 I've literally just got a 820 off eBay for just over £100. I'm good cheers.
  • + 1
 Edge 200 has everything I need and nothing that I don't. When I crashed and broke one I went and bought a refurbished unit.
  • + 1
 I don't need no stinkin Flow score to tell me how slow I am. Or how many times I went OTB. Unless there's a diarrhea mode.
  • + 1
 Still seems like a xc or road focused product.
  • + 1
 Avocet 31 ... loads of features.
  • + 1
 to expensive , this can watch porn hub while on trail? jajajajaja
  • + 5
 sure, but given the display resolution, everything will look like japanese porn
  • + 1
 do they update Trailforks data/tracks ?
  • + 1
 I can't read this story on my phone. For some reason it won't connect.
  • + 1
 Wahoo FTW
  • - 2
 Happy with my smartphone and stem mounted quadlock. I have velcro on my toptube to attach my battery pack if need be.
  • + 4
 That’s an expensive crash waiting to happen.
  • + 1
 @DrPete:

I can buy almost 3 usable phones for the price of the more expensive Garmin.
I crash all the time, and I've never destroyed my phone.
  • + 0
 @DrPete: When was the last time you damaged your stem in a crash?? Sure my phone sits a bit higher but it's still below bar height. In any case, the quadlock case is very protective, the clamp does tilt if it has a hard knock and, ultimately, it's only held on by 2 small zip ties which would just snap in a heavy impact. My phone is at more risk from falling out of my pocket during normal use than being damaged in a crash.
  • + 2
 @lacuna: Damaged my stem? Never. Knocked my stem/bar around in a crash in a way that would’ve smashed my iPhone 7 Plus had it been on the bar? Last weekend.
  • - 2
 Nerd toy...
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login
Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.130977
Mobile Version of Website