Connectivity: Based in New York City, we quickly learned when our old F-301 would and would not work. Summer time always proved to be a more challenging time due to the tree-cover, and hazy days (this seem to make a difference). The F-305 on the other hand performed significantly better than our F-301 in an urban setting. Acquisition of satellite signals was faster, and the F-305 maintained its connection in places where the F-301 could not. For example at the south end of Central Park - view via Google Maps - there is heavy tree coverage along with tall buildings to the south and west. Our F-301 rarely held a signal in this location in the summer time, while the F-305 did a much better job. Accuracy does however seem to drop in this location even with the F-305’s superior circuitry. When we imported data from a two lap run of the lower loop into Garmin’s Training Center software (which we like a lot) the accuracy drop becomes apparent. The picture below shows nearly identical tracks for our two loops, except in lower Central Park where the two tracks can stray from each other by 80 or more feet. In the end this is really not a problem for us as the F-305 did an excellent job of tacking out runs. Further, the unit was able to achieve accuracy rates of as low as 19ft in our tests on the avenues in New York City (an area where our F-301 was seriously challenged). In more rural areas, like the seashore where the sky view was completely unobstructed, sat-lock was very fast when standing still. Movement increased the time required to establish a connection, so we would usually leave the unit on a step or car hood with a view of the sky while we tied shoes, checked gears etc. Of course an urban setting would sometimes prolong acquisition time, but not by much in most cases. Standing still helps. Overall we remain impressed with the F-305’s new circuitry, and for us at least it represents a major improvement over the F-301.

Use: First off, we found working our way around the F-305 to be more pleasing than the F-301. The somewhat odd shape of the F-301 combined with its less responsive buttons made for some menu navigation frustration. The F-305 buttons, though slightly smaller, have better spacing, and seem more reactive to us. Also, with a ‘Start/Stop’ and “Lap” button on the face of the F-305, starting, pausing, and stopping a workout is easier. Screen size of the F-305 has dropped a bit when compared to the F-301 but is still very readable. The F-305 has a load of features, many of which go unused by us. Of its features, we really like the Virtual Partner, something which was also found on the F-301. By setting a pace for the Virtual Partner, you can see how far ahead (or behind) you are compared to someone running at a different pace. The F-305 also has a series of alerts which signal us when we exceed preset boundaries for Time, Distance, Pace, and Heart Rate. Another nice feature is Auto Pause, which will pause a workout automatically once the F-305 detects we have stopped. One issue we have with this feature though is that it will pause a workout in poor coverage areas leading to skewed total times.

Heart Rate Monitor: Garmin developed a new strap design for the heart rate monitor that comes with the F-305. We have found the more flexible rubbery plastic on either side of the actual receiver/transmitter to be more comfortable than the strap that came with our F-301.

Conclusion: At nearly $270 (street price via Amazon), purchasing the Forerunner 305 may not be a light decision. We have however been very pleased with the performance of our unit. Its superior SiRF chip technology allows us to connect in areas (like the New York City, and tree-covered roadways) where our F-301 could not. The redesigned body also makes the F-305 more comfortable to wear over our older F-301. After about 3 months of constant use, the unit has held up very well, and there really is nothing that we know of on the market right now that we would want to replace it with.