Cheapest way to track distance / time / heart-rate?


Likes Bikes and Dirt
I've never before looked at the world of Strava or Garmin, etc. I want to take racing a bit more seriously next year and the best way to do this is to start measuring my progress with respect to speed.
I can't get Strava via my phone (company blackberry only) so that aside, what's the cheapest gadget I can get to measure distance and time? If it can support heart-rate as well that's a bonus but not mandatory.


SF Trailboy

Likes Bikes and Dirt
Look for a Bryton rider 20. I got my kids these for Christmas from bike24. $60 euro including shipping. I had an order going though so $42 euro was a great price.

You will find good deals on Magellan around as well.

Bryton doesn't upload direct to strava you have to go through their software first. I think Magellan does go direct.


XMAS Plumper
Although a bit more, I'd be looking for a lower end Garmin with bundled heart rate monitor. 510, 20/25 etc. Nice simple user interface and easy uploads etc.


Eats Squid
Look at the new minimal offerings from Garmin or Lezyne...

Magellan sucks.

Polar is ok as is Bryton stuff.

If you think you'll use it more later, better to spend a little extra for future proofing than having to buy another unit.


Likes Dirt
I second the Magellan Sucks comment above, got my old man a Magellan GPS and it is freaking horrible to use and the computer software is a joke, he went back to a 5+yo Garmin watch.


Likes Dirt
Cheapest way would be a s/h phone as stated above, I got a brand new garmin 500 with hr monitor and cadence sensor for $230 and pretty happy with it, being able to add courses to it for directions (albeit poor ones in reality) def helps when on new trails.


Likes Dirt
I have a Garmin Forerunner 210 with HRM you can have for the price of postage. The watch has a broken strap and has been drenched in my very own mank many times over about two years, but the HRM is unused and the battery is still fine (4hrs riding). PM me if interested.

John U

MTB Precision
I've been using Garmins for riding for 11 years. I've had Foretrex 101, Edge 305, Edge 800.

The extra functionality on the 800, maps and navigation, is not a user friendly interface IMO. I believe they have tried to incorporate navigation software that was based on their car navigation. It might work for road riding but not for mountain biking. I would rate it somewhere below the steam off my piss. The screen is hard to see in a lot of light conditions and scratches easily.

My edge 305 is still going strong after 7 years and does all the things you require and a few more. I am not sure if you'll be able to get one these days though due to their age. I don't have any experience with the Edge 500 but I'm guessing that it was created to replace the edge 305.

Boom King

downloaded a pic of moorey's bruised arse
One of these on the chainstay

Index and rude finger on your jugular.

Cheap as bro!


Likes Dirt
I got a Garmin 110 about 2yrs ago off ebay for about $70 and it has been great since, although some moisture got inside after a torrential downpoor hwile out riding one day, but seems to have dried up nicely since....


Likes Dirt
Garmin 500 user here for the past 5 years. Does all you want. Can get one off the many Facebook road cycling groups pretty regularly. Otherwise stump up a little extra for new and don't look back.


Likes Bikes
Agree with Markee - check out some of the facebook roadie groups, Edge 500s come up quite regularly.

They're compatible with 3 speed/cadence sensors if you find yourself interested enough to go down that route.
I find using above is good on a MTB as often with tight tracks in iffy reception areas the 1 sec updates from the wheel magnet gives a much more reliable track.


Eats Squid
Edge 500s in perfectly good condition are going on ebay for as little as $75. Nobody wants them now the 510 and 520 have come out, but as stated, they are the best bang for buck in terms of GPS devices that do everything the OP mentions.

Interesting what you say about using the speed/cadence sensors Mafra, I don't have them installed and find that my only criticism is not picking up Strava segments in heavily wooded areas due to bad GPS tracks. I'll try it with the sensors and see if that makes a difference. I was going to upgrade to the 510 as that apparently uses the Glonass satellites as well, but you may have saved me some $$.
Last edited: