Customer Reviews
Very nice device 
2008-09-05
I used to have the Forerunner 305. This is too much better. You can use it as watch (not to go to a formal dine) that was a huge con for the other forerunners. I raced 10k last weekend I it was very accurate, even the instant pace, that was not very good in the previous models. Too much better than Suunto X9i that is worthless.
The google interface and garmin connect are cool if you like to review your data in different forms.
If you want track calories, go to polar, garmin program still shows values too low, basically because they aimed top runners (olympic type) and the calories is related to speed. I am 10 km/h runners that brings a low quantity of calories spent after a 10 k run.
The bracelet also is not the most confortable, but if you think that it is a GPS, Heart Monitor and Watch definately this is very well packed.
The imporvement on the firmware also brought it to next to Polar 800 SD in terms of graphics for HR, that it is nice.
I recommend it if you a hi-tec runner...
Excellent, apart from missing Mac support 2008-09-04
I've owned the Garmin Edge 305 and various Polar heart rate monitors. Overall I'm very impressed with the Forerunner 405 - except for the lack of Mac support.
First of all the size of the device surprised me. It's actually fairly small, especially compared with the clunky previous Forerunners. Smaller than my Suunto watch. Second I like the ability to choose different data fields (up to 3) on customized displays. This is like the Edge 305 and much better than the Polar devices. Third the compass proved to be very useful when finding my way out of a mountain biking mess of trails. And fourth of course the GPS giving speed, distance, etc is great for either running or mountain biking.
Disappointments are it's not completely waterproof (crazy in this day and age), and the lack of Mac support.
I got around the Mac support by loading Vista on my Mac through Bootcamp. Needed to do this for my other Garmin products anyway, but Garmin really need to get over this!
Great HRM..... terrible software! 2008-09-02
Well, I've been using this HRM for 2 weeks now, and I wanted to share with you all how great it is.
Since I was an addicted fan of Polar HRMs, I was afraid to change. But this FR 405 proved to be the best HRM I ever trained with.
Although Gramin still has some work to be done:
- The PACE is not accurate out of the box, so you need to go to Garmin's web page and update the HRM's firmware;
- Lack of integration with my MacBook. So I was forced to install parallels and run windows XP in order to use its PC integration;
- Terrible training software and a pain to make the HRM "talk"to the PC....It lacks the appropriate support for installation of ANT drivers.
Still, it's a great HRM, and the ability to see your route on the google earth is awesome.
The touch bezel is also very nice, and despite of what others said, it's very simple to use.
As for the terrible native software, you can replace it with gorgeous Sport Track...It's free and it would accept the data exported from the Garmin's Training Center.
By the way, I use the FR405 for running and I'm currently training for the Amsterdam marathon in October.
Only good outside 
2008-08-25
I bought this product. Although impressive, it's only good outside. For instance, if you run on a treadmill, you must buy the speed sensor ($120) to get calories burned. You are out of luck if you take spin class. It will not record calories.
From Garmin Support:
>Thank you for contacting Garmin International. Unfortunately, our
>fitness units calculate calories burned using speed, distance, and time.
>If you're indoors the Forerunner 405 is not able to calculate speed and
>distance. Because the unit has no distance value, it's unable to
>display calories burned. Please let us know if you have any additional
>questions.
>With Best Regards,
>Joe C
This is a deviation for how most heart rate monitors work (Polar, Timex). Most monitors calculate calories based on weight, age, and heart rate. Being able to get calories expended even during the indoor winter months is useful.
Also, there is no way edit workouts results in the software. So, if I do a spin class or run on the treadmill (w/o the speed sensor), I can't alter the uploaded data and enter an estimated distance.
This is different from the Polar software which does allow complete editing of most parameters.
Over all, this is a "cool" monitor. However, if you do alot of indoor training, you'll probably want a different monitor.
good, but overpriced 2008-08-25
Its a good product, but for the price it should be great. The battery life needs to be a bit longer (It doesn't live up to the promise on the package). Also, the control scheme needs work to be more intuitive. If you lock the bezel, it beeps at you every minute or two to tell you the bezel is locked. Its pretty annoying.
The software and the ANT stick work well. So does the heart rate monitor. Satellite acquisition is amazing. Fast and accurate. It even locked on in an interior downstairs room of my house.
I recommend waiting for the next generation, which will probably iron out some of the kinks. Or see if you can find one for cheaper than $350, and you'll feel better about the small drawbacks.
Better than I expected! 
2008-08-23
Garmin International is pleased to announce the Forerunner 405 GPS-enabled sport watch. During a run, this slim, sleek watch accurately tracks distance, pace, calories, and displays it all on the easy-to-read screen. Tap or slide a finger around the innovative touch bezel to change information without fumbling for a button. The optional foot pod can also be used to gather speed and distance information indoors. ANT+Sport wireless technology automatically transfers workout data to and from your computer when your device is within range. No cables, no hookups, the data's just there. Users can upload data to Garmin Connect, a web-based application that lets them analyze, share and store workouts. Zone training, heart rate zone training, supports 5 heart rate zones Compatible with GSC 10 speed/cadence bike sensor - monitor pedaling cadence and wheel speed Compatible with foot pod - measures speed and distance and runners cadence when indoors Watch features - time of day (12/24h), dual time zone, (day/date), daily alarm Training and motivational features - Virtual Partner, courses, workouts, goals GPS features - mark waypoints, back to start, save location ANT+Sport wireless technology lets you automatically transfer information back and forth between the watch and the PC Unit-to-unit - transfer workouts and locations to other Forerunner 405's Dimensions - 45.75mm x 70.5mm x 16.4mm Weight - 2.11 ounces (60 grams)
Comparison: Garmin Forerunner 405 vs. Suunto X9i 2008-08-20
After two weeks of side-by-side usage, I've concluded that these watches are targeted at very different markets. Furthermore, in many respects, it seems like neither watch is totally ready for prime-time. Both have nice feature sets, but they each seem to be lacking some very important features to make them truly useful across several sports. The Suunto X9i seems to be targeted and more useful to the climbing crowd, whereas the Garmin Forerunner 405 seems targeted at the fitness/jogging crowd. Neither has the complete feature set that the above-average hiker/trail runner/mountain biker needs. Thus, if you purchase either, you have to accept the compromises inherit in one or the other.
If I was pressed to recommend one over the other, I very hesitantly lean towards the Garmin Forerunner 405 due to smaller size, better battery life, faster GPS synch, slightly better navigation screen and of course, lower price. I'm hesitant because of several important cons which I elaborate on below.
STATS:
Battery Life (w/ GPS): 4.5hr (X9i) vs. 8hr (405)
Battery Life (w/o GPS): 16d. (X9i) vs. 12d. (405)
Size: X9i is larger in every dimension than 405
Weight: 74g (X9i) vs. 60g (405)
Water Resistence: 100m (X9i) vs. 3m (405)
Heart Rate Monitor: No (X9i) vs. Yes (405)
Outside Temperature: Yes(X9i) vs. No (405)
CONS: Garmin Forerunner 405
1) Does not display raw latitude/longitude position on standard screen. You can save a waypoint, which they call "location", and then edit that point to see the latitude/longitude (displayed in non-decimal format).
2) Does not have On/Off button to save battery-life.
3) Comes with very basic software with limited maps. Cannot export tracks into GPX format.
4) Difficult to upload waypoints for future route.
5) Limited to WGS84 map datum (limits international usage of tracks)
PROS: Garmin Forerunner 405
1) Easy to use menu system.
2) Fast GPS satellite synching.
3) Can connect to heart rate monitor.
4) If you can get waypoints loaded, there is a nice screen that shows the direction/distance to the selected waypoint.
5) Great fitness monitoring screens and many are customizable.
CONS: Sunnto X9i
1) Large physical size.
2) Poor battery life with GPS on.
3) Slow GPS satellite synching.
4) Difficult to use and complex menu system with 5 buttons.
5) Does not have On/Off button to save battery-life.
6) GPS tracks, which they call "logs", tend to have jumps/errors when GPS drops out, which is often.
7) Comes with very basic software with no maps.
8) No screen to show direction to a selected waypoint.
9) Limited to WGS84 map datum (limits international usage of tracks)
10) Suggested Retail Price is 25% more than the Garmin 405.
PROS: Suunto X9i
1) Does display raw latitude/longitude position on Position screen, but in non-decimal format.
2) Does have temperature feature.
Good but very fragile 2008-08-20
I have been using the garmin mainly for running, for a month. I must say that it provides accurate information, such as distance, heart rate, and it is very easy to download workouts from the PC, and upload information from the watch to the computer.
The drawbacks are related to the impossibility to receive water, which has created problems with the watch basically while running in a normally rainy day. I have also experienced problems when running with long sleeve, since it touches the watch and it changes the screen.
I prefer it over my previous Polar S410, especially for the ease to program workouts and donwload information to the computer. The major drawback is not be able to use it to go swimming, or even at rainy days.
A Terrible Disappointment - Stick with the 305 
2008-08-19
As a long-time user and fan of the Garmin 305, the Garmin 405 was a product I was looking forward to for months as I was excited to see the next generation of the 305 I have enjoyed so much.
I could not be more disappointed with the result.
The Garmin 405 is a classic example of a good product concept and clever design gone horribly wrong as the Garmin team focused on form (looks) clearly beat out the folks worried about function. The watch looks fine (great for a HRM/GPS watch, so so for an everyday watch) but in terms of actual purpose-built functionality, it is terrible. There are multiple reasons for this which I will outline below.
(1) Useless when wet (yes, that includes sweat). The fact that you cannot toggle between screens or do anything with the bezel while the device is wet should have caused the designers to toss out this novel touch sensitive concept and stick with what works. Instead, they decided to go with a neat design concept that works great when the salesperson is showing it to you at the store, but will provide endless hours of frustration when you are out running and just want to see your heart rate. This is my first bullet point because it is the best example of the type of design failures that make this a terrible device.
(2) Use of built in functions/screens - The makers carried over the capabilites of the Garmin 305 and added a virtual training partner functionality, but the display can only show three fields at once and the fields themselves are too small for good viewing while in motion (ie running). Cycling between the displays is easy to do while sitting on a couch, even fun when you run your finger along the bezel, but when you are out running you quickly realize that it is very difficult to accomplish anything with the device. With the 305, if you wanted to change fields on the fly, you could manage to do it while keeping a reasonable pace. With the 405, you need to press buttons and run your finger along the bezel to switch fields - again, great on a couch, nearly impossible on a run.
(3) GPS Accuracy. I have traded messages with people who disagree, and I will say that I sometimes have great accuracy, but have also had multiple experiences where the accuracy of this device is off by so much as to make the pace and distance benefits of a GPS useless. The best example is running a measured mile with typical neighborhood street tree coverage and having the device show I went a total of 0.70 miles (the 305 on the same stretch showed 1.01). I have had this happen multiple times in various locations and therefore have stopped using the watch in races when I want to know my true pace and distance (I am using the 305 again).
(4) Silly things that might (or might not) drive you crazy - There are two buttons on the Garmin 405 - both on the right side of the face as you look at it. These buttons perform some useful functions, including locking the bezel so that you can wear the device in a non-GPS mode and avoid running down the battery needlessly while still using the device as a watch. The problem is that if, like me, you actually own a daily wear watch and when you travel you prefer to put the 405 in your bag or suitcase, having the two buttons on the same side means that if they press against anything they will unlock the bezel and the GPS will start running (or try to). The result will be a dead battery when you pull it out of your bag. It may seem minor, but pulling the 405 out of your bag after you arrive and want to go for a run, only to see it is dead, again and again, is annoying. The positive offset is that the watch actually charges at a pretty decent speed. Oh yes, and when the battery does, in fact, die, you will need to go through all of the into screens again to get it going which will sometimes freeze on you (check message boards for solution to this as some people have posted them).
Overall, this is a terrible product and if you really want to get a GPS enabled running device, I would highly recommend you buy the Garmin 305. It is much cheaper and while it does not look as good, the size will not bother you after a couple of wears and it will work flawlessy for you. I suspect they will eventually correct the failings of the Garmin 405 but until they do it is not a good use of your money.
Works great! 2008-08-17
This is my first heart rate monitor so I don't really have anything to compare it against. I did a lot of research before deciding upon this unit with the heart rate monitor. I didn't find anything that came close for the price. There are a lot of features so for the less tech savy who want to simply push one button and be done this may not be the unit for you. If features are what you're looking for and aren't against actually reading the manual then this is a fantastic device. It works extremely well even under tree cover, even under bridges for that matter! I've not yet had it loose the GPS signal.
It's really cool to be able to download the GPS data into Google earth with just one click.
I also really like the fairly compact size of the watch. It's small enough to wear as a normal watch and not have people star at you because of this enormous contraption on your arm. I also bought this one because the GPS receiver is built into the watch, no separate unit required!
There are lots of accessories for this unit like a foot pod for running in doors and a bike unit to track your cadence, etc.
I'm very impressed with this unit and highly recommend it unless you want to use it swimming. It's not intended to be submersed in water.
