Best GPS Navigation

Review by Schultzie:
I actually could not decide between the Garmin Nuvi 255w or the 750 model, so I decided to buy them both for comparison. I mounted them both to my car windshield and gave them various addresses to find together. I found that both models took the same routes and announced upcoming turns and street names at practically the same time. One thing I noticed about the 255w was that it was updating my position on the road more often, I’d say about 3 times as often as the 750. This made for smoother graphics on the 255w of the vehicle moving along displayed roads, where the 750′s display was more of a “jerky” movement. I also found that the display on the 255w was a bit brighter, clearer, and more vivid than on the 750 in both daylight and at night. Another feature I like on the 255w is the graphic turn indicator in the upper left corner, which the 750 lacks. This is a small arrow which shows upcoming turns and the distance to that turn. It also show things like a fork in the road, (ie: a Y intersection), and which fork you will be taking. The 750 just displays text on the top line for upcoming turns without the arrow. It’s just a little extra feature on the 255w which I happened to really like. The 255 also automatically adjusts the font size of displayed text so that even lengthy text will fit.

Another feature on the 255w is a display of the posted speed limit on the road which you are currently on right above your current displayed speed. I found myself not even looking at my car speedometer as I could easily see my current speed and the speed limit of my route at a glance. The 750 doesn’t have this feature. I also like how they moved the zoom in (+) and zoom out (-) buttons on the 255w to the same side of the screen which makes it a bit easier. On the 750 the zoom buttons are on opposite sides of the screen.

Now there are some features on the 750 that the 255w does not have. The 750 can broadcast it’s sound over your FM radio with the supplied cigarette lighter cable, and it has a headphone jack, which I found to be nice features. The 750 also has an MP3 player and an Audio-book player, which the 255w does not. Another really nice feature of the 750 is the car locater. This is a great feature if you are parking in a really big lot, such as at an amusement park or a fair. The 750 marks your location when you remove it from the car, then you take it with you and it remembers where you parked and takes you right back to your car. The 255w doesn’t have the car locater.

I also thought the the voice prompts of the 750 where more pleasant sounding than the 255w’s. The 750 sounds more like a real female voice, where the 255w sounds more robotic.

Another thing to consider was that I paid less for the 750 and it came with the FM transmitter cable and a USB cord to connect it to your computer for updates and downloads.

My final decision was to keep the 255w and return the 750 because I really liked the graphic turn indicator and the posted speed limit and current speed indicators. I didn’t find a need for the 750′s MP3 player and Audio book player, but that is up to personal preference. Since the USB cable was not included with the 255w, I purchased it on this site for . I also intend to purchase the MSN direct cable when it is available in August 2008.

Review by EmbeddedFlyer:
If you spend much time driving in unfamiliar territory, especially if you rent cars in big cities, a good portable GPS makes an amazing difference. And the Garmin 255W is the best one I could find in the 0 – 0 range.

First this thing just plain works. I haven’t had any issues with mine. It was easy to set up and figure out right out of the box, and it’s easy to use. It never has had trouble getting sufficient signal unlike earlier and cheaper models.

I chose the 255W for several reasons: It uses some of the newest and best maps available. It has one of the more usable touch screens for entering destinations. It’s fast to acquire satellites. And Garmin almost always comes out on top in reviews–especially in routing.

Ultimately, you buy a car GPS to get you from Point A to Point B as easily and efficiently as possible. And that’s what the 255W does best. If you’ve ever had a “Brand X” GPS take you on some strange route that adds 20 minutes to your trip, has you turn the wrong way down a one way road, tell you to turn AFTER you’ve passed the street, frequently loses the satellite signal, or has old maps missing streets, you know how important this stuff is.

The 255W has a really clear display that’s easy to see in any light. It’s small enough to use on foot. The windshield mount works great and it’s easy to toss in the glovebox when you park. It even tells you the speed limit on most roads. The “points of interest” feature works very well to find places to eat by type of cuisine, gas stations, etc.

The difference between the 255W and 205W is the 255 speaks street names and includes Alaska and Canada. The 205 and 205W will tell you to “turn right in 500 feet” which isn’t as helpful or obvious as “turn right on Ivy Street in 500 feet”. The “W” models are widescreen which makes entering destinations easier due to having a bigger “keyboard” and also lets you see more map area while driving.

All in all this isn’t the cheapest GPS in its class but it’s one of the best. My only gripe is you need an expensive add-on to get live traffic data–something that’s included with the Magellan Roadmate 1430 which is close to the same price. But the Garmin 255W is a better GPS in every other way.

Review by PAZMAN:
I like this thing quite a lot. I’ve had it for about three weeks, and have used it on 12 workouts so far. I use it primarily for running, with biking a secondary usage. The main reason I wanted it was for the instantaneous readout of distance, running pace and heart rate, the latter needed for the speed work I want to do this running season.

The core functionality (distance and heart rate monitoring) works perfectly. There’s none of the signal drops I’ve had with other heart monitors. Once the satellites are initially acquired, I’ve only had one dropout when I was outside. The initial acquisition of the satellites can be quirky and can take some time. The accuracy (according to the readout) is +/- 25ft, depending on how many satellites can be found. I’ve compared the distance measurement on the GPS with a known, measured distance on one of the trails I run on (the Chicago lakefront path). The GPS always increments a mile when I’m within 5 or 10 feet of the mile marker sign on the path. Well, I guess that’s the least I should expect from a 0 GPS unit! Of course it’s bigger than a normal running stopwatch, but that hasn’t bothered me at all. The heart rate strap is also very comfortable and well-designed.

The display is crisp and has one outstanding feature: The information presented on the various pages can be completely user-customized. The default screen layout is rather poor, but in just a few steps I could replace it with the information I wanted to see while I run. There are almost 40 different data fields you can choose from for display. Examples: current pace, average lap pace, average run pace, heartrate, distance.

The only disappointment is the point-in-time (instantaneous) pace measurement: It varies wildly during a run. I see swings as big as +/- 3 minutes/mile. I’m a marathoner and I know my pace is fairly consistent during a run. I just looked at my run today, and according to the data the first mile varied from 5:57/mile to 12:06 mile. I suspect the problem is either in the averaging algorithm (too short a distance?), or in the uncertainty that results from different satellites coming in and out of view. The variations seem to get worse under tree cover compared with an open area. Luckily there’s a lap-average pace that can be presented, and at least that value is useful and more accurate. The bottom line is that you can’t look at the watch and say “right now I’m running 9 mins/mile”. There is the ability to specify a pace smoothing factor, but I have it maxed out and still see the variations. The elevation readout also seems inaccurate, but that isn’t important to me.

Upload of workout data to the PC software (Training Center) is transparent. The PC software is very good for presenting time/distance/pace/heartrate/calorie data. However the maps it shows are very crude. I’ve worked a bit with one of the online, subscription services (MotionBased). That looks really good and provides some additional functionality beyond the included Training Center software, although I still haven’t decided if it’s worth the $$$ yet for long-term data storage. MotionBased allows export to Google Earth, and it’s tremendously cool to see your running path superimposed on a satellite image. You can recharge the unit through the USB port on your computer, although it’s slower than using the dedicated recharger.

I had hoped that owning this device would prove motivational for me, and indeed it has. I can’t imagine running or biking without it. Updating my training log is trivial now: Plug this thing into my computer, and it’s done. My hope is that a future software update will do something about the pace calculation (maybe a few additional levels of smoothing?). If so, the Forerunner 305 would earn 5 stars+++.

Positives:

Flawless heart rate sampling

Great distance measuring and lap-average pace calculation

Seamless integration with a PC

Fully-automatic training log update

User-customizable display

Negatives;

Wildly-varying pace readout.

Review by M. Leuzinger:
With a few one-star reviews, I was a bit hesitant to order this. Now, after two weeks of use (10 runs of 2 to 2.5 miles each), I have no regrets with the purchase whatsoever.

I haven’t had any of the problems reported by any of the one-star reviewers. It syncs to the satellite in a reasonable* amount of time, seems to track my pace very well, tracks distance well, and the heart rate monitor seems WAY more accurate than the dedicated exercise machines at my local gym.

*by reasonable, it does take a minute or two to sync to the satellites each time. That’s the only thing I could possibly think of improving, but it’s not a big deal. Being the super-impatient person I am, I often turn on the watch, set it on my front porch, go back in and change into my running outfit, and by the time I come back out it’s ready to go.

I haven’t seen the pacing issues others have reported. I’m a beginning runner… but if I keep a solid pace… it reports about 10mins/mile… if I push a little harder… about 9mins/mile… if I let up… about 11mins/mile. It seems very consistent over my entire 2-2.5 mile run.

I have a 2.1 mile run where I’ve done the same exact route about 6 times… and when I compare the maps of each run… they overlap almost exactly.

I have thyroid and heart issues, and this watch gives me the confidence to know I’m not exceeding my max hr for too long (I can easily get into the 180′s) and gives me the feedback and stats to keep me motivated.

Last but not least, I’ve bought dozens and dozens of items from Amazon over the years, and this is the first review I’ve taken the time to write – hope that gives you an indication of how happy I am with this product.