Update – July 2020! Heads up that there’s now a newer Edge 130 Plus out. Check out that full in-depth review for all the details!
As a techie-geek I suppose there’s some expectation that I’ll be most impressed with the higher end gear. The stuff that has all the bells and whistles, and usually costs more. But here’s the funny thing – out of the pile of Garmin new gear announcements today, I’m most impressed with the little Edge 130. Not because it’s not powerful, it really is. But because it’s the least expensive cycling head unit they announced today while having nearly as many features as units that would have cost almost double it just a year ago.
Here – let me give you a one-line sampler: The Edge 130 supports up to 8 data fields per page and 5 data pages. It can support power meters and more, show you Strava Live Segments, transmit all that in real-time via Live Track, while connecting to ANT+ radar and light systems. Oh, did I mention it was only $199. It’s kinda like a throw-back to the good ol’ days of the famed Edge 500 (remember bluey?).
Like I said, I’m impressed. Not just in specs, but because the thing has been working beautifully for me these last few weeks (more so than some of the other stuff). I’m a sucker for things that just work and aren’t expensive.
In any case. I was sent a loaner Edge 130 to try out. I’ll be giving it back to Garmin tomorrow and going out and getting my own from regular retail channels. That’s just the way I do things here. If you found this review useful – hit up the linkage at the bottom of this page to save a bundle and also support the site. Or just send me cookies. Your choice.
What’s new:
The Edge 130 is kinda like a mini Edge 520. Mini in size, and slightly reduced in features. But not in the amount of stuff it packs in. Make no mistake – this is definitely not an Edge 25 or Edge 200, similar from years past. This is not some low-end unit that you look at longingly for its looks and size but then realize lacks the brains to match. No, this actually packs in a crapton of stuff.
Here, let’s run through the bulletized version. Typically when I do these bulletized lists I’m comparing them to a previous generation in terms of ‘what’s new’. But in this case, there’s no previous generation to go off of for comparison. So, consider this a ‘greatest hits’ sorta list instead:
– GPS + GLONASS and Galileo satellites (the first Garmin Fitness/Cycling device to do so)
– Barometric altimeter included
– 15-hour claimed battery life (Note: I get 8-9hrs with sensors, but 17hrs w/o sensors)
– 1.8” monochrome display (basically smaller device than Edge 500 was), but similar screen size)
– Connects to ANT+ & Bluetooth Smart sensors (power/speed/cadence/HR/and more)
– Up to 8 data fields per screen, five customizable screens, plus stock map/compass/elevation/segment screens
– Strava Live Segments support
– Works with Garmin Connect IQ Data fields (but not Garmin Connect IQ full apps/widgets)
– Has course support for navigation/routing (but not maps or turn by turn re-routing support)
– Supports Garmin’s new GCM course creator with specification of road type after ride
– Smartphone connectivity for text messages and call notification
– Support for Garmin Varia Radar and all ANT+ lights (Cycliq, Garmin, Bontrager, See.Sense)
– LiveTrack support for live tracking (uses your phone’s internet connection)
– Adds Garmin’s new ‘Safety Assistance’ feature, which sends emergency location to friends/family in event you run out of candy
– The thing weighs 32g (half of the Edge 520 at 61g).
Finally, before we get into all the goodness, note that there are three bundles/packages available for the Edge 130:
Base: $199/199EUR (just the device + mounts) North American Bundle: $249 – includes device + cadence/speed sensors European Bundle: 249EUR – includes the device + heart rate strap Mountain Bike Bundle: $249/249EUR – includes the device + mountain bike mount + Edge remote control + silicone case
Apparently Europeans like to watch their heart rate, and American/Canadians their cadence I guess. Also, all of these bundles should be available to pick up basically today. Or tomorrow. Nowish.
Oh – and here’s a video I put together diving into all the new details:
With that, let’s backup a bit and go through all the usual in-depth review goodness.
The Basics:
With the smaller size and reduced buttons comes a slightly different user experience than the higher end Edge units Garmin makes. The good news is that it’s still silly easy to navigate through everything and find all the features – of which there are a ton as noted above.
By default, when you power it on you’ll be sitting on the home screen as seen above. At this point you can simply hit the bottom right button and get right into a ride. That’ll trigger searching for satellites. There’s essentially three sets of buttons: One on the left for power on, two on the bottom for lap and start/stop/enter, and two on the side for up/down.
On the back is the standard Garmin quarter-turn mount, along with a micro-USB charging cable. No USB-C here yet folks.
Meanwhile, back on the unit itself, if you hold down the upper right button for a second or so, it’ll open the menu up:
It’s here you can tweak settings, look at past rides, and go into details like navigation. Note that structured workouts are not supported on the Edge 130 (meaning, downloaded workouts to execute).
Within the Edge 130 you have a single ‘activity profile’. Meaning that unlike other higher end units you can’t create separate data field configurations for each type of cycling you have (e.g. mountain biking, race, triathlon, etc…). For most people, that probably won’t matter.
And Garmin seems to have made up for it with the customization you have here. The Edge 130 supports up to 8 data fields per screen, and up to 5 custom screens. That’s in addition to some stock map/compass/elevation/segment screens.
There’s a pile of different layouts to choose from:
Here you can see me picking out some of the details for a given screen. What you’ll notice though is that the Edge 130 has a slightly reduced set of data fields. For example, in the power meter side of things you’ve got the power data fields like average power, 3-second average, and lap power. But you lack more advanced fields like Normalized Power, power balance, and TSS/IF.
Speaking of power, that brings up sensors. The Edge 130 supports both ANT+ & Bluetooth Smart sensors, including power meters. It also supports heart rate sensors, speed sensors, cadence sensors, connected lights and radar sensors.
You can see above I’ve paired a heart rate sensor, a couple power meters, and a Varia RTL510 radar. Note that if you have a Garmin Vector power meter, it does NOT record the Cycling Dynamics information. Nor oddly, power balance. I say this because the Lezyne budget units as well a the Polar M460 all track power balance just fine.
When it comes to some of the various overall stats it tracks, it still records and determines your VO2Max, as well as gives you recovery time via the recovery advisor. Plus, of course, PR’s like fastest 40K time, longest ride, and most ascent. These stats overall actually get you basically the same as the Edge 520 series, but stop short of the more advanced FirstBeat Training Load/Recovery metrics seen within the Edge 1030 (which is way more expensive).
You’ll also get text/phone call notifications displayed on the unit itself, similar to other Garmin Edge devices. And while the Edge 130 doesn’t have incident detection (meaning, when you crash it’ll notify someone), it does have the ability to ‘request assistance’ manually via the menus, which will contact those set up in the Garmin Connect Mobile app.
With all that backstory, let’s look at what it looks like out on a ride. Once you’re ready, simply press the lower right button. That’ll start a satellite search and also connect to any ANT+ or Bluetooth Smart sensors.
While it’s finding GPS it’ll overlay a small screen indicating as such:
At this point you can press start and it’ll start recording data, as with any other head unit. You can use the up/down buttons on the right side to iterate through various data fields.
Here’s what a few of those look like mid-ride (there’s more in the video). You’ll notice there’s elevation, which comes from the barometric altimeter in the unit.
At any point in time, you can hold the upper right button down to access the settings, which allows you to edit the data pages, as well as some basic routing information.
You can go ahead and route back along the same route, or, if you’ve saved a location (such as your house), then it’ll give you directions straight back to that as the crow flies (it doesn’t have maps for routing).
After the ride is complete you’ll get a brief summary page of your ride, as well as getting notified about any new PR’s and VO2Max new highs. You’ll also see a small map of where you went. All of that data also goes to Garmin Connect, and then onto sites like Strava, Training Peaks and others that you may have configured. Here’s a link to one of my recent rides with it.
Finally, before we talk mapping/navigation and Strava/Apps, it’s worthwhile pointing out a unique new feature here called Extended Display. This allows you to pair a Garmin Fenix 5 series or FR935 watch to the Edge 130, enabling you to mirror the information you see on your watch to the Edge 130.
This is primarily aimed at triathletes that may want to use their watch to track the entire event and then just show that information on a more visible head unit on their handlebars during the cycling portion.
I’ll be digging into this in the next week or so, as I didn’t yet have access to the watch firmware (still in beta) to test this. This will also come to the Edge 520 Plus, Edge 820, and Edge 1030. I’ve made a good case to Garmin for the existing Edge 520 to also get it…but we’ll see.
Navigation:
When it comes to navigation, the Edge 130 offers the ability to follow tracks and display alerts about upcoming turns. It’s akin to how most Garmin wearables work in terms of following a breadcrumb trail. You can create those routes/courses on Garmin Connect or via Garmin Connect Mobile, and then sync them to the device. This means you can also use Garmin Connect’s newish course creator to get automated routes of a given distance generated (i.e. a 30-mile course using popularity routing):
The one downside here though is that since the Edge 130 doesn’t support Strava’s Connect IQ app like the bigger/colorful Garmin devices, you can’t directly pull Strava routes onto it wirelessly. For that, you’ll need to plug it in via USB and transfer the file over. It’s not the end of the world, but it’d be nice to see Garmin find a solution there, akin to what competitor Hammerhead has done with their Karoo.
Once you’ve got the course on your device, you’ll see it listed within the Navigation > Courses area:
You can now select the course and get a few screens worth of summary information – including an overview ‘map’ (basically just the course outline), as well as the elevation plot.
Once you tap ‘Ride’, it’ll go off and have your unit find GPS and put you on the cycling screens ready to ride. At this point you’ll see an overview plot of the map and where you’re located on that journey:
You’ll also see the overall elevation plot of the ride, along with your position:
When you come upon turns, it’ll alert you about 500 meters out that a turn is occurring (such as to a new road). And you can always just have the map screen up as well:
If you miss a turn, or end up off the route, it’ll give you an off-course warning (including for Segments too):
It’s all pretty basic, but for many people it works just fine. As with past breadcrumb trail devices (across a number of manufacturers), it works well in situations where there’s clear-cut roads with little choice. Whereas when you’ve got a traffic circle with 5 or 6 options (or similarly angled roads), it’s harder to figure out exactly which one you should be taking. Sometimes you just end up having to take the wrong road in life to get a warning and then correct course.
In addition to forward-facing navigation, it can also route you back to the start, mid-ride. In that case, you have two options – A) Along the same Route, or B) Straight Line:
If selecting to do it along the same route, it simply backtracks from wherever you are back to the starting point. Whereas with the ‘Straight line’ option, it’ll do it as the crow flies. Remember this device doesn’t have a map of streets onboard, so it won’t give you the shortest road-focused route home. Instead, it just assumes you are a crow and keeps you pointed in the right direction while you navigate roads.
And finally, you can mark locations for future reference. For example, you can save your home in the unit, so that you can use the rough crow-fly style navigation to get back if all else fails.
Strava & Apps:
Now when it comes to 3rd party apps, the Edge 130 is a bit different than its more expensive siblings. But it’s also different than previous less expensive offerings too. See, Garmin has basically straddled the fence here (and in a good way I think). It supports Connect IQ apps, but only of the data field variety. Meaning, it won’t support the more demanding full blown apps that operate independently of a given sport mode. But it can use the Connect IQ data field type to allow you to gather data from various sensors (or just have unique data fields).
I believe for the price point this actually makes a fair bit of sense. As it was, the majority of exciting Connect IQ things seem to happen in data fields (well, for me anyways). Whereas the full-blown apps and such tend to fit better in a higher quality screen with colors (which the Edge 130 lacks). You’ll add in data fields like pretty much any other Connect IQ capable device, via the Garmin Connect IQ store on your phone or via computer.
Now because it lacks the ability for full-blown apps to run, that does mean apps like the TrainingPeaks or Best Bike Split workout downloader apps won’t work here (though the unit doesn’t support structured workouts anyway). But that doesn’t mean all 3rd parties are exempt. Most notably, Strava stands alone in terms of integration.
As a result, you’ll be able to race Strava Live Segments in a black and white version of what you’d see on higher-end devices. This is the first time we’ve seen Garmin bring Strava Live Segments to a sub-$200 device. Again, I’ve gotta believe this is largely driven by competition from Lezyne and Polar here, which have offered Strava Live Segments at this price point.
And just for clarity, Strava Live Segments allows you to race Strava Segments in real-time (or, at least via offline cache) against the KOM a well as the people you follow and your PR. You can see below as I approach a given segment that it shows these details of the approaching bit of pain:
And then during it, it also shows details of where you stand in relation to the end of the segment and the leader you’re chasing. Also, you can look at Segments on the device ahead of time too.
As with virtually every other device, it’ll both download your starred segments on Strava, as well as picking theoretically popular segments in your area. As a general rule though, I find just starring my segments is the best bet for success here.
GPS Accuracy:
There’s likely no topic that stirs as much discussion and passion as GPS accuracy. A watch could fall apart and give you dire electrical shocks while doing so, but if it shows you on the wrong side of the road? Oh hell no, bring on the fury of the internet!
GPS accuracy can be looked at in a number of different ways, but I prefer to look at it using a number of devices in real-world scenarios across a vast number of activities. I use 2-6 other devices at once, trying to get a clear picture of how a given set of devices handles conditions on a certain day. Conditions include everything from tree/building cover to weather.
Next, as noted, I use just my daily training routes. Using a single route over and over again isn’t really indicative of real-world conditions, it’s just indicative of one route. The workouts you see here are just my normal daily workouts.
I’ll give you a quick spoiler here: There’s nothing of note. Which isn’t really a surprise. It’s been a long time since we’ve seen bike computers from really any vendor screw up GPS accuracy on roads. And part of that is largely because in road cycling your speeds are pretty fast, which helps with GPS accuracy. Additionally, unlike running you don’t tend to bike right alongside big buildings in a city.
Of course, there are trails to be considered – but I won’t be able to hit up trails till this weekend at Sea Otter. So stay tuned there! It’s also where I’ll dig into the elevation accuracy a bit more. Being in the Netherlands the last two weeks, the largest gain of elevation I had was crossing a canal.
So, let’s dig into some of those rides. All of them are compared using the DCR Analyzer, and you can hit up the links to see the original files/routes in more detail, or even download them.
The first route we’ll look at is from this past Sunday in the farmland south of Amsterdam. The route starts out in the city, actually near some larger buildings, before heading out to the middle of nowhere. Here’s the DCR Analyzer link for it.
At a super high level, nothing obvious that’s an issue, so let’s dig into the starting/ending portions where the buildings are.
In both instances, as I passed this large cluster of buildings, the Edge 130 did seem to have some issues. I should note though that for this ride it was merely using regular GPS, and not GLONASS/Galileo GPS satellites. That may well have helped things (though, at a slight battery penalty). You can see the purple track meandering a bit.
It did this again near another cluster of tall buildings a short bit later. Note that both the Edge 1030 and the 520 Plus did actually have GLONASS enabled. Not entirely a fair comparison, but such is life.
However, once we cleared that set of buildings, the units all tracked very much together:
For the large remainder of the ride, this is what things looked like. Virtually identical.
And again:
And some more:
So how did the city buildings portion impact overall distance recorded? Those variances seemed to add about 400-500 meters (on 55,500 meters). Not ideal, but also not unheard of for GPS in a dense building environment. As for elevation gain, it was about the same (virtually nothing). Note that the other metrics were connected to different sensors, so don’t read too much into those.
Next, we’ve got a 50KM one-way journey across the countryside. Also leaving from the city, but I didn’t see any variances on this one as I passed by various buildings. Said differently: It’s boringly exact.
Even these tall buildings next to the airport were no match, everything was spot on:
The rest of the route? Virtually indistinguishable tracks for endless miles. Perfectly on-point.
And again:
You can hit up the link above to skim across the countryside forever, but basically it’s identical. And that’s also reflected in the summary totals below. Note that because the Suunto 3 Fitness annoyingly only exports as a .GPX file (as opposed to a .FIT file), I don’t get all the summary information in the Analyzer. But you can see that the Edge 520 Plus and the Edge 130 were a mere 16 meters apart after 50,000 meters (50KM).
Finally, let’s take a look at a Paris ride as well. This one has a bunch more in the way of obstructions. Bridges, buildings, a tunnel or two, and more. You can find the DCR Analyzer here. But here’s the overview:
If we zoom into the beginning, you’ll notice virtually no difference as I navigate through the city streets and buildings of Paris:
When I was just along the river for much of the ride, it was mostly fine:
The only oddities on this entire course was a bit of a scuffle going under some railroad tracks and bridges, where the Edge 130 didn’t quite perfectly nail it. Sorry it’s hard to see in purple, but essentially it wobbles a bit, whereas the other units cleanly go through it.
The same occurs not far away under the massive highway overpass, as well as a couple of bridges. Neither incident adds much distance, but it’s not exactly perfect either. I’ll be interested to see if enabling Galileo resolves this issue or not.
At the end of the ride, the Edge 130 ends up about 200 meters higher than the Edge 1030, but identical to the Edge 520 Plus:
Do note that on this Paris ride, that was on an older firmware, so it does seem better on newer firmware versions that are now shipping.
Ultimately, for most scenarios, the Edge 130 tracks fine with basic GPS. It doesn’t quite seem as good though in harder GPS scenarios without also enabling GLONASS or Galileo (which come at a small battery premium). That’s an area I’m looking to explore over the coming weeks in more detail, and will post separately on. I’ve just picked up a couple Edge 130’s now, and so I’m looking to do some side by side testing of whether Galileo makes a difference. There’s been a lot of talk in the fitness realm around excitement of Galileo, so I’m interested to see if it actually matters, or if it kinda ends up being like GLONASS – sometimes useful, sometimes hurtful.
More to come!
(Note: All of the charts in these accuracy sections were created using the DCR Analyzer tool. It allows you to compare power meters/trainers, heart rate, cadence, speed/pace, GPS tracks and plenty more. You can use it as well for your own gadget comparisons, more details here.)
Product Comparison:
I’ve added the Edge 130 into the product comparison tool, allowing you to compare its features against other bike computers and related cycling gadgets. In the case of the below chart, I picked ones I figured people would be comparing it against. These include the Polar M460 and Garmin Edge 520+. I didn’t include the Wahoo Mini, because it lacks GPS. Nor did I include the Edge 25 – but you can do so via the product comparison tool yourself. In fact, you can mix and match against anything via it.
In a lot of ways, I think the Edge 130 is the bike unit that consumers have probably been asking for, for quite some time. They might just not have known it. By going back to something the size of a cheap $20 Cateye unit found at a bike shop, it removes the intimidation factor for some people of a larger purchase (or handlebar ornament). I suspect this unit will do incredibly well in bike shops too.
But more importantly than that – Garmin actually just nailed it here in terms of the balance of specs to price. The support for power meters will appeal to time trialists looking for a super lightweight option with a low profile mount. Same goes for those that like Strava Live Segment support, but don’t really want a bike unit on their handlebars. And for those looking for significant data field customization or Connect IQ data fields – this meets those bars too.
And unlike the Edge 520 Plus announced today, Garmin didn’t re-use existing hardware – getting you Galileo support and Bluetooth Smart sensor support. Both of which the Edge 520 Plus oddly lacks.
Of course, there are a few annoyances with the Edge 130. For example, while it supports Strava Live Segments, there’s no easy mobile-friendly way to get Strava Routes onto it without pulling out a USB cable and a laptop/desktop computer. Additionally, as a super-minor nit, I found the Bluetooth Smart sensor pairing a bit slower than other units. Given you only pair once, it’s hardly a big deal. And then the GPS performance was a bit lacking under bridges and near some tall buildings.
Like I said at the start – this is really the unit that impressed me the most in terms of features to price, and it’s ironically the one I expected to be least impressed by. Sometimes good things come in small packages.
Found This Post Useful? Support The Site!
Hopefully you found this review useful. At the end of the day, I’m an athlete just like you looking for the most detail possible on a new purchase – so my review is written from the standpoint of how I used the device. The reviews generally take a lot of hours to put together, so it’s a fair bit of work (and labor of love). As you probably noticed by looking below, I also take time to answer all the questions posted in the comments – and there’s quite a bit of detail in there as well.
If you're shopping for the Garmin Edge 130 or any other accessory items, please consider using the affiliate links below! As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. It doesn’t cost you anything extra, but your purchases help support this website a lot. Even more, if you shop with TPC (The Pro's Closet), you'll save $40 on purchases over $200 with coupon code DCRAIN40! The Pro's Closet has been a long-time partner of the site here - including sponsoring videos like my cargo bike race, as well as just being an awesome Colorado-based company full of good humans. Check them out with the links below and the DCRAIN40 coupon!
I love out-front mounts. Both Barfly and K-Edge make good ones. I primarily use the aluminum ones though, because this mount comes with a GoPro (and light/Di2) adapter on the bottom. So I can mount a GoPro up front and have the footage be rock solid.
This is a dual ANT+/Bluetooth Smart cycling cadence sensor that you strap to your crank arm, but also does dual Bluetooth Smart, so you can pair it both to Zwift and another Bluetooth Smart app at once if you want.
This is one of the top straps I use daily for accuracy comparisons (the others being the Polar H9/H10). It's dual ANT+/Bluetooth Smart, and in fact dual-Bluetooth Smart too, in case you need multiple connectons.
This speed sensor is unique in that it can record offline (sans-watch), making it perfect for a commuter bike quietly recording your rides. But it's also a standard ANT+/BLE sensor that pairs to your device. It's become my go-to speed sensor.
The Varia radar has become incredibly popular in the last year, with most bike GPS companies supporting it (Wahoo, Stages, Hammerhead, Garmin, and more soon). It notifies you of overtaking traffic. While useless for cities, it's amazing for quieter country roads.
And of course – you can always sign-up to be a DCR Supporter! That gets you an ad-free DCR, access to the DCR Quarantine Corner video series packed with behind the scenes tidbits...and it also makes you awesome. And being awesome is what it’s all about!
Thanks for reading! And as always, feel free to post comments or questions in the comments section below, I’ll be happy to try and answer them as quickly as possible. And lastly, if you felt this review was useful – I always appreciate feedback in the comments below. Thanks!
“The Edge 130 supports up to 8 data fields per page”. Alas. Since a few years I can read only 4 fields on my 810, anything more is to small, unless I am wearing my multifocals :(.
Yes yes yes! Finally! I’ve been wanting a smaller, more affordable device that still supports powermeters. Support for the lighting and radar is a plus, though I don’t know that I’ll ever actually use those.
I do miss the traditional side-by-side size comparisons, but bike radar had a picture with it next to the 520. Looks like about half the size. I have a couple mountain bikes for which the stem (my preferred mounting location) is very short, and fitting my garmin 810 is a squeeze. This one should fit well.
My 810 is getting long in the tooth, looks like I’ve found the replacement.
If my Edge 500 ever stops working I might be tempted to get the 130. It ended up up in the washing machine last week and I thought it would be dead. However it is still going strong. Apart from the lack of Bluetooth it does everything I need. I don’t really need mapping and have my phone if I ever get lost.
Same. What did Garmin do right with the Edge 500? It seems to have reliability and life above and beyond all other models.
The 130 looks like the perfect replacement should anything ever happen to my Edge 500. I will miss NP and TSS as those are critical numbers for Powermeter users. (I like to see them on the fly vs after I’ve uploaded ride data)
Yeah… How the hell you go building a device that is probably like 5x more powerful, with wifi, BT and all.. And then leave out NP, 10s avg power? (didn’t see on video) and TSS, While still having an Edge 500 (a 10 year old device) which has supported it for a good 6 years now! Talk about market segmentation!
@rkantos I completely agree, I feel that Garmin was trying to force for the people who used those metrics to go for the 520/520+. I feel that taking out NP/TSS/10 Avg. Power kills any interest in this product for me. Honestly, it takes a big chunk of the powermeter’s utility away when you do this.
When I’m in doing a TT I typically have on my screen, 3s Power, 10s Power, 30s Power, Lap Power, Heart Rate and Cadence. Sometimes I’ll have HR on a separate screen so I can’t see how much I’m hurting. Anyways, without 10s Power and above it makes it really hard to keep your power trendlines on point, this it makes it much harder to adjust and fine tune the rider’s power output stick to their number.
When I’m doing a long training ride NP is a great metric, I think it’s honestly the best one, to train by and to ensure that the ride quality is where it needs to be or that it isn’t. Keeping track of your NP and average HR on a long ride can show at what point when you’re decoupling. Taking this away plus the TSS really data driven athletes who tracking their training and try to eliminate as many variables of uncertainty as possible when it comes to hitting training goals.
I use an Edge 500 currently and it doesn’t have a lot life left in it (one of the buttons is tearing), but when I do replace it it will likely be a 520+. All this being said, I think for the majority of cyclists this computer is a great option and it’s a good price point.
Sure, but what would be the cost of adding 10s/30s power? It would be the perfect sized computer for Mountainbiking but somehow my edge 500 still seems the better option.
Not having 10s power and NP really makes the Edge 130 almost useless for power. TSS and IF I can maybe live without as manually calculating these is easy. I assume Garmin has done this intentionally so as to not cannabilise the 520/820.
However are there Garmin IQ Data Fields for 10s power and NP that would provide a hack?
Training Peaks could absolutely make an NP/TSS/IF data field set (for any devices), it’d be trivial.
Of course, the metrics/calculations are largely well understood, so realistically someone else could make the same thing and just call it something else. For example – ‘Weighted power’, which is what Strava calls it. Other services call it other variants of the same thing.
I suspect if someone digs around the Connect IQ store these types of fields may already been created. Or, probably soon will be.
(To be clear, I totally agree that the lack of fields is silly. I do get it though – they’re trying to differentiate. The challenge is Garmin looks at the differentiation on a software level, whereas most consumers area actually looking at it from a hardware (size) standpoint. The Edge 130 isn’t seen as a successor to the Edge 500, rather, the Edge 510, then Edge 520 was. Ideally, Garmin would get to the point where you could just unlock features on whatever hardware sized you wanted…but I think that’s many years away still.)
I think you’re bang-on regarding the silliness of dropping certain function off the Edge 130. I want the form AND the function as I move on from my ever-trusty Edge 500. One of those features missing from the 130 is Vertical Speed (meters/hr) – it’s a great measure of climbing exertion on steeper grades. Like power in a way.
So I did some searching and found good reviews of “AppBuilder” on Garmin Connect IQ – basically you build and code your own data fields in the app. He has examples of BOTH NP Normalized Power and VS (or VAM to some like Strava) – says it’s compatible with Edge 130 units but I haven’t tried.
Nate, I think you want to check out AppBuilder – I haven’t used the app but I think all this can be done on the 130. It’s just simple math and this guy has figured it out.
This is hell of a feature. If I am not mistaken, Edge 130 does not support firstbeat advanced training metrics (520 plus does not either) and also custom workouts. So, this feature should overcome these problems. Hopefully it will be able to relay functions like strava live segments directly from Fenix 5 (through mirroring) as well. Looking forward to hear more about that.
Galileo’s 1-cm resolution band is pay-to-play, and the signal is encrypted to enforce that. There’s no way we’re going to see that on a 200USD/€200 device.
Some misunderstanding here, I think. I’m talking about the E1/E5 combination (which is an open service, but outperforms single-frequency GPS, largely due to improved multipath resistance), not the commercial E6 service. This kind of implementation.
It’s interesting that the chip Broadcom BCM47755 supports also dual frequency GPS (GPS L1 and GPS L5).
Unfortunately I read a japanese study where they told that dual frequency in sport usage is not always better than single frequency (they told that dual frequency took too much time to function better than single frequency, circa half an hour. Single frequency is much faster to find a good position, it takes just few minutes. This japanese study is two year old, so perhaps now things are different).
Yeah, there is a new signal installed on the newest GPS satellites which will perform similarly to the E5 Galileo signal. I don’t know how many of the constellation have that at the moment, it’s being rolled out as old satellites are retired and replaced, though I think that Galileo’s E5 will be reliable before that.
I can’t find the japanese study any more. But I think I was referring to this article link to insidegnss.com
IG INSIDE GNSS “Single- versus Dual-Frequency Precise Point Positioning” of year 2012
The complete pdf article is here: link to insidegnss.com
I just found also this article of year 2003, that I can’t understand very well and I don’t know if is appropriate for sport watches, but it seems that dual frequency is not a clear winner over single frequency link to fig.net Static and Dyn/I10.pdf
This japanese article compares one dual frequency with one single frequency commercial receiver. In the conclusion it says that there is some advantages for the dual frequency receiver, but it does not seem anything shocking. I don’t know the year of the article, maybe is an old article.
Dual frequency is coming but won’t be in any of this year’s devices. Qualcomm (the chip in Samsung S9, but without the other things -antennas etc to use it dual frequency) and ublox (engineering samples this summer) have released dual frequency consumer grade (not surveying grade very expensive) chips, broadcomm and mediatek (who own Garmin) will probably follow soon (these 4 companies make 99.99%of the GPS chips in the world). But you might see it on phones this year or next, and in sports devices a year or two later. If this is really Garmin’s first Galileo capable device, which is something that has been in phones for 3+years take that as an indication of how long it will take them to put in dual frequency chips. You need different antennas and front ends so it’s not a simple component swap.
I agree with you that it’s unlikely to be this year (Mirko and I were discussing this earlier in the 645 hands-on), and about the challenges of dual-frequency antennae and receiver front ends.
Maybe Garmin waited a long time with Galileo satellites because the Galileo costellation was not fully operational -it seems that just now there is in the sky a good number of operational Galileo satellites- (so the delay maybe it is the fault of Galileo and not of Garmin).
Perhaps with dual frequency they are quicker. If not, it could be that there are construction problems (with dimension of components and power requirements), or that for sport watches the advantages are not so big.
I’m curious to see some review of dual frequency GPS phones, when they come out this year or next, and see the real accuracy improvement. Are you sure there is no phone with dual frequency now? Or maybe some consumer grade outdoor trekking device?
It could also be that there is no commercial advantage for the brands to sell consumer grade dual frequency device, due to the higher cost of the dual frequency components (chipset, processor, antenna, battery) that could limit the volume of units sold and so the profit for the brands.
In one article link to gpsworld-com.cdn.ampproject.org
They say that in 2017 Europe decided to give the PPP for free without charge. With the right receiver this could give 10 cm accuracy. If I understand well, they say that with normal receiver accuracy from 5 meters will be 2.5 meters
The questions are two:
1- when will be produced the first sport watch with multiple frequencies?
2- when will be produced the first sport watch with PPP service? It is possible to have a PPP receiver in a sport watch or it is too expensive or the watch is too little to contain a PPP receiver?
In summary, I think that the article I cited above tells this about accuracy:
1- accuracy of a receiver with single frequency Galileo satellites in open field without tree is between 5 meter and 2,5 meter.
2- with dual frequency they say “In 2018, dual-frequency technology like this will provide an order of magnitude increase in the performance of mobile device location-based services (LBS), especially in urban environments”. So we can assume that also under tree and in urban canyons the accuracy of the receiver remains between 5 meter and 2,5 meter, because multipath errors are avoided due to multiple frequency.
3- with single frequency or double frequency PPP they say: “In 2017 the EC confirmed the decision to implement the commercial service using E6-B with both encrypted and open components so all users could benefit for all frequency bands. Now, with the decision to make the service available free of charge, all users of Galileo, with the right type of receiver, will be able to achieve position fixes with an accuracy around 10 cm from Galileo’s first-generation constellation by 2020/2021”. So with PPP accuracy should be around 10 cm. Someone knows if real time PPP technology can be used in sport, were the receiver is moving very fast, or real time PPP technology can be used just for stationary object?
In wikipedia they write that PPP “Historically precise positioning was associated with surveying and geodesy”. They also say “Precise positioning is also increasingly used in the fields of robotics and autonomous navigation”. If they are using it for autonomous car, perhaps it could be that in the future PPP (Precise Point Positioning) could be used also in sport or outdoor devices, that will have centimeter accuracy. But I believe that we won’t see it anytime soon 🙁
Historically, precise positioning has been done by locking to the phase of the carrier signal, and using the timing of that relative to bit transitions to calculate the pseudorange more precisely than the bit transitions alone allow. I think that’s what a lot of the papers you cited a few days back were talking about, and that’s partly why it took so long to get the stable position.
DOP isn’t actually in metres, if you’re reading the PDOP as 5 means 5 metres of imprecision; it’s a scaling factor for the theoretical accuracy of the system at best performance.The key thing there, as you say, is that the performance shouldn’t degrade anything like as quickly with poorer sky views (though geometrical issues from only having a narrow sky view in an urban canyon will remain).
I think the E6 signal is designed to be real-time like the others, but I have not read much about it; there are no chips out there using it yet, so not holding my breath on that one.
Cars have lots of room for big antennas and a power bus that can handle good processors. Watches not so much. And the question still remains what would knowing your position to 10 cm rather than 2 m gain you when cycling or running or other outdoor sports? (Better pace for runners, maybe? But a simple cheap sensor more or less fixes that, doesn’t it?)
It seems that I completely didn’t understand what PDOP is 🙂
I didn’t know that things are so complex and I thought that PDOP was simply the accuracy in meters, but it’s not!
Maybe is better to evaluate the accuracy that the Garmin 130 can reach in the configuration GPS+GALILEO reading the value of accuaracy showed by the device (for example my old Garmin 610 gives me an estimation af the accuracy in menu -> system -> gps: it shows me the satellites and shows the accuracy : at the beginning it’s circa 30 meters, when the signals is good it ‘s 5 meters). Ray, con you please tell us wich accuracy shows the Garmin 130 in the system menu with the GPS+GALILEO configuration?
There is a beautiful article of “GalileoGNSS” posted on april 22, 2018
galileognss.eu/the-path-to-high-gnss-accuracy/#more-3073 link to galileognss.eu
where they say that we have now the technologies that make high precision GNSS attractive to the mass market.
“High precision GNSS systems dramatically improve precision using GNSS correction data to cancel out GNSS errors.”
“High precision GNSS isn’t new. Surveyors and other professionals have had access to the technology for decades. But high device cost and dependence on expensive correction services have prevented the technology from expanding out of this niche market. What is new is that we now have technologies that make high precision GNSS attractive to the mass market, enabling applications such as lane accurate navigation, augmented reality, aerial drone precision flights and landing, unmanned lawnmowers and tractors, and vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communication in which connected vehicles communicate wirelessly with other vehicles and infrastructure for collision avoidance. Many more applications will undoubtedly emerge as the technology takes hold.”
But I think that they are optimistic and that we won’t see PPP (high precision GNSS positioning) in sport watches for a long time 🙁 , so we won’t have centimeter accuracy in sport watches for at least 10 years. And in 10 years maybe I’m not running any more!!!
@ Paul, you are right, cars have lots of room and watches not, this is why I think that centimeter accuracy will be in watches not in the near future. For cars it seems that centimeter accuracy is already operational.
Yes, maybe if the accuracy is 2 meter would be sufficient also for instant pace, if this accuracy remains also under trees and in urban canyons always costant without multipath errors.
So maybe new watches with dual frequency will be enough to have a better GPS experience with sport watches, without the need of PPP (high precision GNSS positioning).
But I’m really hoping that with Galileo satellites and the new technologies that are coming there is some improvement in GPS accuracy, because I have a Garmin FR610 of year 2011 and a Garmin FR35 of year 2017, and it seems to me that GPS accuracy is the same.
All the other things improved (now the watches are water proof till 50 meters, the battery is better, the menu are better, materials are better). Why not they improve also GPS accuracy?
That said, I’m quite happy with the GPS accuracy that I have now with the FR610 and the FR35.
For instant pace I tried a Garmin footpod, but with me it never functioned well for instant pace (my FR610 let me the choice between pace from GPS or pace from footpod). Now I read that the Stryd footpod is very good, but it’s rather expensive and I don’t want to try again, because instant pace of the recent Garmin FR35 is ok for me.
This is an extract of the previous article.
They say something about accuracy.
“high precision GNSS – enabled using multiband receivers and SSR correction data – will reliably deliver a guaranteed position of the vehicle, regardless of the circumstance. Ultimately, it will have to be accurate to the decimeter level on open highways, and to the sub-meter level on more challenging urban highways”.
They say that with high precisione GNSS (PPP) (using multiple frequency and the correction service) the accuracy is 10 cm level in open field, and 1 meter in the urban canyon.
Even with multiple frequency it seems that in urban canyons accuracy is a lot worse than in an open field by a factor of 10.
It will be interesting to see what is the accuracy of dual frequency Galileo using multiple frequency, but without the service correction (PPP), in open field and in urban canyons.
My guess is 2 meter in open field and 10 meters in urban canyon.
Now without dual frequency should be a lot worse, my guess is 5 meter in open field and 20 meters in urban canyon.
Sorry, just speculation… Better that I stop here 🙂
Can you tell us what does the 130 says under the voice menu -> system -> GPS -> accuracy in meter
with the GPS+GALILEO configuration (after waiting 5 minutes in open field to find a good lock with the satellites)? Thanks
Now without dual frequency should be a lot worse, my guess is 5 meter in open field and 20 meters in urban canyon.
Sorry, just speculation… Better that I stop here 🙂
All we can do is informed speculation until one of these devices actually turns up on someone’s wrist! I’d say without dual frequency, if we’re lucky GPS+Galileo will slightly outperform GPS alone in canyons, and if we’re not it won’t (I stopped using GPS+GLONASS because it wasn’t helping). I should post about my thoughts on chip differences sometime.
I’m sure Dom is right but I understand “just make cool shit” much better.
Garmin at this link
www8.garmin.com/aboutGPS/waas.html link to www8.garmin.com says that :
– accuracy of GPS is 15 meter
– accuracy of GPS + WAAS enabled (WAAS is a service correction) is 3 meter
Now GPS+WAAS is available only in outdoor devices, like the Garmin FORETREK.
Probably sport watches don’t have WAAS because it uses a lot of processor power and drains battery very quickly, and it’s possible to use it only in bigger devices with bigger battery.
The problem of WAAS is that for example in Europe there are only two satellites that communicate the corrections, so it could function well in open field but in urban canyon is quite impossibile to receive the signal of the two satellites.
If I understand correctly, the main advantage of the PPP signal in Galileo satellites (the B6 frequency) is that each satellite communicate the correction, so it’s impossibile to lose this correction also in urban canyon.
Unfortunately the PPP service will also needs a lot of power and it probably will drain battery, so it’s unlikely to see it in sport watches (like we don’t see WAAS in the Fenix5).
My Garmin FR35 understood that I’m controlling GPS accuracy and today it did the best track ever 🙂
Garmin says that accuracy of GPS without WAAS is 15 meters, but my FR610 showed 5 meters most of the time and 8 meters under tree and near building. Still and in open field it shows 3 meter accuracy.
Garmin have never been terribly clear about which devices support WAAS/EGNOS. The Fenix 3 has the logo on the packaging, the Fenix 5 doesn’t, but isn’t appreciably different in accuracy.
I don’t know much about the WAAS/EGNOS signals, other than that there’s a fast and slow component, and the fast component is supposed to be updated in real-time. Given the satellite locations and sky view limitations, a sensible engineering approach to the chip design would be to grab whatever data possible when the satellite is visible and use the last good data when it isn’t. Speculation on my part.
It could be that in the Fenix3 and Fenix5 there is this kind of implementation for using WAAS like you describe.
But I think that in the Fenix there is no WAAS, because in the Foretrex 601 you can choose in menu -> system -> if you want WAAS ON or WAAS OFF. I attach an image of the menu of the old Foretrex 401. In the Foretrex 601 manual, Garmin explains how to activate WAAS (menu – > system -> WAAS ON or WAAS OFF).
In the Fenix manual they never speak about WAAS and this option is not in the menu. I would expect in the Fenix a similar menu setup like in the Foretrex.
I think there is one of these possibilities:
1- there is WAAS in the Fenix and it operates behind the scene in the way that you describe (it would be very clever from Garmin)
2- the Fenix is ready for WAAS, but Garmin didn’t enable it. It could maybe possible just with a firmware update.
3- the chipset of Fenix is just not WAAS-capable
It would be interesting if some owner of the Foretrex describes how quickly the battery goes down with WAAS enabled.
If we know this, we could understand if it will be possible from a battery standpoint to have in the near future WAAS in the Fenix, and maybe Galileo PPP E6 service in 2020-2021 when it will be ready.
By the way, it seems that everyone’s advice is to not use WAAS, because the signal is too weak, except in open field, where the accuracy of the normal GPS without WAAS is already enough.
For example in this review they explain why is better to not use WAAS
h ttps://backpackinglight.com/garmin_foretrex_101_gps_review/ link to backpackinglight.com
“The Foretrex 101 is equipped with the capability to receive WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) satellite correction signals to increase positional accuracy. WAAS is not utilized when in the backcountry for the following reasons. First, WAAS decreases battery life for all GPS units when enabled. Second, since the WAAS system uses one of two geostationary satellites, reception can be difficult in all but open land and marine settings. Canyons and forested or mountainous areas frequented when hiking often do not receive strong WAAS signals. Third, increased positional accuracy achieved with WAAS does little to aid backcountry navigation where position accuracy is normally less than 15 meters without WAAS. Thus for most hiking activities, the WAAS mode is kept off.”
But the Galileo PPP E6 signal should be good also under trees and in urban canyons, so for us would be much more interesting.
Confused. I just found the manual of the Fenix 2 and it has the option to turn on WAAS.
In the Fenix 3 and Fenix 5 manual they don’t speak about WAAS any more.
Dom, probably in the Fenix 3 and in the Fenix 5 WAAS functions in the way you describe.
I hope that in the future it will be possibile to use also the E6 signal of Galileo for high precision positioning (PPP service). Maybe there are not so big battery problems.
In this german article link to kowoma.de they say that with WAAS in Garmin devices the battery lasts half the time (they say that you must use “normal mode” and not “low energy mode” in the settings). They repeat that WAAS was thinked for airplanes, so the satellites are very low on the horizon (in Munich 34°) and the reception near mountains and in woods is very bad. They show an image where they reach an accuracy of 2 meters.
I attach the image of the article cited above about the accuracy of the device Garmin Vista with WAAS enabled. The image shows the page of satellites with a differential correction with EGNOS (the european equivalent of WAAS). The letter D in the graphic of the satellites shows that for the signal of the corrispondent satellite correction data are received and utilized.
Empewu the 3 april 2014 made this comment in the DC Rainmaker Fenix2 in depth review (he thinks that WAAS doesn’t require a lot of extra power consumption). By the way, I read the other comments in the DC Rainmaker review and it seems (as we expected) that WAAS didn’t help for accuracy, most users didn’t see any difference with WAAS on or off. Some users reported that with WAAS on they had more problems.
The comment of Empewu:
“Enabling WAAS means enabling EGNOS. You can actually see when EGNOS kicks in. If you go to “GPS Tools” menu, and then “Satellite”, and scroll down you will see IDs of satellites from which watch is currently receiving signal. Anything up to 32 are regular GPS satellites, above that are WAAS and EGNOS (and also Indian and Chineese equivalent systems) satellites. For example in Europe my Fenix locks on Sattelite with ID 39, which is Inmarsat 4-F2. When switched on, EGNOS in theory improves horizontal accuracy from 10 m up to 3m. As for the power consumption – it increases as GPS chip performs extra signal decoding and position correction calculations. However this increase is small. I do not know what chip Garmin has used in fenix, but I would assume it should not be more than extra 1mA of current. Fenix has 500 mAh battery so you can do a math how the watch operating time will decrease with WAAS/EGNOS enabled.”
Hi Mirko, I found the Foretrex 101 manual here and what it say about the power-saving mode is that “When the Foretrex 101 is in Battery Save mode, the GPS receiver turns off and on alternately to save power”. So it’s like Ultratrac, basically, and it doesn’t really tell us anything about how WAAS affects battery life in normal GPS mode.
Good observation. The german article was referring to the Garmin eTrex Vista of year 2001 🙂
manual here link to tramsoft.ch,
and I see that “battery save mode” has the same meaning that in the Foretrex 101.
Update of accuracy of the Galileo PPP E6 service, that Europe decided to give for free . Director of GSA said in novembre 2017 that accuracy in open field will be 20 cm with convergence time of 5 minutes (not 10 centimeter like I believed).
The service will maybe start in 2020-2021 when the satellite constellation will be complete, but perhaps 2019. In the article the director of GSA says “Right now, no one can say when the system will become available. Of course everybody prefers 2018, but we need to wait and see how this current discussion goes.”
The main reason Europe decided to announce to give an high accuracy service for free was that Europe wants to be the first to give a high accuracy PPP service for free (before China and Japan, that will probably give the same service for free in the future, China perhaps and Japan for sure).
Article here
h ttp://insidegnss.com/fundamental-rethink-for-galileo-commercial-service/ link to insidegnss.com
Extract of article:
Des Dorides said the GSA and the Commission see location and navigation technologies going in the direction of multi-system, multi-GNSS, which by itself will continue to provide better and better accuracy, ultimately limiting the draw of a fee-based high-accuracy system.
“So, the expected revenues are shrinking,” he said, “while on the other hand there is still the idea that Galileo can be the first mover to provide a high-accuracy service, but as a free service.”
“By high accuracy we mean around 20 centimeters,” des Dorides said, “not the 10 centimeters that you can find offered by various manufacturers in the market — these are different. We are talking about 20 centimeters with a convergence time on the order of five minutes, and you know that 10 centimeter accuracy I mentioned comes with a 15-minute convergence time, so it’s a different market.”
Thus, he said, an accuracy on the order of 20 centimeters, delivered for free, could represent a competitive advantage for Galileo vis-a-vis the other GNSS systems.
In the previous article they don’t specify that the Galileo high accuracy PPP B6 service reach 20 cm accuracy for a stationary object in open sky after waiting 20 minutes to reach a good convergence.
For moving object in challenging urban environment preliminary tests show that accuracy should be circa 2 meters (with errors up to 6 meters).
Article about the test of year 2015 here link to spcomnav.uab.es
link to insidegnss.com
It seems that ublox has the chip for high precision receiver, that they will use also for bike sharing.
Extract of article of 8 maj 2018: “u‑blox and Qianxun Spatial Intelligence Inc. are joining forces to deliver high precision positioning solutions to the Chinese market. By coordinating their product offerings, they seek to meet growing demand for increased positioning accuracy for mass market applications.”
I understand that ublox gives the high precision chip and that the other company gives the correction signal wireless. In this case they use a chip F9 that doesn’t use PPP (Precise Point Positioning, the technology that is used by the not still ready E6 signal of Galileo) but RTK (Real Time Kinemakic).
But ublox produces also PPP chipset , for example NEO-7P u-blox 7 PPP Precise Point Positioning link to u-blox.com
I read the manual and it says “NEO-7 P supports operation as a D-GPS rover as an alternative to PPP and SBAS corrections (applicable to GPS operation only).”
So it seems that the ublox chips can work with all these technologies.
It seems that when the Galileo PPP E6 signal will be ready, the chipset for the mass market are ready, because probably the F9 chipset can work with PPP signal also and it will be ready for the PPP service of Galileo with some modification.
I think that now we have:
1- chip with dual frequency (the Broadcom)
2- chip that support PPP (ublox F9)
Which will be the first to appear in the cellular phones and wich will be better for phones and maybe sport watches?
The service of high accurate positioning will be available in China at the end of 2018. Probably the service of Qianxun is not free of charge.
Correction: the chip u-blox F9 is both multi frequency (E1-E2-E5) and PPP high precision capable.
It’ also multiconstellation (GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BEIDOU).
The indicative power requirements of the other single frequency PPP chip, the Neo7- P are 22 mA 3V in Icc Tracking (continuous mode/PPP).
I can’t find technical specification of the new u-blox F9 chip.
It seems that these kind of chips could fit well in a Fenix 🙂
Yup, that’s 204mW compared to 37mW acquisition and 27mW tracking for the MT3333 in the Fenix 3 (and probably the Fenix 5 too, don’t recall). It’s quite big, too, at 17×22 mm compared with 4.3×4.3 for the MT3333. I can’t find out how big the BCM47758 is, but it’s described as small and as a 77-ball WLBGA package, where the 3333 is 57 balls 0.5mm pitch. So, certainly a bit bigger than that, depending on the pitch.
link to mwrf.com
The hope to install a dual frequency GNSS chip in the Fenix remains the chip Broadcom BCM47755. I can’t find the power consumption of the Broadcom BCM47755, but the link above says that the chip is based on the 28 nanometers technology and it needs half the power of the previous generation chip. Extract of article : “current consumption can be less than 5mA during GNSS tracking”. I assume they are talking about 5mA and 3V, so circa 15 mW.
Maybe ublox still uses a 45 nanometer process technology. In ublox power consumption with multiple frequencies increases a lot from the chip 7 (single constellation and single frequence) and 8 (multiple constellation and single frequence) to the chip 9 (multiconstellation and multiple frequencies). It’s a pity, because I saw a webinar of ublox where they show that with the chip 9 they are a lot quicker to find again a good signal and a good precision, in comparison to the chip 8, driving with a car after a tunnel or after a problem that interrupted a good reception. I hope that they will produce it in a smaller form factor and less power hungry.
In his web page u-blox makes a distinction between standard precision GNSS module (where we can find a small form factor, ad example size of 5x5x1 mm for the the ZOE-M8) and high precision GNSS module (accuracy < 1 meter with correction service), where also the NEO-7P, that is mono constellation and single frequency, is quite big (size 12,2x16x2,4 mm).
I read this whitepaper (the challenge of low power and good GNSS performance) of u-box about the difficulties to put a GNSS receiver in a sport watch: now I am a bit discouraged that the designers will be successful to deliver a better gps performance in a sport watch. In their test they found that gps 2D-accuracy (95% confidence) in urban environment is 25 meter, in suburban environment 15 meter with a standard accuracy gps receiver while running.
Maybe a good solution could be to produce a separate gps sensor. Optical heart rate was another thing that didn’t function so well for many people in a wrist watch, and a good solution was a separate sensor in the upper arm.
The solution that u-blox suggest is a low-energy mode that they call “Super-E mode”, where they have less power consumption but worse performance. Unfortunately the Galileo signal must work with full energy mode , and I think that manufacturers should forget power-save mode and they should try to deliver better gps performance.
This is an extract of the whitepaper:
“When it comes to portable applications such as smart wearable platforms (e.g. watches or trackers), manufacturers have struggled to find the best balance of size and performance resulting in a lower-than-expected adoption rate that has disappointed many traders.
Much of the challenge has been around the GNSS antenna, which has to be very small to fit inside a wearable product. The extreme size-related constraints on antenna design inevitably involve performance compromises. Compromised antenna designs result in weak signals and the antenna placement (e.g. on wrist) can generate very high dynamics for the receiver even with moderate movement from the user. As a result, GNSS receivers are hard pressed to decode signals and provide accurate positions. As well, a short battery life due to small batteries has always been one obstacle, if not the primary obstacle, for wearable GNSS applications. The paradox of performance and low power has consistently limited GNSS adoption in this market. Customers want GNSS positioning implemented in small and battery powered devices, yet with accurate performance. The challenge is to use hard performance requirements in parallel with reduced power spending to enable new market opportunities. To this end, Swiss-based u-blox has developed the new super-efficient Super-E mode running on its new UBX-M8230-CT GNSS chip and ZOE-M8B System in Package (SiP) solution, a next
generation answer to the power versus performance challenge in the wearable market.”
Garmin produces GPS sensor like the GLO link to buy.garmin.com
This sensor is gps+glonass and I think that can be used just with phones (not with watches).
Maybe in the future Garmin will produce a centimeter accurate GPS sensor with Galileo that can be used also with watches. 🙂
In year 2011 Polar produced this GPS sensor to be used with polar watches. Maybe the easiest way is to go back in the past, and to produce a gps sensor with Galileo. It should be a little smaller and it should be compatible not only with Polar products, but with all brands. I know it would be a little unconfortable to have another sensor in the arm, but we could use it only when we need extra accuracy, for example in races or in intervals workout or in trail running.
We would have another sensor to attacch, but we could use smaller watches with longer battery life (because the battery of the watch wouldn’t have to feed the gps sensor) and better gps accuracy (because the gps sensor could have a bigger battery, a bigger antenna and a more powerful gps chipset with multiple frequency and maybe with the centimeter accuracy of the E6 Galileo service correction)
Another article about accuracy of SF-PPP with the chip ublox NEO-7P (single frequency precise point positioning). In urban environment results are not very good, they don’t reach sub-meter accuracy, in urban environment accuracy is circa 3 meter even with the PPP correction service. They conclude that to improve accuracy is better to go with dual frequency. Maybe Galileo dual frequency is better than PPP-single frequency.
Extract of the article:
“Autonomous vehicles require accurate position at all times in different environments at an affordable price. This accurate position can only be achieved when combining multiple positioning methods. One of these methods is presented in this paper: positioning based on a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) to obtain absolute position. This solution should be at an affordable price with sub-meter position accuracy. At the University of Delft, the Netherlands, a low cost solution was developed in Matlab for open areas which is called Single Frequency Precise Point Positioning (SF-PPP). It uses a low cost receiver with single frequency, single antenna and single GNSS constellation (GPS). The receiver provides raw measurements to the SF-PPP algorithm which corrects them for different kind of errors. This method was ported to a low cost Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) embedded platform in C++. The selected platform is a Raspberry Pi version 2 with a u-Blox NEO 7P GPS receiver. The corrections for the raw measurements are received from a network service via a 4G modem. The PPP method is validated with an RTK system which is cm accurate. We evaluated the PPP method in different environments and conditions, with focus on open area, but also for harsh conditions on the highway and in an urban environment to know the current limitations of the method. For the open area environment a horizontal root mean square error (RMSe) of 0.5 m on position coordinates was achieved which fulfills our target of submeter accuracy. In harsh environments we suffer from reflections (caused by multipath receptions) and poor satellite availability due to obstructions from trees and buildings which makes the accuracy varying from 0.5 m up to 3 m. Future plans to improve the results involve using more satellites from other constellations like GLONASS, using the Doppler shift to estimate the vehicle speed, using dual frequency receiver for ionosphere removal and closer integration with other low-cost sensors and vehicle model.”
News on highly accurate GNSS with the technique PPP (Precise Point Positioning).
With new satellites and multiple frequency convergence time is no more 10-20 minutes, but it can be istantaneous. A big role in accuracy could be the use of the now free E6 Galileo frequency.
Article of July 4, 2018 – By Denis Laurichesse and Simon Banville here: link to gpsworld.com
Extract of article:
“The technique of precise point positioning (PPP) is making inroads in the positioning industry. However, one issue hampering its more widespread adoption is the convergence time required for the carrier-phase ambiguities to be fully resolved so that the 10-centimeter-accuracy threshold can be surpassed. By using a multi-system, multi-carrier-frequency approach, instantaneous centimeter-level PPP can be achieved.”
link to eprints.nottingham.ac.uk
interesting article about PPP in urban environment. Extracts:
“The poor signal visibility and continuity associated with urban environments together with the slow convergence/re-convergence time of Precise Point Positioning (PPP), usually makes PPP unsuitable for land navigation in cities. However, results based on simulated open areas demonstrated that, once Galileo reaches final operational
capability, PPP convergence time will be cut in a half using dual-constellation GPS/Galileo observations. Therefore, it might be possible to extend the
applicability of PPP to land navigation in certain urban areas. Preliminary results,
based on simulations, showed that GPS/Galileo PPP is possible where buildings are relatively short and satellites minimum visibility requirement is met for most of
the time. In urban environments, signal discontinuity and re-convergence still represent the major problem for traditional PPP, which is based on the ionosphere-free combination of two-frequency pseudo-range and carrier phase.”
“From this preliminary study, it seems clear that high
accuracy positioning in urban environments is possible, but
only in some areas. Traditional European cities with narrow
streets and six or more story buildings packed together aren’t
good candidates for PPP. PPP can in theory be performed in
those urban areas where buildings are relatively short that
provides good signal availability and geometry. However, it is
well known that an additional obstacle of urban environments
for PPP is signal discontinuity. Indeed, in case the GNSS
receiver loses track of the carrier phase, the positioning filter
needs to be reinitialized, meaning that further tens of minutes
are required before re-convergence”
It depends what you call precise.
First of all that is one reason to have 2 navigation setting run in parallel. So you have more “visible” satellites. Furthermore navigation in cities will not need that level of precision. Coutryside this would mean an issue, there you will have not big building, but maybe deep forest.
I did a run years ago London Canary Wharf and even there and with this old device to the track was ok. The issue was noticable, but not really an issue.
Finally this is well know and to me has nothing specifically to the 130.
Mirko (and Dom), the FCC just announced approval of consumer and industry use in the United States “will now be permitted to access the E1 and E5 Galileo signals to augment GPS.”
But later in the same press release the FCC specially excludes the E6 band:
“The order does not grant access to the Galileo E6 signal, which is transmitted over the 1260-1300 MHz frequency band, since this band is not allocated for RNSS in the United States or used by the U.S. GPS to provide PNT [positioning, navigation, and timing] service.”
What impact would that have on the discussion of higher resolution positioning (above)?
Hi John, just speculations on my side.
Sean Barbeau, the author of this article “Why Galileo is not seen in United States” link to galileognss.eu
is wondering if the limitation of receiveng Galileo satellites in the USA was for all smartphones before the FCC rule of 15 November 2018.
In the article that you shared gpsworld writes: “While private users were free to use the European GNSS, with this ruling entities such as telecommunications companies can now also use Galileo.”
So maybe in the USA smartphones and smartwatch could use Galileo satellites also before 15 November because the users were private and not “entities such as telecommunications companies”.
Your question: the FCC doesn’t grant access to the Galileo E6signal. This signal should give “PPP (Precise Point Positioning) transmission free provision : broadcast correction in real time across the globe.” This rule is only for USA, so for the rest of the world it has no impact.
As far as I know, the free PPP service with Galileo (using the frequency E6B) is still not operational. So I would say that now it has zero impact also for USA.
When will be ready the Galileo free PPP using the E6B frequency? link to slideshare.net
I found this slide of 5 giugno 2018 where they write that this is a NEW service and it will have a gradual implementation 2018-2020.
In the near future how it will impact devices in the USA?
– this will not impact smartwatches because they can’t use PPP techology, because it uses too much power and watches have battery limitations. The cost of a PPP chipset is also a lot bigger of a chipset with standard accuracy. I think that no brand will produce a PPP smartwatch in the near future. Maybe Polar or Garmin could produce an external Gnss sensor with PPP accuracy? They could, but probably they are more interested in selling watches than gnss sensors (Polar used gps sensor in the past, but no more. So probably it’s not good from a commercial point of view).
– maybe smartphone will have PPP technology? Probably. Some applications for smartphones can now give high accuracy with the newer version of Android using not the Galileo E6 signal but internet services. So it would be enough to produce a chipset that could receive this new frequency. Maybe in the USA smartphones could use the Galileo E6 frequency becayse smartphones are held by private users?
– other applications: bike sharing, farming, survey. Galileo with his free PPP service with the E6 frequency wants to give high accuracy at decimeter level.
So applications where centimeter accuracy is requested are out of discussion.
But where decimeter accuracy is enough, companies who gain their living giving their services for a fee (RTK or PPP with internet wi-fi transmission or radio transmission) will suffer the competition of the free (without fee) Galileo service.
It is possible that in the future Europe and the FCC will find an agreement for this new frequency, so in the future also in United States of America they could use the Galileo free PPP service.
Or maybe for political or economic reasons United States will say that the E6 frequency is not allowed (but again: private users could benefit of this frequency? Maybe yes, because gpsworld says that FCC rules are not for private users but just for companies).
Or maybe Europe will change his mind and it will give the service for a fee.
When will we see this new E6B signal? Maybe in 2019, maybe in 2020.
When will we see new devices that could use this PPP service?
In sport we will have to wait a long, long time (the5krunner just says in short: “buy a STRYD if you want accurate instant pace”. This will be always be true, because PPP doesn’t function near building and other obstacles, where PPP receiver function in the same way of receiver of standard accuracy. But it would be nice for intervals on a track where are no buildings!).
In other applications (survey, farming etc) I don’t know, and I’m not interested. Probably also Galileo is waiting to see which new application could use his free PPP service.
If you have to pay 1000 € in a year for a subscription fee for a PPP service, this will remain a niche product. If it’s free, it will be interesting for everyone (the European agency GSA says “high accuracy for the masses”).
link to insidegnss.com
GPSmap 66s can give high accuracy with post processing: extract from article
“Professionals and serious GPS enthusiasts will appreciate the inclusion of RINEX data logging, which allows for sub meter accuracy of GPS position after post processing.”
A step forward toward high accuracy in real time with Garmin devices?
But later in the same press release the FCC specially excludes the E6 band:
“The order does not grant access to the Galileo E6 signal, which is transmitted over the 1260-1300 MHz frequency band, since this band is not allocated for RNSS in the United States or used by the U.S. GPS to provide PNT [positioning, navigation, and timing] service.”
What impact would that have on the discussion of higher resolution positioning (above)?
Interesting. Particularly the sentence While private users were free to use the European GNSS, with this ruling entities such as telecommunications companies can now also use Galileo in the link. As far as precision goes, E1+E5 can give you better accuracy than the standard single-frequency GPS we’re currently using (as above, a lot of this is better multipath resistance, so the performance in urban canyons doesn’t degrade as fast), where E6 would give you accuracy to ~10cm with good sky view. The “private users” bit suggests there’s nothing stopping Garmin or Suunto selling devices that use E6, since they are aimed at end users for personal use – after all, Garmin have been selling units that use E1 for many months now, and the FCC haven’t said anything about that. Implementing that would still depend on the availability of small, low power chips suitable for a watch, plus antenna designs suitable for the required frequencies.
Who is right?
Sean Barbeau, the developer of the app GPStest, tells that before 15 November 2018 smartphone could receive Galileo satellites outside United States but not in United States (see link above).
GpsWorld says that smartphones of private users could use Galileo satellites also before 15 November 2018.
If GPSworld is wrong, probably in United States devices receiving gnss signals will be inhibited to receive the frequency E6, when this third frequency will be available.
I think that we can’t be sure that the devices that Garmin has sold before 15 November could receive the E1 frequency of Galileo satellites, because I think that in the new units Garmin doesn’t show any more which satellites are used to find a position fix.
In my old Garmin FR610, under menu -> system -> gps was possibile to see which satellites were in view and the strenght of the signal, but in the fenix and in the other devices there is this option any more, I think (I don’t have a fenix). Maybe in the firmware Garmin put an option to not permit the reception of Galileo satellites in United States.
It would be nice if Garmin would allow again to show the numbers of satellites in view, which satellites are used to obtain the fix and the DOP value (the firmware should know this second after second). With these data we could develop an app in CIQ field that shows number of satellites and DOP value and report it in a graph in GarminConnect with the other metrics of the run. Looking at the DOP value, we can understand in which point GPS had trouble.
Sean Barbeau in the comments of his forum says: ” I believe the only smartphones/watches that have shown Galileo satellites in the past are international variants that don’t have the filtering enabled as they weren’t intended to be distributed in the U.S. The issue with mobile devices is that device location computed with GNSS is used for a lot of different services, including telecommunication system operation (and E911), app location, Google Play Services, etc., so it’s not just the end user benefiting from the calculated GNSS position.”
See link to medium.com
In the comments of the same link above in the Sean Barbeau forum an user writes on 6th December 2018:
“I just purchased a brand new Samsung G8 (U.S. variant, unlocked) from BestBuy, ran GPSTest, and no Galileo satellites are shown. Glonass satellites are, of course, visible. So as of Dec. 5, 2018, Galileo is not visible. The G8 definitely has the hardware required to see Galileo (according to Qualcomm and its Snapdragon 835 processor), and the device is listed on the UseGalileo.EU list from the GSA. So, we are still waiting. Pretty pathetic” situation.
Tweet of Sean Barbeau of 6th January 2019
“@SamsungMobileUS has rolled out two firmware updates in the last month for the U.S. @Sprint variant of the Galaxy S8+, and each time I hope to see #Galileo satellites on U.S. soil. But, no luck yet following today’s update…”
Yes, compatible. Same restrictions as Vector 3 though: No cycling dynamics, no power balance. Just total power and the handful of data fields for power.
Any chance you think that eventually, the unit will at least record the cycling dynamics and power balance? I just got one Edge 130 last week. I really like it so far but I will not keep it if those data fields are not accessible…
What it will record and what you are able to show by datafields may defer.
You have to options:
– Connect it and check the date with your favorite sports software.
– Check for a CIQ datafield for the 130 that may show that field.
Primarily what has been determined so far is, the 130 has almost every field internally available. But ther is no guarantee it could be used by a datafield and/or imported.
You may like to ask you question in the Edge 130 Garmin Support forum.
“You may like to ask you question in the Edge 130 Garmin Support forum.”
I just had a chat with them. This is the reply I got when I asked if there was any chance they would include cycling dynamics information and power balance in future software/firmware upgrades:
“I would say that there would be a very slim chance that any features outside of just ‘Power’ would be added in the future.”
2 – You have stated you got one. So why not test yourself what has been recorded? If you are keen on specific data my assumption was you have some favourite software you use and this will the data or not.
My apologies for not understanding at first. Yes, this is what I did, and those parameters are not available. Too bad, otherwise the 130 would be the perfect unit.
Have look at the Lezyne Mega C maybe.
I am disappointed by the 130 and Garmin again.
The Wahoo Bolt for me is not an alternative as the Display is to bad. But maybe something for you. The sport functions should feed your needs.
based on my experience of both devices, the answer is NO. Edge 130 has been a disappointing “upgrade” for me. Breadcrumb screen doesn’t scroll when following a course, elevation data is garbage (and i dont think you can set elevation points, like the 500), battery life is garbage (WAY worse than 500).
It doesn’t sound like it. Basically, it takes new firmware on the device, and I think by and large the firmware updates for new features have ceased for the FR920XT.
I had the this exact question about my trusty 920. Is there a technical reason that the 920xt couldn’t support screen mirroring, or is it that Garmin’s just lost interest in it and is trying to push us to buy a new device?
No, I wouldn’t expect that to occur. That said, I vaguely remember someone publishing an FE-C app, but I’m not sure if it’s still around. I know Kinomap had talked about it, but also not sure if it ever came true.
Since the E130 only supports GCIQ data fields, a firmware update to support full GCIQ apps would be needed along with an FE-C app. Suspect that is even less likely than just having an intern try to port the E520 FE-C code over to the E130.
I think you missed something here:
Note that if you have a Garmin Vector power meter, it does NOT recording the Cycling Dynamics information. Nor oddly, power balance. I say this because the Lezyne budge units as well a the Polar M460 all track power balance just fine.
I think you mean “does not record the Cycling Dynamic” and a bit further “Lezyne budget units”
I’m sure Wahoo will do something, but they don’t have the mapping engine (or experience, or data for that matter) that Garmin has. Nor do they have anything like ConnectIQ. They certainly can press Garmin on usability, reliability and some unique features (maybe even price), but they will probably lose in terms of navigation and advanced feature sets.
This isn’t a complaint just on this product but the thing I really like about Wahoo’s units is being able to do all the settings on the phone and have them port over. It makes setting data fields so much easier.
Question on the mirroring: Let’s say I have a 935 and want to mirror, can I only display 4 fields since that’s all the 935 lets me do? Or can I somehow do 8 since the unit allows 8?
I’m surprised there wasn’t more comparison to the Lezyne Super GPS? A couple of nice features with the watch display mirroring and real time Strava segment racing, but beyond that I think the Lezyne may give you more for your money.
Simple: I realized I didn’t have the entry in the database and plan to put it in shortly here. Been on my forever list.
I’ll also be doing a bit more of a detailed comparison of sub-$200 units in the near term, but given this week is Sea Otter…one never quite knows what might show up shortly.
I do agree that both Lezyne and Polar give you more features (structured workouts, better data collection) for the price, though I think Garmin is probably a cleaner implementation across their ecosystem. I suppose just a case of what one values.
That’s strange feedback from the community, given their direct aim at lowering prices. They are pushing it way harder than the big names. But is it the problem? They are not a sufficiently recognised name yet?
Well, specifically lack of feedback is really more the issue.
I suspect it’s partially distribution. They aren’t well known because they aren’t in places people can see and buy them, especially in North America. They are in Amazon now, which is an improvement over the past, but finding them in retail bike shops is tougher.
It’s the EU’s global positioning satellite constellation, which is close to complete now. The really exciting thing about it is that it has a secondary signal which is similar in precision to the GPS military band, much more resistant to multipath errors than current civilian GPS/GLONASS. There are dual-frequency chips reaching the market now which will support this, and it could give a huge leap in accuracy for small devices like watches. But – only for devices which have both a chip and an antenna supporting the two frequency bands required. My guess is that this unit has only single-frequency, so the GPS/Galileo setting would be similar in accuracy to the GPS/GLONASS combination – can help sometimes just because your device can see more satellites and fix position more accurately, but not a lot of help when multipath is the problem, or a narrow sky view in an urban canyon. But that’s just informed speculation, based on how recently the dual-frequency chips were announced and that Garmin would probably make a big deal of announcing a dual-frequency unit.
Garmin 1030, 520, 820 etc are all rated down to -20c. I just checked the manual for the 130 on Garmin’s website. The 130 has a operating temperature range of -20c to 60c. That makes it Fat Biker worthy. Maybe you can add operating temperature to your info. There are a lot of us Fat Bikers out there. But especially since you call in a In-Depth review.
Interesting, was pretty sure off-hand they were all -10*c, guess not. I’ll ask if that’s just a typo, or if not why. Though it’s actually the first time anyone has ever asked.
The 130 has a ton of features the 25 doesn’t: doubled battery life, Strava segments, 1-second recording, Bluetooth sensor support, power meter support, live weather (via GCM), thermometer, barometric altimeter, Galileo positioning, longer support lifecycle, etc. I don’t understand why anyone would spring for the 25 to save the few dineros difference in price.
Really interested in how the mirroring from the 935 works. As far as I know (please correct me if I’m wrong!) Garmin doesn’t track “Training Status” (TSS) across multiple devices so being able to make use of the larger bike computer screen while still keeping everything recorded and all my stats on my 935 looks really appealing.
Of course it would be nice if they just implemented multi device Training Status tracking into Garmin Connect, especially for if/when your device dies.
Sounds like an awesome Edge 500 replacement. Ben Delany over at Bike Radar raves about the screen.
Are the Cycling Dynamics and L/R simply not available for display, or is this data actually filtered out of the ANT+ data stream so it’s not even there for post-ride analysis?
Also, just to verify, no Shimano Di2 data fields available?
No Di2 support, which means no support for the hidden buttons on the tops of the hoods ☹️, but it does support the Edge remote (which comes in the MTB bundle) which does have data page scrolling.
This would have been a great little device for the TT bike whereby you only wanted to view some key data with one of them being IF.
Amazed they could not include this!!!
Thanks for another great review of what seems to be great device (at least for my needs), although I also miss section with side to side comparison, weight, what’s in the box… Will it come, when you’ll be back home from Sea Otter.
Additionaly I have a couple of questions:
1a)Do I get this correct that you can’t upload Strava Routes to 130 via mobile app, but can upload recorded activities from 130 to Garmin Connect/Strava via mobile app (through Bluetooth)?
1b)WiFi is not suported for activity upload, right?
2)What exactly comes in sensors type bundle? I’m confused, because on CleverTraining(.com and. co.uk) says speed/cadence sensor, but you also mention something about heart rate strap. The confusing thing is price, if there is no heart rate strap. Given that base is 200$(195€) and bundle is 250$(252€), while Garmin speed and cadence sensor are sold separately for 40$(€). Can you clear this up, because it doesn’t make sense to me.
3)Is it just me or it looks really funny when such a small device like 130 is mounted on out-front mount (or is that extended version for Edge 1000/1030 you were using). Probably that’s why it come just with standart mount.
How do you find it, is it better when is mounted directly on top of stem/handelbars?
0) Yeah, the unboxing will come. I just got the final boxed versions last night and simply ran out of time to shoot them in the light. I’ll be up by tomorrow morning Kansas time. They had previously just sent over the final production unit, sans-box.
1) Correct. And correct, no WiFi.
2) It’s confusing indeed, because there’s two bundles. In the US it’s the Cadence/Speed sensor bundle, whereas in Europe it’s a HR strap bundle. I’ve been meaning to ask why that is, will find someone tonight. But that’s the SKU’s that’s been dealt.
3) It does look funny, but it was an extended mount. There are smaller mounts that’d look more pretty. I had already swapped the mount twice that day for some other stuff, and honestly didn’t want to dig through moving boxes to figure out where I put some smaller mounts. It looks good on the stem, though super small. I think there’s some pics above and in the video showing it that way.
For 2) besides two different bundles, the price is more confusing for me. Wouldn’t be logical that bundle cost less, oppose to if you buy unit and sensors separately. 250$ vs 200$+40$.
As said, clear response from Garmin will be welcomed.
Ups, just found my mistake. Sensors (speed/cadence) are 40$ each or in bundle 70$ and in the end is indeed cheaper if you buy it with Edge.
So you can ignore previous comment, but anyway who knows why two different bundles.
You can beat the features for this price. It’s the fundamental basics. I don’t use most of the features on my 820. If I had this as an option I would have bought this.
One thing that is not clear is whether you can sync it with your phone over BLE?
Yup, totally sync via BLE over smartphone. The only thing that won’t sync that way is Strava Routes from Strava to the device. But your normal uploads from the device to Garmin Connect work just fine via BLE.
Hi Ray,
Having trouble connecting BLE and BLuetooth Smart sensors. They connect/pair fine but no data is displayed. Garmin support says:
“If the data from a BLE sensor is not recording correctly during your activity we recommend to un-pair or remove the sensor and re-pair it as an ANT+ sensor. ANT+ is the preferred way of getting data from sensors, as ANT+ is more mature and more complete than Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE).”
But when I try and pair them via ANT+ they don’t show up after scanning for devices.
Any suggestions?
(Topeak Panobike & Scosche speed & Cadence sensors)
So, my only concern there is that Topeak actually has a bit of a history in some of their older products of not properly supporting the Bluetooth Smart standard correctly. I haven’t used one in a few years, but I’m wondering if that’s perhaps part of the issue (and maybe also the issue on ANT+).
I don’t want to say that they don’t follow the standards now, as I don’t have one to validate, but I’m wondering if you’re running up against something like that from before?
That’s honestly the first time I’ve heard of issues with pairing here.
Thanks Ray,
it is an older Panobike spd/cad sensor so maybe that is the issue.
paired wonderfully (and so did my several cheap Scosche spd/cad sensors) with my Polar M450, but thats now for the ‘Oops something went wrong please reset’ screen and just doesn’t comeback to live, plus Polar didn’t want to help with a firmware reflash due to its age (4yrs old).
In fact, somewhat compounding issues is that back in the day (right around 4 years ago), Polar actually did a ton of work to ‘fix’ everyone else’s issues with their product. It was right around when Polar was taking a lot of heat for their BT-only approach, and Bluetooth was just having never ending compatibility issues in sport sensors for everything but HR straps.
So Polar embarked on a ‘Fine, we’ll just make everyone else’s broken non-complying stuff work on our platform’. Mostly, because they had to.
I was so excited when I first read about this product, but IMO Garmin hasn’t got the feature set right.
All they needed to do here was modernise the Edge 500. That means adding GLONASS, livetrack, BLE and call/txt notifications. Things like TSS/NP and Power Balance (and power zone) should be a given in 2018! As should being able to send workouts to follow on the device.
They should have pulled mapping and Strava out completely and made this a “numbers” unit, with te 520 plus (or 530) the colour unit with mapping, strava and full app support.
Right there with you Robert. I want a bike computer with all the power metrics and live track to the size of the 500 or smaller. I am too slow to worry about Strava segments.
The one thing that it’s missing that I’d like: FE-C. I suppose I could go back to using the iPhone to manage the resistance on the Kickr (and having used the 520 to do that job, it would probably be a lot simpler – the UI on the 520 for making changes on the fly is APPALLINGLY bad), but … well…
The ability to mirror what’s happening on my 935, though… that on its own is _almost_ enough to make me jump. Almost. The other differences between the 520 and the 130 don’t bother me.
I chatted with them a bit about it, in short, they just don’t see much usage of FE-C on their head units, and didn’t see much justification for adding it in here (balancing dev time versus people using it).
I generally tend to agree. I think the adding of FE-C to head units served its purpose of jumpstarting the standard and getting all the trainer/app companies to adopt it, but I wonder how many people actually use FE-C on a daily basis to control their trainers. Certainly some do, but I feel like overwhelmingly it’s more app-focused than not.
Thanks for explaining their decision making on the FE-C feature.
I’m one of the few riders that does use FE-C for most indoor training rides. I like to minimize the number of devices involved and keep the dashboard similar to my outdoor configuration. Replay of my more hilly rides from the head unit doesn’t always work perfectly, but it is more engaging to me than manually adjusting the resistance levels.
It would have been tempting to get the E130 as a backup for my E520 if it had FE-C, but oh well.
Given the features of the 520 that I don’t use, the small form factor of the 130 may just find me looking to sell my nearly new 520. Never thought i’d see a feature laden small Garmin again.
I’m just an occasional cyclist who usually uses my 735xt for my riding, but one or twice a year I do an organized ride that has a tcx or gpx cue sheet available to download – is this something that can be uploaded, via garmin connect, to the 130 for navigation? Thanks!
You would be able to side load, via computer and USB cable.
Also have a read through “Quick Tip: Quickly creating routes on your phone for your Garmin & Wahoo devices” article on here. Some interesting tips (and more in comments) about getting a .GPX file to open in Garmin Connect App on Smart Phone then you can BT across to a paired Edge device.
Would you be able to post a picture of the 130 to the 500 to compare the size?
With that said, I have been waiting on something to replace my trusty 500. Wasn’t quite sold on the Bolt. You should tell them that no nominal power makes this a no go for triathlete with a power meter. It is a deal break, add those metrics and I would have my credit card ready.
Yeah, let me see if I can temporarily steal one today at Garmin, else you’ll have to wait till I get back home next week.
I can say that basically the Edge 130 is thinner (vertically) than the Edge 500, and I’d say a tiny bit less wide. I think it’s about the same length though. Again, just going off top of my head measurements.
Is it receiving 1 or 2 Galileo frequencies ? 2 frequencies would be more accuracy…
Thanx Ray for all your wonderful reviews, really appreciated… You the man !!
Sigh…I just picked up a Lezyne Super GPS 2 weeks ago. Throw me a bone and tell me why I’m not missing out?
Also why don’t you have the Lezyne products on the comparison calculator?
You’re actually not missing out on much (if anything). In fact, you’ve got better routing options than this. You have less sensor connectivity options (e.g. no radar/lights), but more data field options.
There’s no good reason for the Lezyne not being in there other than it been on my to-do list to knock out, and every time I sit down to do it I’m lacking a unit in front of me to double-check everything on. I may just grab the Lezyne guys tomorrow and Sea Otter and sit down and do it in their booth.
The Super GPS is a pretty good unit – longer battery life, also connects to both ANT+ and BTLE sensors, has routing, Strava segments, live tracking. And (though I’ll need to do a few more rides to be sure, only one ride since the update so far) the last update (6.75) appears to have fixed some serious issues.
If my Super GPS breaks, or they bring out another update that breaks half of its features AGAIN, I’ll probably go for the Edge 130. The radar/light and Galileo support isn’t a deal breaker for me (yet), so in no rush to spend another $200
If you are working on it with them, can you make a bit of a tutorial about the map screens on the SUPER GPS? Also a time to destination and distance to destination fields are lacking on the data fields.
i’m not sure what you might be expecting, but i fail to see how this is any poorer in quality than his other work.
as usual, aside from describing the various features, there’s also pretty in-depth analysis – whether said features work, their usefulness, whether they’re value for money etc. which is more than what many other reviewers do.
at several points in the review, he’s also pointed out areas which require further investigation as well. overall it’s extremely comprehensive. don’t think it is of any lesser quality.
Did You ride with speed sensor?
I would like to know, if the speed is primarly from speed sensor when one is attached.
I’m a bit of freek with my current speed, and GPS always take a little time to match to Your actual speed, Thats why ride with my GPS watch and simple sigma bike computer combo.
One short question Ray: as you say that Edge 130 struggles under bridges and tall buildings, what do you think the GPS accuracy will be in the forests? I only do mountain-biking and have been looking for a device like this for quite some time.
No issues in forests on a road bike. My Paris ride goes through some without problems.
However, I didn’t have any place to test the mountain-bike type scenario. But…good news because later tonight I’ll land at Sea Otter, and have lots of mountain biking planned the next few days. 🙂
Any information regarding antenna strength? Any problems connecting to sensors? My Fenix 5 is a huge disappointment as it cannot keep a connection to my stages gen 2 with constant dropouts if it connects at all. My old Edge 510 working ok but problems with shorter dropouts now and then. Its due for replacement but if it’s as bad as the Fenix 5 it’s not an option.
I didn’t see any drop-outs connecting to a Shimano power meter and Vector 3, or finding the Quarq power meter. Nor any HR drop-outs.
But then again, none of those tend to be the units that have issues (like your Stages). I don’t really have a great way to test drop-outs from the head unit side of things (testing poor sensors is far easier because I can measure the RSSI values, whereas testing poor head units is tricky because I can’t measure the poorness within the head unit…if that makes sense). :-/
Hi Ray. Thanks a lot for this in-depth review; you rock as always! In the comparison chart, you’re referring to Polar M450, though the text says “In the case of the below chart, I picked ones I figured people would be comparing it against. These include the Polar M460 and Garmin Edge 520+.”
So, I’m newer to biking. Nothing fancy on my end. Probably train for century ride. I was looking into either the 520 or Bolt, but those may be way more than i need. Now the 520+ is out and this 130. For only $50 am i better long term going with the 520/Bolt or even a little more the new 520+, instead of spending $200 on the 130?
Ken,
Really, any of them will be fine. If you think you will need true turn-by-turn navigation, get the 520+. Otherwise, they will all track your time, speed, distance, cadence (with a sensor), power (with a sensor), heart rate (with a sensor), etc. If you are already a Garmin owner, you might want to stay in the ecosystem, if not, doesn’t matter. The 520/Bolt can control a smart trainer assuming you have one. However, most smart trainers are also controlled by their phone app and most people are using Zwift anyway. So, no real big deal.
More importantly, Ken, you exemplify the problem Garmin has got themselves in. They now are selling the 20, 25, 130, 520, 520+, 820, 1030 with a handful of 1000s still laying around. Not to mention, a dozen watches that will also track your bike ride. It’s confusing as hell. You don’t mention if you run. If you do, you might just want a watch that will track both. Most people who ride alot end up getting a dedicated bike computer but some, who run, just use their running watch. Not to get off track, but it’s almost amusing that Garmin put out the 130 to compete with Wahoo and Lezyne. That’s the only justification for it. But, this just makes their lineup all the more confusing. With the advent of the 520+, why not just drop the price of the 520 to $199 beating the Wahoo Bolt and call it good. But, NO, they create two new computers while they are getting beat in some markets by companies really just carrying one or two, i.e. Wahoo and Lezyne. When you really look at it Wahoo has one computer albeit two versions based on screen size. And Lezyne, really just has one, again just different sizes and displays. Here’s an idea Garmin, fix the horrible touch screen on the 820 and drop the price to $275 and drop the price on the 520 to $199 and save the gazillion dollars you spent on R&D bringing two new products to the market and you would own Wahoo and Lezyne!! Certainly, now that you have done it Garmin with the 130, kill the 20 and 25.
Ken, not only are you confused but so are bike shop owners who are certainly not carrying Garmin’s complete line. The problem for Garmin is simple. Your ma and pa bike shop will carry one Wahoo model and a couple Garmin models and that’s it. The bike shop owner will not try to carry them all and so the choice comes down to one or two models for most buyers. Price point becomes more important and Garmin has made it impossibly difficult.
So, Ken to answer your question. Sorry for the rant. Get the 130 and use the other $50 or $100 on a heart rate sensor and cadence sensor as you will want them anyway and they will improve you as a cyclist. Then start saving for a power meter.
Thank you so much for your info. You make a lot of great points. Yes, I am a runner. I use a Garmin watch for running so everything is already in Connect. I have a TomTom Sport that has cycling mode so I’ve been using that so far on my rides but it gets annoying to try to look at my wrist while riding. It has been easy enough to export the ride and import it into Garmin Connect. I purchased the Wahoo Bolt (only used it once so far). while I like it, I don’t think I’ll use most of the features right now, and it is a major pain to try to get the ride exported and imported into Garmin. Haven’t truly found a way yet. So it is probably going back. I think I’m going to try out the 130. I wish it was maybe $179 like someone mentioned. That would have made it more of a no brainer for me. at $200 it is barely less than getting a 520 or the Bolt. but still way less than the 520+. but I like your idea of going with the cheaper one and spending the extra $50 on the speed and cadence sensors.
Ken,
If I recall correctly, Tom Tom and Wahoo both have options to export automatically to Strava. Create a free Strava account, select for the Tom Tom and Wahoo to upload directly to Strava, Link your Strava and Garmin accounts and no need to do any difficult export then import. The data will automatically transfer from Strava to Garmin.
Ken,
I may have mislead you. Garmin uploads to Strava but not Strava to Garmin. I use Tapiriik.com which synchronizes Strava to Garmin. Nonetheless, it’s simple and only costs $2 a year. Ray has articles on it somewhere here.
I grabbed a Lezyne last year and one thing that has really impressed me is that they keep updating it and adding features…something you’d rarely see with Garmin.
It may not be quite as polished but for the price their stuff is great. I’ve always felt that Garmin artificially limits their devices to force people to get more expensive ones.
Questions regarding data on Edge vs data on Garmin Connect.
1. When the unit does not have Firstbeat features and 5s power-averages and so forth. Will this data also lack in garmin connect app/software?
2. When owning both a fenix5 watch and a garmin1030, firstbeat metric does not sync across units. But is the data in garmin connect aggregated from both units? (The data on the app/pc-software is aggregated, while the data on the gps-unit only have own activites)
I’m still using an Edge 500 for a few reasons but am ready to try the 130. The temperature gauge in the 520 was not accurate at all. On 90 degree scorcher days it would read in the mid 70’s. On days where it’s in the low 30’s I want to know the precise temp to dress accordingly for a commute to work. The grade readings on steep hills was also useless on the 520. Any short 14% hill would read 7% and wouldn’t change until after I’m over it and descending the other side. Based on other posts regarding that on the Garmin Forums it was not an isolated case. One last thing is can the 130 be charged while in use for very long rides?
I wonder that one popular German bicycle online shop offers both Edge 520 and Edge 130 without sensors for same price now. I think that real price for Edge 130 should around $150.
I too grabbed a Lezyne last year and have liked it except for the fact that it is annoying to upload to Garmin Connect. I wear a 235 so all of the data is there. Any tips on how to make the upload less annoying? For whatever reason the website does not accept the .fit.
I have a Garmin 1000 that has always seemed oversized and this looks like it could be the option for me! Any chance you know the answers to these two:
– I have Di2 and I know the 130 can link with bluetooth sensors. Can I then use the button on the top of my Di2 shifters to change data screens like with the 1000?
– I know the screen is 1.8″ diagonal, but what are the screens length and width?
Does the 130 have a KJ (kilojoule) display option?
How many button presses to get to the power meter “Zero” screen ? (although garmin typcially misnames it “calibrate”).
The model 500 requires about 6 presses to drill down, and then back up … annoying.
All recent model Garmin’s (in the last few years) allow you to enable an option that displays the zero offset screen as soon as a power meter is connected, the Edge 130 included.
i’ve been wondering if there is a specific reason for the button layout? seems to me that Garmin has a penchant for placing buttons along the bottom edge of their devices, which would make them harder to access especially in an out front mount, where the stem and cables might get in the way.
i’m more of a recreational rider so it is merely an occasional annoyance, but i can imagine that someone doing specific training and recording their data might need quick and dependable access to the lap button.
it boggles my mind because the bottom edge seems to be the worst place for buttons, yet Garmin persists in doing so. even the Bolt places the buttons facing upwards.
Agree. Give me a Garmin Edge 500 plus. Just add Bluetooth to upload activity from a phone and improve the course/ navigation side of the unit. It can even be bread crumb style navigation.
I’ll go out a buy that unit today.
Sold my Edge 705 and Forerunner 220 recently to help fund an upgrade from my 2008 bike computer. Got about $150 for the pair on ebay.
Fast forward two months, and we’re moving house, and I’ll be commuting by bike again. The ANT+ light control for a Fly6 is now high on my list.
1) Is the light control of the 130 the same functionality as the 520 Plus? (do the 735 of 935 support ANT+ lighting?)
The only thing I feel I’d be missing, is the FE-C control of my Elite Direto, and workout mode. I was looking forward to recreating all my favorite workouts on my next Garmin. The 520 isn’t out of the question, but the small size and price of the 130 appeals a lot.
2) Is a workout mode possible under ConnectIQ? (not FE-C, just setting up intervals with a timer on the unit to then allow me to do workouts on the road?)
1) It’s not as complex in terms of UI options and configuration. But the basics of ‘turn lights on when powered on’ type of stuff is the same.
2) No workout mode natively of course, and creating it in CIQ would be tough since it doesn’t work with full-blown apps. For example, that’s what Xert’s CIQ app does (a workout mode), but that’s not a data field, which is all that the Edge 130 works with. Instead, that app is a full app, so it wouldn’t work here.
I noticed there’s an “Extended Display” option on my 935 under Add New Sensors & Accessories with the 8.0 firmware – – is that not working as expected right now?
I picked up the Garmin 130 yesterday, saw it as a sensible compromise to purchase that as well as the FR 735XT, instead of the more expensive FR 935. I’d be disappointed if I got the 735XT and it lacked the extended display functionality.
Can you refer me to the battery issues thread please, I did a search but can’t seem to find it. I’ll give that a read before opening up the Edge 130!
You can read (below) in this comment thread that some users experience a (much) shorter battery life than the acclaimed 15 hrs.
Of course this depends on many factors (e.g. what sensors are connected, what GPS type is used, brightness of the display etc). I hope some test results will be posted soon.
Since the FR 735xt is a triathlon watch, I suspect it will get the extended display functionality eventually, although i’m not 100% sure on that yet.
The watch itselfs rocks though!!
I love the idea of the extended display. Ive always wished Garmin would do something like that but even simpler as in a device that is just an extended display. I always have my watch, it would be great to just have a simple device with crazy batter life because it is nothing but a secondary display for the watch info.
I generally don’t do the battery-life tests initially as part of the in-depth review since I usually can’t afford to leave a unit outside for a prolonged period of time at that point in the review.
The good news is that I now have of them, so I’ll charge them up and do a concurrent test: GPS, GPS+GLONASS, GPS+Galileo.
Why Garmin doesn’t allow to choose Galileo satellites alone without GPS? Other commercial receiver allow Galileo alone. Maybe for battery life it would be better than GPS+Galileo. For accuracy I don’t know.
Did you try connecting to it from your watch with the Extended Display “sensor”? No idea how it works, but thinking you’d have to initiate from the device you want to extend from.
I got my Edge 130 and I am little bit disappointed. Is there a way to put temperature on the ‘main’ screen? I can see it only on the ‘weather page’ which is pretty useless.
Riding in Arizona, the Temperature on the main screen was critical in judging the rest of my ride when it got well into the triple digits. The Edge 130 has no option to show temperature while riding, so I’m now in the dark compared to my Edge 500. Also disappointed in setting a lap based on a GPS position which I used constantly on the 500, especially for comparing laps in a criterium; what good is a lap preset at 5 miles? Thinking I’ll need to go back to the 500.
I recently purchased the Garmin Vector 3 and paired it with my 920xt. Will my “watch” or even other Garmin computers “smooth out” the power display? For instance 3-5 second smoothing/averaging.
Thanks for also testing in harder GPS scenarios. As some mountain bikers have problems with the Wahoo Bolt in the woods it would be very interesting to se a comparison of gps accuracy between popular devices (Bolt/520/130 ?) in harder conditions. Maybe you can do that when you test Gallileo for the 130?
I can confirm the Bolt have issues in the woods. Futher issues for Mountainbiker that are going to ride a bit more difficult trails. The noses of the Bolt mount break of very easily the plastic used seems to less strong then the Garmin. I ran into the issue and the experience fairly the same as for Garmin. No repair, just crash replacement discount. That is why I went back to Garmin.
Love my 500, but Bluetooth on my 810 was a revolution. Sadly the absence of activity profile will be annoying and here is why I have separate displays for training and racing, road and TT. No big deal because 8 custom pages is plenty.
But…. I use different auto lapping criteria depending on activity. Start and position for road and circuit races, then distances for different TT distances (2.5 miles for a 10, 5 miles for a 25 and 50, 10 miles for a 100 and 1 hour for a 12hr) have to set those manually now if this option is still available. Charging in use is also absolutely vital. I recharged my 810 during a 12hr, my friend’s died at 11:36.
Wahoo still does not lap on GPS position, which is a big failing.
Looking for a recommendation for an admittedly niche use. I need the longest battery life possible, easily read display, and the ability to load courses to whatever unit I use for long race route navigation, and it needs to be standalone, so no bt or wifi connection to a phone needed for nav. Currently using an Edge 520, and while it’s generally ok the battery life is pretty awful.
Of these 3 units – Garmin Edge 130, Lezyne super gps, Wahoo Elemnt Bolt – which is best suited for what I need? Or is there another option I should look at?
For really long battery life, look at the Garmin Foretrex 601. Claims 48 hours battery with GPS. Uses 2AAA batteries, so you can carry spares if necessary.
Its designed to worn on the wrist, but its easy to get a handlebar mount if you want.
Most people in the bikepacking community use the Etrex 20 or 30. Battery on mine lasts for more than the stated 25 hours of riding on 2xAA batteries. No power meter support though, but cadence and HR are supported on ANT+ on the Etrex 30 only.
Ray, I have a Fenix5x that I am very happy with. What do I get from a Garmin Edge 130 the I won’t get from my Fenix 5x? I am thinking of getting a handlebar mount kit for my Fenix5x so I can see it more easily and using my HRM strap for heart rate. WDYT?
Well, you get less than the 5x, since this can’t do real navigation with maps like the 5x can. What you get is a much better form factor for cycling. Watches, even mounted on the handlebars, can’t match the visibility of even the small screen of the 130, not to mention units like the 1030 with its larger color screen. If you’re satisfied with the visibility of the 5x (I’m not with my Epix, which is why I have a 1000), then just stick with it.
David,
What Paul said is generally correct. I have ordered a 130 but have been using a
Fenix 3HR on the handlebars linked to a heart rate monitor, usually a Mio Link but sometimes a Garmin chest strap. Like the 3HR, with the 5X you can use connect IQ data fields that allow to see all or more of the info on once screen than the 130 probably will but, as Paul suggests, it is a small font. Since my eyes, post 45, aren’t as sharp as the used to be, I use bifocal sunglassess with reading glass magnification in the lower half, available cheap on Amazon. With this solution, there is nothing the 130 would do that your 5x doesn’t. For me, the 130 does, however, offer some benefits over the 3HR. Hope that helps.
130 first ride tonight. Screen visibility is awesome. At first, I was not seeing phone notifications or Strava Segments. However, further into the ride it all started showing up. Looks like it just took some downloading from the phone or something. I did notice the cycling dynamics/power balance missing which is included with my Fenix 3hr. Not a big deal to me. Only one complaint, it doesn’t allow you to name the paired sensors. Wish you had pointed this out in the review. Not a deal breaker but annoying if you are testing different power meters or other sensors. Nonetheless, love the small size and believe I will be happy with it.
I discovered a strange bug when I analyzed my data from the first ride. During the ride the 130 asked to update the software. When this screen came up, it shut down the ride recording and lost all sensors for 6 minutes. Something Garmin certainly needs to look into.
Interesting that it asked you mid-ride. There was a beta bug with this issue, but that was solved a while back. I wonder if perhaps the unit had stale firmware on it (sometimes they manufacturer with older firmware and then ‘force’ a firmware update mid-ride).
Out of curiosity, what firmware version was on it to begin the ride (it may actually have recorded that in the ride file, if you look at GC on the right side, but I’m not sure if it gets wiped by an update later in the ride).
Looks like it was 2.00 and now updated to 2.20. Did another ride this morning and it froze and went to a “ride in progress” screen that I was unable to get out of then shut down. Obviously, I’m having some issues. I reset it and will try again tomorrow hopefully.
Third ride turned out better after I reset and turned off notifications. Looks like potential issues with notifications turned on. I’ll keep using and call Garmin if I have issues. Love the screen brightness and very simple.
I just picked one up for my son. My local tri shop got these just after the announcement as they had a spring kick off event that included a Garmin sales rep showing off the lineup. it seems to be a good device, with setup and install just as simple as any other Garmin I have purchased. It did take 5 minutes to find GPS sync, which is longer than I have seen in other devices. The track followed my 510 closely. Other than taking a while to find GPS the first time, it has worked as advertised.
My question for the group: In my edge 510, I could edit the startup.txt for a splash to post a “if found, contact number.” I do not see a start up file in the 130 directory. I tried to use the same startup.txt the main directory, the Garmin directory, and the new files directory. Can this device support this feature?
No issues there, it works equally on both continents. Nothing to do except let it find satellites as normal (should take under 60 seconds when moving continents).
Yeah, not sure why not instant power. On the flip side, I’ve never found a situation where instant power was honestly useful (because of the natural fluctuations of power meters). I’ve long used 3s/10s/30s power instead.
I’ve been using instant power on Fenix 3HR. Guess what I miss now with Edge 130 is the faster response time. The 3s avg power really feel like lagging behind by 2-3s. Oh well I’ll try to live with 3s avg power and see if I could get used to this more stable but slower power reading.
Ray,
Did you verify this as I was almost certain you could chose power, 3s power, 10s, or 30s? I chose 3s because trying to watch instant power will drive you crazy and isnt useful.
I’ve been using instant power on Fenix 3HR. Guess what I miss now with Edge 130 is the faster response time. The 3s avg power really feel like lagging behind by 2-3s. Oh well I’ll try to live with 3s avg power and see if I could get used to this more stable but slower power reading.
Few more questions. Seems power is a hot topic here.
Has anyone come up with an IQ app for normalized power yet?
In extended display mode, as either device shown less battery life? Thinking about the watch here, if you use a Fenix 5 or 935 for extended display in an Ironman length event are you going to see a decrease in battery life of that device?
Picked up the 130 last week and used it for a 8 hr Mtn bike relay yesterday. Here are some thoughts:
1) GPS sync was very fast. Typically just a couple seconds. There was no loss of signal riding in the bush, however in Ontario there are still no leaves on the trees.
2) Screen is high quality and easy to read.
3) Rode over some very rough terrain, at high speed, on a hard tail (no rear suspension) bike. There were no issues with the mount – not that I was expecting any.
One MAJOR hiccup though – I had fully charged the unit the day before the race. Even had it hooked up to a USB volt/amp meter and was able to visualize that the current draw was at 0 before pulling it off the charge. When I got up for the race, the unit was displaying one bar from the top, even though it had not been on. By the time I had completed approx 2.5 hours of GPS connected use, the unit was showing low battery and I had to charge it in order to finish the event. The 130 was turned off between each riding session. It was connected to my cell phone via Bluetooth, but the phone was not with me during the approx 30 minute laps. It would instantly connect to the phone when returning within range, and upload of data was seamless each time.
Other than the Bluetooth radio being on, it was connected to a HR ANT strap, but not to any other devices. The are profiles on the unit for Speed/Cadence and Power, but I don’t have those on my MTN bike.
I am going to run another test today, with the unit just sitting in my yard. I’ll report back on if the poor battery life was an anomaly, hopefully by end of day today or tomorrow.
After fully charging the unit again, I had it running on my deck stationary for three and a half hours. There were no ant modules connected to it, and it still shows about 50 percent battery remaining. So the verdict is still out. As it stands now I don’t see this getting anywhere close to ten hours, let alone the claimed time. It is set to GPS and Galileo, so there could be some testing there to do. I would love a actual battery percentage display, but all I can see is the battery bar.
Just got my 130 yesterday, updated to 2.4 software. Charged it up fully (although it doesn’t show a percentage like my 500 did). Had GPS on with Glonass, no external sensors, cellphone in my pocket with no activity via bluetooth. 50 minutes into the first ride I got a low battery alert.
Am i right to think that Strava Premium users will see the Normalized Power numbers on their ride analysis under “Weighted Average Power” anyways? Since it is simply a calculation based on numbers that the 130 can and will produce.
Same experience here. From day one my 130 never shows full battery, even after overnight or one full day of charging. And it usually shows about 50% battery after one hour of riding. Today I have the first long ride- 6 hours. At the end, it showed only about 10% battery. This is very appointing for something that claims 15hr of battery life. Btw for fear of battery drain, I’ve been using GPS only without GLONASS or Galileo.
I’ve ordered one and I’m really hoping these battery issues can be solved (by a software update). I was on the fence between Wahoo Element Bolt (240 euro) en the Edge 130 (199 euro), chose the Garmin since I’ve been in their eco-system for a very long time, it’s nice small size and the slightly lower price.
Ray, you encountered no issues with battery life during your in-depth review?
No issues with battery life for me, and I suck at recharging.
That said, in seeing the threads overnight I’ve got my three Edge 130’s charging up fully as we speak, and then I’ll go and and do a battery run-down test here this afternoon on the deck. One unit each for: GPS, GPS+GLONASS, GPS+Galileo.
I’ll turn on an ANT+ generator to stream in some ANT+ data too. Obviously, it’s not a perfect battery test, but at least outlines a best case scenario.
Did 1.5 hours more today, without going up before hand. After 6 hours of use since last charge, I’m showing a small battery bar, maybe 15 percent remaining. Hopefully they don’t have the battery display calibrated properly.
It could be that the battery indicator is functioning poorly. During my 1.5 hours today, the battery bar was longer after riding for 1/2 an hour than it was when I started. By the end of the 1.5 hours it was back to where it was before the ride. I’ve got 6.5 hours on this charge now. Hopefully a software update will clear some things up!
Fully recharged the unit before today’s ride. Attached is a picture of the battery level after 4 hours of usage. I’m not impressed by the far less than advertised battery life.
So the battery monitor on my device is officially screwed.The battery bar was higher on waking the device when then when I turned it after the last ride. I took photos one minute apart, with vastly different readings, including a blank bar and a bar that far extends the normal battery icon. There is some work to do here on the firmware.
Not sure if it will work, but here is a link to a google photos shared album of four photos, taken one minute apart with vastly different battery indications: link to photos.app.goo.gl
Can you charge while using it? It looks like the cable would be able to fit when mounted in an out front mount. So I guess the question is more around if the software allows it. I only do a few long rides a year and could live with an external battery on those.
Hey Ray, I was just wondering why I am not able to use extended display on my 130? My unit does not seem to have it even as an option. Is this feature simply not activated on this unit yet?
Correct, Garmin had confirmed on their forums too that the feature will be rolled out in upcoming software update. No specific release date was mentioned.
Matt is correct – it was pulled at the last minute due to a few last minute bugs to be ironed out. It sounds like they’re talking more like a couple weeks, not months.
Hi Ray, I know you’ve mentioned before (multiple times) that the extended display feature will be available on Fenix 5 models and FR 935. Have you heard anything indicating if it will, or won’t be available on the FR 735XT?
The lack of workouts is my only worry about this unit (which I purchased this week), however extended display functionality could solve this issue.
Wonder if anyone has this issue with Edge 130… But for me this has happened 2 times in the last 4 rides (one 6hrs, rest three sub 1hr). The unit would stop recording without warning. After this happened, the display (I always left it with the the 8 field with HR and power on top) looked normal, as if it’s still recording because both total time and distance were advancing. But the unit was actually not recording (proven by Strava record). The first moment something looked wrong was when a screen popped up to ask if shut down is preferred due to inactivity. I lost big chunk of data as a result. First time I also lost PR on a key climb that I pushed for.
I’ve arranged exchange with the good seller but want to check with owners out there. Hope most units out so far are good.
Today in a 90min ride, 130 reset itself at around 15min again. But the startup screen showed up so I was aware of it and pressed start button twice to get it back to recording. Still lost about 40sec of the ride though. Not sure I want to give it another shot… may just replace it with 520. Oh well…
Thanks for another great review! I have the 130 and taken it out for two rides now. There should be a battery live of 12-15 hours. In fact after 85 km – 2:50 hours – it shows half the battery used. (Just connected to a speed sensor and without navigation. GPS and GLONASS on, backlight out) In the battery datafield which is just an icon, the icon shows erratic values. Can’t say if it is a problem with the indicator – and the unit has in fact 12-15 hours runtime – or with the battery life. Read a post in a forum where a guy was reporting that his 130 is running 3 hours.
What was your experience? Have you tested the runtime?
Thank you Nick. I have seen it after my posting. Sorry!
Was out for a 3 hour ride today and using a datafield showing percentage. After full charging on 100% it was showing 58% after the ride. When I was charging it via PC it shows three segments which should mean that the battery is somewhere around 75%. During the ride percentage sometimes get up a few digits. It seems more that it’s a software problem and the battery probably last the promised time. Also the loading segments are only shown if the charging is made via PC and not if using a charger.
Best I’ve done on a full charge is 9 hours. In my book that’s no where close to 15. Maybe my concern is misplaced, but I always worry about battery life down the road a couple years. If it came reliably get me through 8 hours, then it’s value to me drops dramatically.
Would be interesting to hear about Rays findings. Also wondering why nobody in the official Garmin forum is reporting this issue, because it seems to be a general problem.
Hi Nick
The overlong bar looks familiar. Had this too, seconds after it showed a near blank bar. It is a firmware problem. I mean, also after all the experience with Garmin, they would not advertise 12-15 hours of runtime and delivering, from the hardware point of view, 3-4 hours. Saw a video of a german Garmin dealer testing the 130 on a long ride. It left him after 3,5 hours. But again: No remarks about this issue in the official forum. Anybody here facing the same problem? I hope Garmin is aware of the poor battery performance. And: Ray, anything about your test?
Yeah the battery issue (either display or actual drop in charge) is concerning. Today after 4.5hrs ride, there looked to be only one bar left (from fully overnight charged at beginning) as shown in the pic. Hope Garmin well fix it quickly.
Note, I had an ANT+ Simulator transmitting power and HR sensor data…except, when I turned off the porch light about 1-2 hours later, that apparently also turned off the power outlet for that…so…no more ANT+ data after 1-2 hours. That would (in theory) I believe cause a minor increase in power required as I believe they raise the power level to ANT+ to try and find the dropped sensors. But I believe there’s also a timeout. In both cases, consider those statements iffy at best.
On GPS conditions, there were no tall buildings within 15 meters of it, and only a single short tree nearby with not much leaves. As you probably know, GPS blockage increases power requirements (like heavy forests). I think this was reasonably low blockage, and thus fair.
No phones were paired to any of the units. Backlight was off. And aside from one check mid-way through, there were no button presses. All were left on default data pages with basic data. All tree of which would be considered ‘best case’ type test scenarios.
Given these are below the specs in a ‘best possible’ scenario (no phone), I’ll shoot the files/test data over to the Garmin Edge team and see what they think.
Since I don’t generally test battery life in a formal test pre-review release (as I usually don’t have the time to leave a unit alone that long), the battery life here seemed within the ‘not crazy’ ballpark (being 9 hours). Obviously if I was only getting 3-4 hours I’d have noticed, but 9 hours is enough that for 1-3 hours rides, a few times a week you end up charging once every week or so, and with frequent beta firmware updates/etc, I’m plugged in more often than not (I only had one device then).
I’ll make a note in the review somewhere on battery life here in a few minutes.
That fits right in line with my results. Have to say I’m somewhat disappointed. 9 hours is only 60 percent of the advertised life span. We wouldn’t accept a screen that was 40 percent smaller than advertised but it’s ‘acceptable’ for battery life. ?
Hi Ray
Thank you very much for doing this test for us and for forwarding the results to Garmin!!!
Today I made a 4 hour tour and had 57 % battery left at the end of it.(If the indicator is working right). GPS, connected to a speed sensor and no phone connection. This seems to confirm the results of your test.(8-9 hours runtime). For me it is enough, because I am doing tours up to 6 hours. What is striking is, that even after charging it full overnight the 130 is indicating 87 – 90 % battery at the start of the tour and sometimes is counting up a few percent. So something is not working properly here. Also the four segments on the loading screen of the device are only shown if charged via PC and not appearing if loaded via charger. But, and Nick is absolutely right here, it is far from the 12-15 hours advertised by Garmin. Hope this will be solved by upcoming firmware updates. Apart from that issue, I also have the Edge 820 (terrible touchscreen) and Edge 1000, I really like this tiny little device and it is working fine for me so far.
Another topic: Will you also do a test of the new See.Sence ACE light?
Regards, Volker
🙂
Maybe 15 hours is without gps . It is possibile in the ege 130 to train indoor. Extract from the manual:
“You can turn off GPS when you are training indoors or to save battery life.
1
Hold …
2
Select
Ride Settings > GPS > Off .
When GPS is turned off, speed and distance are not available unless you have a compatible sensor or indoor trainer that sends speed and distance data to the device.”
Hi MicroSurf&Run
That might be the solution! We all should have read the manual carefully! 😉
Another thing that bothers me concerning the battery issue, is that due to the erratic behavior of the indicator I ask myself how reliable this indicator is. When it shows 48 % for example, is it 48 % or could it be that the unit shuts down a few kilometers down the road.
John
Garmin came back and said that what I’m (and thus you) are seeing isn’t consistent with what their internal testing and expectations are. They’re going to do some more digging and will follow-up shortly.
I do agree with others in that I also saw some oddity in terms of battery bar state, wondering if perhaps something is prematurely shutting the unit down.
Ray, thank you so much for conducting the test and informing Garmin about the results! I’m sure it’s much more convincing to them than what we can offer. 😉
As for me, I’ve decided to move on with 520, because besides battery, my unit also has reset issue that I reported above. They are a bit too much for me to deal with although I love how small, light, and clear 130 is. Good thing that recent sales of 520 made this an easy decision.
Listed below is our expectation for battery life on the Edge 130:
1: GPS / no sensors – up to 15 hours
2.GPS / GLONASS or GALILEO / 2 sensors – 10 -12 hours
3.GPS / GLONASS / 2 sensors / following a course – 10 hours
4. High: GPS / GLONASS + 4 sensors (incl. power) + following a course – 10 hours
Running the backlight always on will significantly reduce battery life on the device. The display on the 130 should not require the backlight for normal daytime operation.
Hi Shawn
Yes these runtimes was, what I expected too. And it is probably not a problem of the hardware but of the firmware. It shows erratic numbers (using a percentage datafield) and battery bar icons. I have seen both over 100 %, counting up during a ride before going back. Also it is fully charged the evening before the unit is at 87% or something like that the morning after. I don’t know that from my 1000 or 820.
So please check your firmware. Looking at the web, it is a common problem. Firmware is 2.20.
Thank you for the information Shawn. I have attached photos on another post of the erratic battery bar indication mentioned by John (searching for my name should get you there fairly quickly). Minute by minute the bar changes, even going above full and down to nothing. I have also experienced the charge for a full day but the next morning indicate less than a full charge. Please have the firmware looked at for the issues. I’m very impressed that you have taken the time to directly address the forum!
Hi Shawn
Thank you for being here to discuss the battery issue with us!
If you compare your expectations with Ray´s findings you will see the discrepancy: For GPS+GLONASS and two sensors paired (and that for just 2 hours) Ray gets a runtime of 8:43, while GARMIN is expecting 10-12 hours. Following your statement he should have been near to 13-14 hours because of the sensors switched off after 1or 2 hours. So There is a big gap apart from the backlight scenario, isn’t it?
As I noted in my findings, the ANT+ simulator laptop crapped out after a few hours, which meant that the Edge 130 would have actually worked harder (increased power) to try and find those sensors. That would have impacted battery life, but we don’t know exactly how much.
In the meantime, I started a new single-unit GPS-only battery test outside (no backlight, no sensors, no phone, as vanilla as it gets). It’s about 6 hours into that. Will report back in the morning when it dies.
Thanks for all the feedback. We do have the erratic battery gauge issue reported as well. We are looking into the battery reports and investigating the issue.
Just as another battery update – my test from yesterday actually surpassed the specifications (to be fair, Garmin earlier this week hinted it probably would). I clocked in over 17 hours with just GPS and no sensors enabled (and no backlight).
Wade,
This is my concern as well. Most of my rides are less than two hours so the battery issue is not that disturbing. But, the reset issue is huge. I’ve got only two of six rides that the unit didn’t reset or shut down. One of those had no Strava segments as segments or notifications may or may not have anything to do with it. Nonetheless, the Garmin forums confirm this reset/shut down issue is affecting numerous 130 owners. This thing is starting to remind me of the problems I had with the original Garmin Fenix. I hate being a beta tester for Garmin. The 130 is having issues that certainly should have been addressed before release. How do you not do enough testing with enough units to see the battery issue for instance? Not to mention they claim the screen mirroring in release info and then have to pull it. I’m going to give it another ride or two but it’s going back if Garmin doesn’t fix it in the next few days.
Garmin answered my support request. Here’s the response that may be worth trying if you are having reset/shut down issues.
Start by syncing that device with Garmin Express on your home computer. This will ensure you’re up to date with the latest software and it will check the drive for memory issues. If you don’t yet have Garmin Express you’ll want to get that here – garmin.com/express.
Once that’s done we need to purge some files. You can copy the folders below to your desktop to save the data if you wish, but it should be safely uploaded to your account. In any case, don’t put them back on the device.
Connect your device to the computer using the Garmin data cable:
Access the device drive (Windows Key + E for Windows, Finder > Devices for Mac)
Enter the Garmin folder
Locate and delete the following folders – Activities, Courses, New Files, RemoteSW, Workouts
Note that we are deleting the folders themselves, not just the contents – some folders may not appear, but remove the ones that do from the list above
Once that’s done, empty the trash on your computer
Eject the device before disconnecting from the computer
Test performance – the device should now perform as expected.
How come GPS alone resulted the least amount of time?
I would have expected just GPS to consume less power -> more running time of device.
Also Garmin doc states “Using GPS and another satellite together reduces battery life more quickly than using only GPS.” (link to www8.garmin.com)
Ok maybe I just didn’t get it the point with TrainingPeaks (TP) properly.
Is it possible to download a planned training from TP to the 130 and start/complete the Training (as I am used from the edge 500 for example)?
Thanks and BR
So with the 520 on sale at the same price as this little gem, what’s a guy to do? Looking to replace my 500. Can’t figure out if this is it, or the evenly priced 520, or just go all out and get the 520+ when it’s actually released.
That’s tough. From a features standpoint, there’s very few reasons to get the Edge 130 over the Edge 520. Off the top of my head, the only feature I can think of that the Edge 130 has that the Edge 520 (base) doesn’t is the new Extended Display piece, which is basically for triathletes to mirror their watches to the unit.
Of course, the Edge 130 is smaller than the Edge 520…though, for most people they won’t care. Obviously, the Edge 520 has a boatload more features than the 130, especially around structured workouts, Connect IQ, and even mapping if you want to put it on their via 3rd parties.
Personally, size aside, I’d choose the Edge 520 if someone made me just have one.
“Personally, size aside, I’d choose the Edge 520 if someone made me just have one.”
Just anybody should be aware it is still the same “old” hardware, they just increase memory.
So i.e. no Galileo, no BLE and maybe futher limitations.
That is why I choose the 130 and refreshed my old 1000 (fixing power button issue and replaced battery).
If they would have launched a 530 I would go for it.
It actually does have BLE. It does the (slightly odd) dual Bluetooth and Bluetooth Smart dual pairing to the phone.
Unless you’re talking BLE sensors, which is true, it doesn’t have. But unless you’re buying the Polar OH-1 HR sensor, every other sensor on the market is dual ANT+/BLE anyway. But, what it makes up for in lack of BLE sensors the Edge 520 has in better sensor support – for example full power meter metrics that the Edge 130 cuts down on.
To each their own of course, but wanted to clarify there.
I find a reason to choose 130 over 520… Info for Strava live segments. 130 displays more info like times to two riders (such as KOM and PR) and elevation profile. I don’t find a way to do so with 520.
I can confirm the massive battery drain with backlight. Did my first ride on Sunday with backlight permanently on as it makes the Display perfectly readable. I started with around 80% (so far the battery bar could be trusted) and ended up close to 0% after just a 2,5 h ride. Didn’t experienced that with any other Garmin monochrome display.
For the battery issue – Shawn repsonded in the support thread:
====
hulster we had a look at your ride data and it looks like the device had 3 sensors paired and was running GPS+Galileo plus the backlight set to always on. The 130 display should not be required in normal daytime operation. This was likely the cause of your battery drain.
Listed below is our expectation for battery life on the Edge 130:
1: GPS / no sensors – up to 15 hours
2.GPS / GLONASS or GALILEO / 2 sensors – 10 -12 hours
3.GPS / GLONASS / 2 sensors / following a course – 10 hours
4. High: GPS / GLONASS + 4 sensors (incl. power) + following a course – 10 hours
===
To be honest – this is not acceptable. I have responded I am doing rides all the year which would mean fairly for 1/3 year night rides. This will need to keep backlight permanently on. I owned a 500 and 510 keeping backlight permanently on for such rides and were far away from running into full drain even after 2-3 rides so 6-8 hours. Keeping backlight on 1000 permanently on with navigation, always on the map page, as well with 3 sensors keep me running 5-6 hours.
And Garmin will tell the 130 not even 3??? Sorry….
Head lamp? Always on backlight (500 or 520) would’ve sucked for me at night. I run my primary light on my helmet, and glancing down for a second to check cues or the map works fine. If I need a longer run time than 6-8 hours I’d do what I do now, carry a small battery pack. The Biolite Charge 10 is perfect, I can strap it under my stem if I want to runba charger while I ride.
My 130 MTB bundle just arrived. Can’t really see the point in the remote so that’s going on eBay, the bracket is incredibly well built (and remarkably heavy) but not great. On a really short mtb stem it sits the unit over the top of the stem cap which means it sits very high (and prone to getting knocked). The K-edge products – either the gravity cap (with mounts on the steerer) or even better the adjustable stem mount sit the unit lower.
Advice wanted – I’d like to link a cheap wrist based HRM to the unit (can’t be done with wearing a chest strap). Your reviews of the VivoSmart units seem to suggest they really don’t work well for cycling. Is there a low cost write based HRM device that will link to the Edge 130 that is actually any good?
My 130 MTB bundle just arrived. Can’t really see the point in the remote so that’s going on eBay, the bracket is incredibly well built (and remarkably heavy) but not great. On a really short mtb stem it sits the unit over the top of the stem cap which means it sits very high (and prone to getting knocked). The K-edge products – either the gravity cap (with mounts on the steerer) or even better the adjustable stem mount sit the unit lower.
Advice wanted – I’d like to link a cheap wrist based HRM to the unit (can’t be done with wearing a chest strap). Your reviews of the VivoSmart units seem to suggest they really don’t work well for cycling. Is there a low cost write based HRM device that will link to the Edge 130 that is actually any good?
I would really appreciate you could add to your future Garmin InDepth reviews realistic battery life, incl. BACKLIGHT.
When you have a look for my last post what Shawn came out with for point 1. – So GPS only NO sensors 15 hours(WITHOUT backlight) this is something totally unrealistic. This is sports device and not an outdoor. Who will use it with no sensors? Which SPORTS guy will not do any rides in Winter?
So despite any bug and limitation discussion this would help people not waste money for the wrong gadgets.
Yeah, it’s always tough to cover every possible scenario – especially ones that you have to basically block-out a day of usage for. If I look at all the scenarios I could think of:
1) GPS: No Sensors + No Backlight
2) GPS + GLONASS: No Sensors + No Backlight
3) GPS + Galileo: No Sensors + No Backlight
4) GPS: With Sensors + No Backlight
5) GPS + GLONASS: With Sensors + No Backlight
6) GPS + Galileo: With Sensors + No Backlight
7) GPS: With Sensors + With Backlight
8) GPS + GLONASS: With Sensors + With Backlight
9) GPS + Galileo:With Sensors + With Backlight
That’s roughly 9 days of testing (since I have to assume it’ll take the full duration specified initially of 15 hours), inclusive of re-charging time, working around the rest of life, etc….
And that also ignores the variants of that test too – like does ANT+ sensors burn less than BLE sensors? What about navigation (I can’t easily test that for 15 hour blocks 9 times over), and so on.
To be fair – in all the years of reviews (more than a decade now) – nobody as ever actually asked for backlight-on max battery times. Never once.
Now that could be for a few reasons. Perhaps folks didn’t tend to use devices with backlight at full beyond what was a common duration. Meaning, for a commute or such, that’s less than an hour or two. Or perhaps the battery being bigger on larger devices meant it wasn’t as much a concern. I’m not sure.
I try and cover the battery life aspects that I think most people care about. I do think it’s relatively rare that people are riding at night for even more than a couple hours at a time. Obviously, people do it. But I’d wager that’s under 2-3% of the population of road cyclists buying a unit like this. Mountain bikers, but again, just a couple hours in most cases. Same goes for road cyclists. I don’t know many people doing 5-6hr rides in the dark for training in the winter.
Furthermore, why would you need to run the backlight constantly? What information do you need to see at all times? On my Edge Touring when navigating the backlight wakes when there is a turn instruction (and you can set the backlight delay from a few seconds up to i think 30).
If you want to be able to trigger the backlight when you need data from the device how about getting the packages with the remote – i think you can set one of the buttons on there to switch backlight. That would mean you could trigger it without removing your hands from the bars.
Hi Ray, ok agreed. Missed the effort for the different scenarios.
And agreed nightrides will not be that long.
Just in this case it seems to be an issue, as the backlight – assuming not issue with battery or software – only last 2,5 hours. But specific to Edge 130. I hope a tech(bad battery quality) or software issue may caused this.
Don’t agree. For navigation you will need permanent backlight as it would be a mess to just press the power button every time. For nightride the same.
I ran my old Edge 500 and Edge 510 without any issue with backligth permanently on and still do for Edge 1000, but dimmned to 4 dots.
We are discussing primarly it is massively bad for the Edge 130 in comparism to the other Garmin devices. That it is limited is not the discussion here.
If you have prompts the backlight automatically wakes (on the edge touring) when there is a turn approaching – i’m guessing this is the same. no need to press the button.
Whatever. I don’t understand why we’re still scrabbling around for battery life on these devices. It would have been no issue at all to make the 130 a few mm bigger/maybe 10g heavier and have a battery life of 30+ hours.
I agree with Simon. The never ending desire of devices manufacturers to make their devices as small as possible is nonsensical to me. I’m 6’2″ and weigh 200 pounds. If the devices is a little thicker, a little taller, but has double or triple the battery life – well that would make me very happy. I don’t buy a device because it is small, I buy it for the feature set, of which a significant feature is the length of usage between charges. Give us a decent battery and you’ll sell more devices than giving us a tiny device.
Well, in the absent of updates to improve this device, my two units will be returned this week. After two days of charging mine showed 85 percent charge, and then was dead after 3.5 hours. Attached is a photo of the battery life at the 3.5 hour mark, which was taken just minutes before the low battery warning sounded.
What have you got connected to it? Mine recorded a 7.5 hour ride yesterday (including lunch breaks) while connected to my phone (but with no other sensors) and is still showing about 50% battery.
I would consider it a pretty standard workload. I believe I have it set to GPS only for this ride, with a HR and Speed/Cadence sensor, as well as paired to my phone with Live Track enabled. Live track is shared with one person, who checked in perhaps two to three times over the duration of the ride (not sure if that matters). There are a couple other ANT device profiles attached to the device, but they are set to disabled (Tacx Neo – power, speed, cadence sensors).
Ray – its says it all that this is the first time anyone has asked you about backlight battery testing – it proves that the 130 is TERRIBLE in this regard! I do night rides for 6 months a year – with backlight on. First time i used the 130 for a night ride, battery died. For the previous 5 years, i used a 500 – battery NEVER died!
Performance like this is definitely worth calling out in your review.
To check this out I have ,even not needed, backlight permanently on. But lowest level – which should be fine to ensure everything readable in dark. 3 sensors, Galileo, no navigation.
A 2 -2,5 hours ride will need 30 – 40 %.
I think I’m gonna buy this unit for my dumb turbo trainer. I was happy with watching cycling races on my TV while I runned my workouts. Then I sold my 810 and moved to the Wahoo ELEMNT and lost all the tools I had on the Garmin Connect to tailor my workouts (time, speed, cadence, watts). The one provided by Wahoo is a joke to say the least “go to training peaks and help yourself” is so basic that is infuriating.
Ray, you list the recording interval as “1-second and smart”. As a keen mountain biker in the woods recording interval is really all I care about when getting a new unit, so it was the first thing I searched for when I came to this page. I duly bought one, and now that it’s arrived I can’t find any way to set the recording interval, unlike my old (now lost in the mud somewhere!) 520. Can you shed any light, or do you think you need to make a correction to the review?
Same here, can’t find the setting anywhere.. A little bummed, since Ray’s review mentions it should have it. If it turns out it doesn’t, I just might send it back… 🙁
If the setting is not present then I would expect they default to 1-second recording (“smart” recording is kind of obsolete I think). Or does someone actually want “smart” recording?
I just pulled up a file though, and it’s clearly recording 1s data wit ha power meter. I’ll double-check when i get back Monday on where the option went since when I wrote that. Just don’t have a unit with me at the moment travelling.
FYI, my 520 (set to smart recording) records 1s data when a power meter is connected, if I disable the power meter on the very same ride it will no longer record 1s. Re-enable the power meter and it goes back to 1s.
Thanks – so are you suggesting that WITH a power meter it will save a GPS data point every second (not just a power reading), but WITHOUT a power meter it might not? So if I got a power meter it’d force it to per-second recording, but without one I might be out of luck?
That is what happens with my 520 correct. I cannot say what happens with the 130 as I do not have one. I feel like it would be silly for Garmin to put out a device that only had smart recording and not 1s recording.
That’d be great Ray, thanks. I’m reluctant to use it myself to find out because then it becomes harder to send it back… although I suppose I’ve already set it up so doing a test recording walking around the garden isn’t much different – I just wont get it muddy out on the bike.
So I’ve just done a couple of tests in the garden – one running around and one with the unit sat stationary for a few minutes. I can confirm (exporting the .gpx files from Strava) that in both cases it recorded a data point every second. That’s without any power meter (or anything for that matter) connected to it.
Ray,
Do you have any idea what bike computer I can buy without GPS but with ANT+ support ?
I mean device which will be running on batteries few months instead of few hours ?
I found Bontrager Node 2.1, but it’s deprecated. link to trekbikes.com
Any other ideas?
Question…..why no support for ANT+ Gear Shifting (i.e. SRAM ETAP) like the 520 and 520+….especially since MTB eTAP is due to be released this year sometime. Is this something that will be in a future release?
This is a great little computer for road and mountain biking!
I suspect the reason is that they see ANT+ gear shifting as a higher product class thing, similiar to how while there is power meter support on the Edge 130, it’s limited (i.e. no left/right balance, no Cycling Dynamics, etc…).
I think what may be Garmin’s challenge here is that people are seeing the Edge 130 in terms of size first, and not actually price point. So they’re mentally equating the size to that of the more feature-rich Edge 500, when in reality it sits below that, even if it’s the same size (just like the Edge 20/25 sat below everything and were smaller).
In some ways this gets to the core challenge Garmin has in terms of how to solve the challenge of people wanting a certain form factor with certain features. Ideally they’d get to the point of you being able to unlock whatever features you wanted on whatever hardware you wanted (excluding hardware-specific limitations of course). Perhaps based on a subscription (i.e. Premium, Basic, whatever), or perhaps just one-time. Either way…I suspect that’s all a long-long-long time from now.
The lack of LR balance is a cynical move to intentionally reduce value on what would otherwise be a prime option for weight weenie racer/strava types. It would cost them nothing to provide it. This could just mean I hang onto my reliable 500 longer.
Is there a technological reason why there wouldn’t be 4) “GPS + GLONASS + Galileo”, or is that something we’ll likely see on the more flagship models in time?
Given that I live in the UK, and I do lots of mountain biking in very tight (and often very steep) wooded terrain, what is likely to be the best setting for accuracy for me? I don’t care about battery life (well, I do, but accuracy is much more important!)
Glonass is Russian. Galileo isn’t fully rolled out yet. Seems to be some reports around that using additional can result in worse accuracy rather than better. I think best looked at as future proofing at this moment in time and use GPS only
Question – my other Garmin Edges (200, Touring) have had a ‘movement alert’. Start a ride and forget to hit start and it beeps at you to remind you. The 130 doesn’t seem to – is this a setting somewhere or a feature that’s been dropped?
Nice size and price point – been wondering about getting my wife/stoker a unit for the back of the tandem that would monitor her heart rate primarily and some other basics. We have a cadence sensor – would that link to two Garmin units – so to my edge 1000 at the front and her 130 at the back at the same time?
As long as it uses ANT+ (which it will do if it connects to your Edge 1000) it should be fine. ANT+ allows multiple simultaneous connections, Bluetooth doesn’t.
Hi Ray — Do you know if the 130 support Garmin Power Courses (e.g. Best Bike Split) — also, the review says it supports data fields, but when I check the BBS data field download on the garmin app store, it doesn’t list the 130 as a compatable device.
It looks as if the developer/Garmin needs to specifically list a plugin as compatible for it to be downloadable and that hasn’t been done for many things yet, even if they would logically work.
Firmware version 2.30 for the Edge 130 is now available. This update can be downloaded through Garmin Express or Garmin Connect Mobile when available.
Incremental roll out 20% Change Log Support Extended Display mode. This special mode allows selected watches to display their data fields on the Edge 130.
Support Physio TrueUp. Physio TrueUp syncs activities to and from other Garmin devices, allowing all of your devices to more accurately reflect your training history and fitness.
Fix issue with software update not applying when a CIQ field is present
Improve file download speeds
Fix various bugs
Attempted to update to 2.3, hoping it will ‘cure’ come of the ongoing battery issues I’ve been having. The update was uploaded from my phone with no issues, but it refused to install. The unit would notify that there was a software update to install when booting, and that it would take 2 minutes. After selecting the install option, it would bring up the install bar, but would then immediately reboot without installing. This occurred about half a dozen times, even after an extended off period. This morning I attached to the PC and synced via the Windows app. It said the device was at 2.3, even though the device itself still said 2.2. After syncing to Windows the next device reboot was successful in installing 2.3. Hopefully it has some battery fixes, I’m getting frustrated with this device. 🙁
Follow up with my initial 2.3 firmware results. Following a seven hour charge, the device was reading 95% charge. It was 75% charged when put on the charger. For some reason it does not want to fully charge, or the percentage is messed. Unit was connected to HR strap and a speed/cadence sensor, as well as a phone. No live track, no other ANT or Bluetooth device profiles active. After 1.5 hours, the device is showing only 55% charge remaining. Can I trust that is accurate – nope, but I also can’t say it is not accurate when the low battery indication last came on after 3.5 hours. Initial impression is that the 2.3 update has not done anything to help with the ‘seemingly’ poor battery life of my unit.
Hi Nick
Was the update to 2.30 without issues? There are comments in the official Garmin forum of people who seem to have “bricked” their device when performing the update process. So I am reluctant to do the update to FW 2.30.
Has anyone other here made the update and was it trouble-free?
Mine prompted me this morning so I let it update. Saw the install progress bar move normally, and it finished without a hitch. There was a message about Physio Trueup once it had finished, which is one of the new features. Seems fine so far, but I haven’t taken it for a ride yet.
No issues for me after the update. FWIW mine has never had random restarts. GPS was a little iffy at first, but once I’d used it a few times it seems to improve, and now gets a lock pretty quickly.
The only complaint I have about it is that there’s a slight lag after you pause a ride, so the resume/save/discard menu takes a second or two to appear.
I really like the screen – Considering I thought the Wahoo Bolt was too small, I was a little concerned, but it’s super clear outside. Much better than the disappointing 1030 experience, especially with a matte screen protector applied. For a small, cheap device I think it really punches above its weight!
I have two units, ran them side by side during today’s ride. They were set up identically. Can you guess which one is going back to Garmin?
(Not sure why the calorie counts are so different)
If calories are different, it almost undoubtedly means some aspect of the user profile are different (age/weight/gender…or, one was paired to a power meter and the other not, which is unlikely).
Hi Nick
What IQ data field do you use for the battery percentage? I have “Battery” from the IQ Shop and haven`t found a way to make the numbers as bold as the other characters. The percentage numbers are thinner and not as good to read than the other fields on the device. It seems you are using a data field that replaces the normal Garmin screen, because it looks different.
Thank you!!
Went through the settings and I did find a significant problem with my test. The unit that is virtually dead after the ride was set to GPS and Galileo, while the longer life unit was set to GPS only. All user data (age, height, weight) was the same, as per the attached picture. No power meter connected to either unit, at least not until I convince Ray to send me one for a ‘Lessons from a Rookie Power Meter User’ feature on dcrainmaker. ?
In theory btw, you can copy the Settings.fit file between the units to triple-check that they are running the same settings. I say ‘in theory’ because sometimes that just craps itself and you end up having to setup everything from scratch. 🙂
1. Live segments caused the device to restart while in the segment ( long segments )
2. Restarts after saving a ride.
3. Avg power goes blank for a period of time after the PM sensor is dropped.
4. After the latest 2.3 update the device worked OK then on a restart the Garmin screen was displayed (blinking on and off). Nothing could fix this. The device would not connect to a PC either.
Paul,
I’m having similar problems. On this mornings ride the 130 went blank and tried to do the 2.40 update. I had tried this morning for 10 minutes to get it to update as I knew Garmin had pushed the update but it wouldn’t work then mid-ride it shuts down. This happened when I first bought it and now again. I’ve had it a little over a month and had only two completely successful rides with it. Going back to Clever Training or calling Garmin today.
I really enjoyed this review, and was going to purchase the Garmin Edge 130 to upgrade from my Edge 25. However, I now have the possibility of getting the Edge 520 for the same price.
Which would you recommend if price isn’t a factor?
Ray answered this further up the comments. Basically the 520 has more features like training plans. Get the 130 if you want the form factor. The only other advantage that could be major is that the 130 supports Bluetooth sensors which may matter more if you have a bunch of Bluetooth only sensors (not too common).
The 130 has Galileo support which the 520 doesn’t have, which may lead to better accuracy once the constellation is fully operational in a year or two. Does it even work at the moment, I’ve no idea really!
I was looking at both at a similar price. The B&W screen on the 130 swung it for me – i’ve found Garmins colour screens completely wash out in bright sunlight, whilst the 130 is stunningly clear.
Do keep in mind however that the Edge 130 doesn’t support Vector Cycling Dynamics, nor power balance (left/right split). All you’ll get is total power and cadence.
So far my experience with the 130 has been hit and miss. The screen is GREAT, and performs much better than the 520/820 in sunlight. The battery life has been… poor, I guess? Coming from a 520 that drove me insane with its poor mapping, incessant issues and consistently buggy firmware I was hoping for better battery life (especially since it’s been a sticking point in many reviews). But it’s been disappointing– I’ll finish our usual group training ride, about 40 miles door to door, with the 130 nearly dead (GPS/GLONASS, speed/cadence/power, BT off, backlight always on but toggled off until darkness falls). Under the same settings, the 520 would have 70% remaining at ride-end. Going to consider a refund.
Sorry to hear you are disappointed with the device. We would like to get some more information from you about your concerns. Please reach out to us at social@garmin.com, mention your post and that I asked you to reach out to us. We would like to get the activity file from your ride and find out what was going on.
Does anyone know if the Edge 130 can be used to control the Bontrager Flare RT rear light? I don’t own a 130 yet but I’m likely to get one in the future. I’m about to purchase the Flare R or RT. It looks like higher end Garmins can fully control the light through a Connect IQ app but some models only let you turn the light on or off, which isn’t really work the extra cost.
Ray, you write in the review that in the future you want to write a separate post about the difference in tracking accuracy in difficult environments with the Edge 130 using the option GPS alone or GPS+Galileo (both single frequency, because you specified in a previous post that the Edge 130 doesn’t support dual frequency).
Is this post still in your “to do” list or do you thing that this should not be treated as a priority and you are not interested any more?
I notice that there are now circa 400 comments about the Edge 130, but it seems that users are not interested so much about the accuracy they experimented with the option GPS+Galileo, because no one commented about that .
Or are you waiting that the 4 Galileo satellites launched in december 2017 become operational? Now they are in testing phase, I think that they will be ready in July.
It would be nice to have a comparison between:
1- garmin edge 130 with single frequency GPS
2- garmin edge 130 with single frequency GPS+Galileo
3- smartphone Xiaomi MI8 with dual frequency GPS+Galileo (chipset Broadcom BCM47755)
Autolap functions on Edge 130, help please! On my Edge 500 (“old bluey” one of the best Garmin devices ever) I could set autolap for any distance. On Edge 130 seems only the default 5km is available, is that true?
Also with autolap enabled, at each 5km it simply displays “5km” for a few seconds, not very helpful without some other metrics e.g. lap speed, lap power. Is it possible to display other metrics with autolap/
Interesting to follow the battery debate. Haven’t done enough riding yet to test life but did immediately notice that after hours of charging the bar would not show 100% charge (only about 80 or so going off the icon). Look forward to Garmin’s response.
My question though related to weather:
– is it possible to view the weather widget while riding? couldn’t work this out.
– secondly, is it possible to show live temperature while riding? I assume this is what the sensor underneath is for?
1. I am not near my Edge130 but IRC you can add it as one of the data screens. Just be sure your unit is connected to the phone. It is inaccurate as hell, it is weather widget after all.
2. This is the biggest bummer for me. No, you cannot, because… I do not know why, reasons?!, buy a more expensive unit? From viewing ‘after-ride-reports’ I have noticed this sensor is very inaccurate as well (24°C when it was 30°C) – my 6x cheaper sigma 16.12 gave better readings.
Just to confirm the battery issue with firmware 2.40
I did a longer ride Saturday. 6:12 hours. Backlight 10s, GPS+Galileo, GC app NOT connected, no navigation 3 sensors. Only 23% remaining. My Edge 1000 last longer.
Reading through reviews of the 520 Plus most people are supriced how long battery last.
For me there is definitely something wrong on the 130 and Garmin still not able to discover it.
No idea why they are showing like not able to reproduce the issue, even every other user is to.
And targeting the issue should be not that difficult. One is backlight, the seems to be connected sensors. If user do a test ride with NOTHING connected and just GPS running it last around the 15 announce hours.
But that for me is like “It last 15 hours, if you don’t use it”.
Another mistake being an early adaptor of a new Garmin. Don’t understand why I am not able to learn from pat.
Re Garmin connect: Is there a way to turn off the ads sent via notifications? These show up on my Edge 130. I refer to the messages that say “get the weather app” or “stay connected with livetrack”? Also I noticed that even when it’s sitting on my desk, if I push the start button it says I’m going 2.5 kph and logs distance! What’s up with that?
have had the unit for 2 weeks now, all my ant+ sensors paired with no issues instantly, tried my BLE/ ant+ Hrm, paired right away with no issues. my 4iiii paired via ant+ only, any thing i can do to make it pair via bluetooth? have tried disabling all sensors, iq apps and the phone itself and just look for sensors, cannot find the ble signal of my 4iii precision.
Buy a 520 plus. I had the 130 for almost two months and sent it back to Clever Training. It never worked correctly the entire time. Either it would shutdown and restart during a ride or after update 2.40 the Strava Segments would not work. Got my 520 plus today and after set up it worked perfect on the first ride. There is a reason Ray originally indicated he might prefer the 130 over the 520 then backtracked on that. Besides, the 520 plus is $79 more but includes a $30 outfront mount not included with the 130, making the difference only $50. What’s more, if you use the Clever Training VIP 10% credit, you get an extra $8 worth of credit, bringing the real difference to about $42. Trust me, the 130 sucks compared to the bigger color screen of the 520 plus. For $42, it’s a no brainer. Skip a couple beers or coffees and get the 520 plus. Don’t buy the 130.
I am finding some peoples experiences of the 130 to be very odd as i’m Getting no issues with mine (tho i think garmin underspecced the battery and sub 10 hours is likely if you have lots of sensors attached)
I’ve done a good few all day mtb rides with mine now (with no sensors except phone attached) and short (2hour) road rides with HR, Cadence and speed sensors and using Strava segments.
Battery life is about 50% after an 8 hour day with no sensors. Looks like it might not be so great with loads of sensors but not tried.
The unit has yet to crash on me or give any strange behaivior (which for me is a first with a Garmin. My Edge touring, despite numerous firmware upgrades, still crashes sometimes when navigating and, every so often, a load of settings reset to factory for no reason i can work out).
So, odd that some are getting issues and others are not.
Simon,
I get what your are saying. But, there are far more complaints on here and the Garmin forums on the 130 than there are on the 520 plus. I learned long ago with the Fenix 1 not to be a beta tester for Garmin. If it does not work out of the box get rid of it.
But, my other point is this, you screwed yourself cause you could have had a far better computer for really only $42 more, even if the 130 worked correctly.
One minor thing to remember is that people had the Edge 130 from basically day 1 (mid-April), whereas the Edge 520 Plus was held back till mid-late May. Thus, more people and more time and all that.
Not at all, despite the aspect Ray told, you need to keep in mind – if it goes down to navigation – the 520 has not been originally designed to work with maps. Especially if you ride MTB map orientation is far too slow.
So if you are only keen on the sports function I may agree, but really using navigation regularly and not only for emergency would be a pain.
When using the Back to start Via same Route feature, the arrow pointing my position in relation to the course navigates outside of the window and does not automatically recenter. I have to switch data page to get a refreshed view of the map and arrow. Anyone else experiencing this? (This was with firmware 2.3, have updated this morning and I have not yet tested this on the 2.4 release.)
I have the same problem, and there seem to be quite a lot of people complaining about it on the Garmin support forums too, as there are several threads with a lot of views. I am using a bike computer mainly for navigating breadcrumb routes, so this renders the device mostly useless for me.
On the Garmin support forums, a Garmin employee (Shawn-Garmin) has stated this was a known problem and that it would be fixed, without giving any specifics. After waiting for several days, I called the German support hotline today. The staff there gave no indication he had heard of the problem at all and told me the device had to be returned to Garmin for at least 10 days.
I decided to wait for a firmware update for a couple of days and then send the unit in.
Yes, same experience here. I tried using the 130 to navigate a route i’d previously ridden and it was unusable because of this. (i’ve got an Edge Touring i use for navigation so was only doing it as an experiment)
I don’t know if it’s because of me being german and all, but the way this is handled by Garmin customer support seems totally ridiculous to me.
From what I can gather from my personal experience and the Garmin support forums, a bug was introduced in software version 2.3 or 2.4 which renders a main feature (GPS navigation while riding a bike) of a 200€ bike computer mostly unusable for a substantial part (all?) of customers who bought it.
If this was a washing machine, I would expect customer support to contact the owners of the faulty product, explain the problem, apologize for the inconvenience caused by it and to explain how and when the problem will be fixed. And if it cannot be fixed, offer a quick and convient way to return it for a refund.
As it is, all I’ve got is a post in the support forum (essentially “we have heard about this problem and will fix it eventually, good luck in the meantime”) and phone customer support saying the unit must be sent in for “repair”.
Sorry for the confusion Fabian. We are working on getting this resolved with a software update. You should not need to replace the device for this issue. I will reach out to the team for an update on the timeframe. We do apologize for the inconvenience.
My experience as well. The german support is rubbish. Seems to be just a callcenter to handle RMA.
1. The first answer sit always “The problem is not known” even people are discussing for week in the german and US forums
2. First solution is always RMA
3. If in rare cases they know the problem the statement is always “we have forwarded the issue to the developers, we will neither get a response nor be able to give any statement when the issue will be solved
The german forum does not get ANY attendance by Garmin. So in the US forum we are quite lucky to have Shawn. But overall not that much better. You will see on the battery thread, no further response by him. No statement if it is a technical issue or just something like:
“We are sorry we have far overestimated the capacity and didn’t respect the expected usual usage of the device. If you are disappointed, please get back to – worldwide – and you can claim your money back”
Sorry if the following issue has already been stated. This thread is meanwhile REALLY long.Just take then as confirmation.
Today I tried to follow a quite short track. Less then 15km just to get to a point I didn’t know exactly. I was gong to depart for a little dirt spot right beside the track. No need to integrate it. So the 130 recognises and gave notice. So far, so good
After the map won’t any longer change its orientation. Purely north. It neither helped to stop and start it, nor to power down the Edge. As reminder to people not familiar with the 130s, Garmin decided to reduce massively for some reasons configuration options (and other stuff). Means the option to change map orientation is missing.
I there anything else this device could do properly then showing speed….
….without any sensor connected
…. without backlight
…. etc.
I usually can by a 10 bucks device to get the same result
1) Have you seen my post a few days ago about the map not centering issue when navigating back to starting point?
2) Any update from « the team » about a timeframe for a definitive fix (ref: one of your previous messages)?
3) Is the Product Owner aware of this situation? What does he or she have to say?
I really like the suggestion from another user about an official email to all registered owners of the Edge 130 but I seriously doubt Garmin will follow it.
Eagerly awaiting a resolution on this ridiculous limitation.
This thing is GARBAGE. Created a route recently for an unfamiliar location (that’s what GPS is for right?) and the navigation missed like 5 turns for some reason. The road clearly turns like 90 degrees and the name of the road changes but no turn notification from unit. Told me I was off course multiple times—and this is with GPS and GLONASS enabled. 2 hours into the ride and I was at 50% power so i turned off all sensors and GLONASS. Started heading back and unit tells me that my next turn is in 42 miles????? I can literally see the turn 50 feet away! Had to use my phone to find my way back. later in the ride—got a flat. that sucks—but wait, i’m using live track so i can be found right? nope—-contacted my friend who was tracking me, told them my location and according to live track I was 15 miles away from my actual location. GREAT!!! Finally got home after getting quite lost and went to upload the ride and BOOM—battery dead, 8 hours later. This is with no sensors or navigation. CRAP CRAP CRAP. So I contacted Garmin—have heard nothing. Probably because I’m ranting to them as I am here. Posted on the edge 130 Forum–the moderator pretty much told me that I dont know how to use my unit and thats why its acting up—he then decided to shut down my comments. Contacted Jenson USA for a refund and was basically told that since I mounted the thing I may have to pay a restocking fee of 15%!!!!! Terrible customer service from all parties. Will never buy anything GARMIN again
I started my ride with GPS & GLONASS enabled (GLONASS enabled thinking all turns would be accounted for!) Also had HR, cadence and speed sensors enabled so I understand that battery life may suffer but 2 hours in and 50% left seems excessive. Disbaled all sensors and GLONASS leaving only GPS and navigation (which an hour later bit the dust anyway) and ended up with maybe 8 hours of battery. I purchased the unit before our first century ride so I needed something with good battery life but this was not it…..
The other item to triple-check would be if backlight was set to ‘Stays on’. It’s a topic I talked with Garmin on at Eurobike, in making it super clear on Garmin Connect what backlight status was, as well as if during daylight hours backlight is on permanently, to perhaps give a warning (since it can be impossible so spot in the sun).
Sounds like they’re already working on that.
Steven – If the PM bit isn’t working, I can forward your e-mail to Shawn with your permission.
Still the issue is with the overall drain the backlight causes is to high. Did you own an Edge 500? Did you ever experience that power drain while using backlight permanently? And there was no dim option as well.
During winter season I am doing nightrides almost 2-3 times a week. 2,5 – 3 hours. Makes it nearly unusable to me.
With my Edge 1000 dimmed to 4 dots (which is still quite bright in the dark) I can do minimum 2 rides.
What I like to say – a warning for backlight on is even not a workaround. The Problem is not you are not aware it is on. The issue is the unusual massive power drain by it.
So I basically had no choice but to send this thing back to Jenson USA. I reluctantly spent $16 on shipping and I’m not even guaranteed a refund. The day I sent it back I got an email from garmin finally (probably after I posted my thoughts here) telling me that I could upgrade my device to the edge 520 plus at a discounted rate but apparently that offer only stood after I returned the item to garmin myself. offer now gone apparently. now i have no device, no guarantee on a full refund and the experience of poor customer service everywhere. Fabulous!
How would rate the 130 vs the 520+? I’m really on the fence here oscillating between wanting the 130, the 520+, or the Bolt. I ride with power (PT G3 hub) and am currently using a Garmin 705 (which is having connection issues with my computer. Are the issues on the 520+ sorted enough to place above the 130?
Do you think Lezynes Mega XL or Mega C are going challenge the 520+ and Bolt?
I bought two 130s (one for the wife) and have had mixed results. My unit had significant battery issues, and would only charge to 95 percent with an overnight charge. I was lucky to get five to six hours out of it in use. I’ve replaced it with the 520 plus, and have to say the whole unit is much better. Better battery life, more robust features etc etc. I’m glad I returned the 130 for the 520 plus. The wife’s 130 has ok battery life, gets a full charge and does what she needs it to do.
Robin,
My experience with the 130 was terrible. It would only finish about 1/4 of the rides without shutting down or rebooting and after the 2.40 firmware update, live segments never worked again. I sent it back and purchased the 520+. The 520+ has been mostly rock solid. I had one initial pairing issue with a power meter but haven’t had it again. Live segments work great. It has never once shut down or rebooted. I mentioned this earlier, but the 520+ is a no brainer over the 130. It’s in a different category. For $279 you get the Garmin outfront mount with it that sells separately for $30. That doesn’t come with the 130. Effectively, for $50 you have color screen nearly twice as big, much better battery life, more power data, etc. etc. etc. Get the 520+.
I was thinking about the 130 when the 520 was on sale for the same $199. Ray suggested (Thanks!) just going with the 520. I bit the bullet and went all out for the 520+. No regrets. Works great, good battery life, navigation is more helpful and I use it more often than I thought I would. If anyone needs a nudge that direction, here’s another vote for the 520+!
Really glad I dropped by to check the recent owner/user comments before placing my order. Sadly, it seems the Edge 130 is not yet the replacement for the dependable Edge 500 it promised to be.
Poor battery life, no temperature display, navigation issues, live segment problems, fixed autolap, etc, etc.
Seems my venerable 500 will stay on my bikes until the Edge 130 user feedback improves or the Wahoo Bolt price drops here in Oz……
If you can wait, wait. As you see by Shawns and Rays they are working on it. You need to be a bit more straight if you already own a device to get your issues solved.
From hardware perspective – if the got the battery issues solved – the 130 is great device, because there was no stand-in for the 500 before. Edge 20/25 are a different category.
I know that there are no advanced power datafields available. But after uploading a training to Garmin Connect or Trainingpeaks, are these numbers like TSS shown there or are they completely missing and aren’t calculated at all?
I’ve had an Edge 130 for a month now in active use (maybe 1,000 kms) so thought I would post and add my own thoughts on this device.
I’ve been a happy user of the trusty Edge 500 for several years. I thought the 130 was the perfect answer to get better connectivity and an updated device.
Overall, my impression is entirely mixed. The form, size and weight (verified weenie) is great, but the functionality lacks.
LIKES:
– the display is such a good upgrade from the 500. Crystal clear in all light conditions. Good sized, readable fonts and decent screen size to show all the fields and metrics you might want (or ask Garmin to give you…)
– connectivity is what I expected. With live tracking, live segments, Bluetooth BLE and Ant+, auto updates, BT route uploads, etc. This has been seamless for me and so beats the old version whereby you have to tether to your PC. When traveling, I always had to surf around to see who had a PC I connect to. Now its just the mobile. This was among the key reasons for the upgrade for me. LOVE getting a text message displayed on the device.
– as stated above, the compact form and minimal weight is near perfect – buttons are placed well and no issues managing the device during the ride. To my minimalist mind, nothing is worse than a big old brick dangling off the front bars. The 130 ticks the box so well.
– ability to add Connect IQ data fields is good – indeed critical as it has become necessary for me to make up for other shortcomings of the functionality of the device. BUT… I believe there’s a limit of only two CIQ fields you can deploy contemporaneously (does anybody know if you can do more than that?) and why that’s a limit is a mystery.
ON THE FENCE:
– battery life is reported to be an issue for some here and in the Garmin 130 forum. This hasn’t been too bad for me. I experience about 9-10 hours (certainly short of their optimal 15 hours claimed) with GPS+Glonass, 1 HRM sensor, backlight set to 10s minimum, live tracking on, route on, live segments on. A 4 hour ride under these conditions ran it down to 55% while paired with my phone. Wish it was more like 15 but not a killer issue.
– Mapping. I am used to and fine with the old breadcrumb style mapping of routes on the 500. This is about the same experience (but with a known display problem in current 2.4 software version). Display rendering appears quicker than the old 500 which took more time to think about things I suppose.
DISLIKES
– field limitations are just dumb and pointless. If the info is there, please let me have it. Examples of the shortcomings from the 500 are:
– Vertical Speed (VS30) – not available at all. Love this field as a proxy for power. Surprised no-one has commented on it not being there. I have band-aided/hacked a solution to this using the AppBuilder app in CIQ. It works OK but is far from ideal. Getting a good readable font size from CIQ datafield apps is not easy or possible I think.
– Temperature – not available at all. The device has it (shows up in Strava file) but no live readout. There is the Garmin weather app on the device (through phone) but many like the recorded metric shown live.
– auto pause custom speed setting – device has auto pause but sometimes I will sit a light for 10s before it goes into pause. I used to have a setting to manage that better in the 500. Not available in the 130. Dumb limitation.
– auto lap fixed distance (5km) – pointless utility and limitation. The 500 could be custom set for distance and/or a fixed location on a lap. Not so on the 130.
– battery % is not shown. Just the teeeeny weeeny little status bar. Hard to know what’s left in the tank. Again, there’s an app for that in CIQ but you have to rig the field display to max to make it show up properly. It’s really dumb.
– 2.4 Firmware – known and huge issue on route display. North is ALWAYS up and the chevron rider (you) simply rides on and goes off the page. This renders the route feature completely useless. I have some faith but diminishing patience that the next version will correct this in a timely fashion.
So where does this leave me personally? I want to like the device – really. But I want and expect to Garmin to open it up better and offer it as a solid unit (without advanced mapping and nav and that’s totally OK. It is that feature that drives others to the 520 or better) and not to slot in their lineup as a lower-end device. It’s all there but intentionally dropped from the unit – please let your faithful Garmin users have the info they like!!
If Firmware 2.5 does not make a material advance in route display (fix) and additional features being “un-locked”, this unit is going back and I will drape the 520 brick (or maybe a Bolt) off my bars for essentially the same price.
Hopefully the foregoing bits help others make their decisions or inspire existing users to sound off and get the unlock codes for better functionality.
Lastly (for Shawn), I would post in the 130 community blog on Garmin too but can’t for the life of me figure out how to post. Must be a permission thing. I am a registered user but there are no “reply” or “post” buttons anywhere. Any suggestions on this would be appreciated. Thanks to Ray and DC here to allow me to sound off. Cheers.
Thanks for that full review @Breton Smith. It confirms my decision to wait or shop elsewhere.
The thing that should concern Shawn and all at Garmin, is not just that the seemingly inability to resolve these issues will impact on sales of the new 130 but it also gives the potential buyers cause for concern over purchasing other Garmin units instead. They’ll quickly determine it’s probably look elsewhere for reliability and a responsive support structure.
Meanwhile, the Edge 500 powers on and on….
PS Ray, maybe you could add a ‘user feedback’ indicator after the summary of each review such that products such as this (the Fly 6CE and 12CE come to mind too) with real world multi-user issues would have those issues noted? A buyer could currently read through your review and its summary and believe it to be their ideal product only to discover after reading through 400+ end user comments that it maybe isn’t.
Thank you for the detailed feedback Breton. You should be all set to post on the Garmin Forums. We will have the north up issue resolved in our next firmware update. I will reach out to the Edge team with the concerns you and others have posted.
My experience with the Edge 130 was getting slightly better (in the sense I was learning to live with the device’s limitations and poor battery life), but then it went right off a cliff. When I updated to 2.4, the update seems to have wiped my GPS firmware entirely. I can’t connect to GPS at all, no matter how long I wait, and when I finally checked System/About, it shows the software version as 2.40, the sensor hub as 5.80, and the GPS as 0.00… which I assume means the device has somehow deleted the GPS software (it used to have the current software number). I’m getting kind of fed up with Garmin’s inability to fix issues without causing more issues. So frustrating.
I just want to state again that due to a software bug (navigation map doesn’t refresh and always points north), GPS navigation has been unusable on the Edge 130 for 6 weeks now unless you constantly press a button on the computer (while riding a road bike fast).
Despite repeated claims by Garmin customer support, a bug fix has still not been released. Also, despite repeated requests by multiple Edge 130 users, Garmin still has given no information whatsoever on when a bug fix can be expected.
With navigational capacities lacking, the Edge 130 is as powerful as a bike computer costing ten times less.
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE Garmin, fix the computer we bought and that you broke by a faulty software update (in my case, just outside the german 14 day return window) 6 weeks ago.
Also, if the bug is so major a team of programmers have not been able to fix it for 6 weeks, just allow the user to revert to software version 2.2.
At least for me, the unit worked fine using this older version. I could then use the computer for riding my bike and had all the time in the world to wait for another update which fixes other issues (Strava segments? Battery life?).
If a reversal isn’t feasible through Garmin connect, I would be happy to download it from somewhere and follow instructions to put in on the unit myself.
This site normally has firmware that you can revert to: link to gawisp.com
But I don’t see the Edge 130 listed there yet.
I’d call back Garmin support, they can (and have a long history of), providing the older firmware versions to revert back to. It’s a trivial exercise that takes only a few seconds to do. It’s also something Garmin does in every beta firmware update (including the previous version to revert back to).
You can also consider posting on the Garmin Forums and asking for the older firmware. While Garmin themselves is unlikely to post there, but perhaps someone else has it handy somehow.
After reading the review I had decided the 130 was for me. I currently have a 520 and use it purely to collect data and every once in a while I upload a map to it. The simplicity of the 130 and live Strava was all I was looking for. What that means, is I don’t use the GPS mapping like it seems many folks do.
So here is my question. After reading the comments it seems there is a real battery issue with these computers. Does anyone know if Garmin has fixed this issue? Is there a “born on” date I should look for to make sure I get an updated computer when I buy? Thanks for the help!
While there may be an issue with certain folks that are getting crazy low 2-hour bits, I think the main battery issue is actually an expectations alignment problem.
Meaning, Garmin advertised battery life of X – but didn’t qualify that in terms of which sensors/features are enabled at that time. Supposedly they are doing so soon (perhaps they already have), which will help clarify things a bit.
The other issue I think we’re seeing is actually people leaving backlight on. It’s so easy to do and with the Edge 130 in particular you’ve got almost no idea in daylight that it’s on.
Garmin’s looking at two solutions here:
A) Making a reminder to users after perhaps a few minutes that the backlight is on
B) Enumerating backlight status in Garmin Connect when looking at a completed activity – thus, people like me (and the internet and support) can quickly help diagnose this.
In the actual .FIT file itself the backlight status is listed.
In my case the battery wouldn’t get a full charge after a all night charging, so definately something defective. I do agree on the expectation issue… Don’t claim 15 hours when in real use you are going to get less than half that. Give us bigger devices with significant battery life and real/ honest battery life advertising!
Yup, if after charging all night long and it doesn’t hold a charge – then without question it’s broke (or, I suppose, your cable or upstream device could technically be broken or rate-limited, but that’s unlikely).
I think the problem Garmin’s learning with the Edge 130 isn’t so much the actual battery numbers (because frankly only a handful of people are riding more than 8 hours at a time). Rather, it’s just setting expectations. If the 15hr figure is only achieved in a non-sensor/non–map/non-whatever situation, just be clear about that with a simple table with what each device gets.
And to be fair – they committed somewhere up above they’d be doing that from here on out. Previous to this, I think most people looked at these smaller devices as non-viable. So they’d look at the bigger units you noted, and in those situations kinda knew that if you had maps and a pile of sensors and what-not, it might not get the max battery life. Just like if you watch YouTube on your phone it’ll die quicker than plain text messages.
hi .. i am a 130 user in the asia pacific region
when i first got the 130 it had firmware 2.20 in it
everything worked well .. navigation etc
battery life was shocking if it tried to meet the claim of 15 hours … total time of about 5 hours would take over 70% of battery capacity with 2 sensors and only GPS
connect then prompted me there was an update for firmware (only 2.30 available as latest update for my region)
fine .. went ahead with the update (2.30) which i hoped will solve some battery issues
firmware 2.30 .. battery life did not improve .. navigation missed a turn on a short 5 km course .. elevation gained synched to strava was virtually doubled (if it was 400m in connect it tells strava 800m) .. this elevation issue really kicks me ..
would be great if someone had the 2.20 firmware that i can roll back to
to battle the battery issue .. i even got myself a small powerbank that i can use to charge up the device when i do go for real long rides .. until a solution comes up
downloaded a CIQ to show me the battery % in numbers
charged the device up full (shows full black bar and 100% in CIQ)
switched it off .. left it on the table for an hour … switched it back on
CID app shows 86% battery available .. whats going on ??
based on my experience with battery % … the numbers are based on voltage of the battery .. so if there is a 14% drop with ZERO USAGE 1 hour immediately after full charge .. there is something very wrong .. poor battery quality that does not hold its charge IMO
ok … enough of my ranting
please please … someone .. a copy of firmware 2.20 please
A couple of questions come to mind after reading the response. Does the new 520+ not have the same issue? Is there a reason this seems to be isolated to the 130?
Finally, would you agree with my assessment that if all I’m looking for is consistent/accurate tracking of my rides with live strava segments and periodic route guidance when I travel out of town with my bike, the 130 is plenty of computer for my needs?
The 520+ may has different issues. The 520+ is the same hardware as the old 520. Primarily adding a bit of memory to keep maps of usual size on the device. The issue here is, it is quite slow, because of the old hardware. And due to not a touch device you can currently not scroll the map, just zoom.
So if you are not looking for the map navigation it could be currently an alternative to the 130.
Garmin has decided, even the software basics are fairly the same, to keep firmware of each device separately. Which we all do not understand, because the hardware defers the devices already a lot.
But as example the Edge 1000 can’t do Geocaching, even all hardware and a big touch screen is there. And they are really believing people will buy a device out of the other ranges to get it.
We all know software quality would improve a lot if the would change their mind to have a single basic firmware for all devices.
But currently it is more looking to get worse. And you see how long it takes to get just the biggest bugs fixed. I got the impression the developers get slots for each device.
In the past years the speed getting out new devices increases a lot. So much more to support every separatly.
They are focussing on getting new customers….
I’ve found what seems to be an odd glitch with the GPS on my 130. I’ve had an 820 for quite some time now, never seen this glitch with that unit, but my last two rides I have had the exact same glitch with my 130.
The 130 seems to glitch on out-and-back efforts. The first time this happened was on a July 4 ride here in SoCal. The heart of the ride is a climb up Mandeville Canyon Road. Phil Gaimon made a video when he took the KOM (link to youtube.com). It was then taken by pro Corentin Ermenault on his TT bike (link to youtube.com). The climb dead-ends at the top, you ride out-and back. I did this climb on July 4, but the 130 basically erased the climb from my GPS file. It knows I was at the base of the climb, then it ignores my ride up and down the hill, then it continues my ride when I returned to the base. The 130 essentially crops out the out-and-back effort. Here is the file:
I was pretty bummed the 130 lost that effort, as it was a PR for me, so I put the 130 away until yesterday. This time, I tested it by running my 820 in its normal spot (Cycliq duo mount) and I ran the 130 in my middle jersey pocket. At this point, I had no idea of the out-and-back glitch, I thought it was just a freak GPS drop, but I just so happened to do another out-and-back effort on this ride, this time on a road called Westchester Parkway. What do you know, the 130 again decided to crop this section of my ride from my file!
And here is the 130 file from the same ride, showing a total distance of 20.73 miles, due to it cropping out my out-and-back effort: link to connect.garmin.com
In the 130 file, it shows me stationary at about 1:04:10 and then seems to teleport me home at the end.
Really can’t see using the 130 for any ride at this point.
I just found a glitch or bug that is most likely responsible for the battery drainage?
So what I have done is gone and turn off GPS/GLONASS/GALILLEO, turned off all prompts and navigation, unpaired and turned off all sensors, disable phone connection, disable CIQ and basically just about everything.
From there I hit start and start recording without any GPS or sensors, doing a stationary recording. The only data field I have shown is a battery indicator and a time elapsed timer. There is a peculiar thing that happens at 00:04:58 (4minutes 58 seconds) into the elapsed recording session. The battery indicator drops a bar at that exact time. I let it run a few more seconds and then stop recording. The battery indicator remains in the same position.
I then power off the device and turn it back on. The battery indicator is back up to full charge! So thinking this might be a once off, I hit start and record another session with no GPS or sensors and everything is turned off like the first test. Low and behold at 4 minute 58 seconds, the battery indicator drops a bar at that exact time!
Determined to see if this is glitch or bug, I turn off the device again and turn it back on. After the screen lights up, the battery indicator is shown back at full charge. I renable just only GPS for a new recording but also staying stationary whilst recording like the previous tests. Just like clockwork the battery indicator drops a bar at 4 minutes 58 seconds.
So perhaps this isn’t a drainage issue? The firmware is faulty in reading the charge and subsequently shows the device to be draining more than it should be. If Garmin will allow a proper percentage battery indicator level, and not just a bar indicator, we can possibly find out if it’s an actual drainage issue.
Firmware update no 3.00 is now out on Garmin’s site. (Dear Garmin Support Personnel, why don’t you inform your registered users when you push an update!!!)
We have not typically sent out emails to registered users in the past for software updates. We do post the update to our forums. I will post the change history below:
Changes made from version 2.40 to 3.00:
• Add additional backlight settings
• Fix map zoom not working in certain scenarios
• Allow eight CIQ data fields to be installed (still allow only 2 active at once)
• Fix issue with BLE power meter cadence
• Scale battery reporting of CIQ data fields to reflect device capabilities
• Support CIQ 3.0
Seems the backlight issue got fairly sorted. I did a quick test at home just start a ride with brightness “Low” and display permanently on, GPS on, connected to phone. Shutdown after 6 hours. But no sensors connected. Will do a real ride today just keeping backlight on, but with all sensors connected.
As usual the developers did make things worse. Realising CIQ developers can use battery percentage they now changed the content of that field to show only the same as the bars.
Means 100%->80%.->….->20%->1%
So any estimate will no be less accurate. Especially when it got fairly empty. So it will show 20% until real 10% are reached and then switch to 1%. So you really no idea when the device will shutdown. 🙁
For some reason I cannot post on the Garmin forum hence I’ll communicate with you here. On 3.0 firmware the engineer added an annoying backlight/battery prompt after you power on the device. The prompt comes up if you have the backlight set to ‘stay on’. I’ve now set the backlight’s new ‘keys and alert’ to come on only after sunset and before sunrise. However I do wish the backlight to stay on at night until I manuallty turn it off, hence I’ve set the backlight to ‘stay on’. With the combination of backlight settings I currently have the backlight would never come on during the day unless I manually turn it on. So there’s no reason to get the backlight/warning prompt after every power up. Please talk to the engineer to have them either add a new setting to disable the annoying backlight/battery prompt or just add a new backlight setting ‘off’. With the new backlight setting of ‘off’, I can manually turn on the backlight at night and have it stay on, and not get the backlight/battery warning prompt after power up. Thank you for your time.
Confirmed. I have already contacted the developer of “GPS and battery info”, the datafield that I am using, but haven`t received an answer yet. Probalbly it could be solved without waiting for a new update from Garmin, which will take weeks as we know. I have also noticed a strange behavior with the new firmware 3.0. After the percentage dropped down to 40 % (after 6:10 hours with GPS, speed and cadence sensors paired and backlight on low) the percentage jumped to up 60 % a few times and went down to 40 % again. Showing the percentage in 20 % steps is nearly useless. Apart from that: What kind of silly policy of restriction is it not to have a datafield that shows the percentage in the Garmin OS if you can load it over the IQ Store?
Also: My language is german and after the update, the datafields are just shown in english. Language in GC and device is set to german and the system language is german, but not the datafield. This is not a big deal – chinese would be a problem 😉 – but do they perform any kind of tests at Garmin after releasing a new update? (It is a rhetorical question.)
It would be nice if Shawn could give us an answer concerning this matters. And it should be more than: “We are working on it”. If there is a bug in an IOS update, Apple normally fixes it within a few days.
The 130 doesn’t seem to have a ‘movement detected’ warning (which my 200 and Touring both have). I’ve missed the start of a few rides forgetting to switch on but also lost the middle of a few after accidentally knocking the start/stop button.
Is there a setting for this? Any clue as to why this feature is missing from this device? Did other people find it annoying (why would anyone ride with a gps *without* recording the ride?)
Yeah.. When I bought the device it was on firmware 2.20 which had elevation working properly
Updated to 2.30 as prompted then elevation went crazy.. Nearly doubled known elevations or more
Had a new update released to APAC users namely me.. So I updated again to 2.40
Havemt tried the 2m40 on elevation yet.. Will be going for a ride later.. See how that goes
With Garmin’s Extended Display feature, do you imagine this will come to an eventual successor to the Garmin Edge 20/25? For active folk that already wear an expensive Vivoactive or a Fenix, offering a cheap “slave” display on the bike would be a great way to sell another Garmin device for an extremely competitive price.
Normalized Power can be added by using the Connect IQ app called “appbuilder 4”. See the NP formula in the app’s description. Works flawlessy and is exactly the same as the NP seen post ride in garmin connect – so looks accurate. Pic of mine here: link to instagram.com
I see now that Appbuilder4 is the identical quadruplet-app of Appbuilder along with ab2 and ab3. So installing all four enables programming of four separate custom data-fields! 🙂 The formula for NP was in the Appbuilder4 description though – see below.
NP formula:
AVG0(IFS(Timer GTE 30 and (Timer – MAX(IFS (PREV(timer) eq null, timer)) plus 1) gte 30, TIMEAVG0(Power,30)^4))^0.25
I maybe got aware about a further issue. As transfer of log files seems to be quite slow and the time extend by every single ride more stored on the 130 I was going to delete either a bunch or all. But I did not find any option. Only to go into every single log file and delete.
Did I overlook something? Would be great if somebody could check.
Anyone having trouble with the elevation readings in the latest version? I’m getting all sorts of weird readings that i’ve never noticed on any other edge device. It was convinced I was below sea level by up to 30m riding in London yesterday.
It started after the last update, as you wrote. In addition, GPS shows lines 300m apart from each other, when I am going by the same road (sunny weather, clear sky).
I have advice for the comment readers, maybe it will save you some money – DO NOT BUY GARMIN PRODUCTS. I have bought Edge 130 with the set of sensors (cadence + speed) + additional heartbeat sensor. From all of this only speed sensor works fine. Edge 130 is fubar’d as you can read in comments here, I have lost two from three straps for cadence sensor, only by a miracle I didn’t lose the sensor itself, I had to design and 3d print separate mount. Heartbeat sensor strap parts are peeling off (hand washed every week in the warm water).
I’m wondering how the barometric altimeter in the 130 works – how does it calibrate?
Two of us were riding at the weekend on the same loop with 130’s running the same software. We got the same distance and nearly the same total climb (ie within error margins and messing around on mtbs) but our units were showing massive difference in ‘current’ elevation – a few 100m different.
It does calibrate by GPS. As earlier you start, as less precise it is. Determination of elevation by GPS needs more satellites than Postion and as more receive as more precise it is.
But still the manual calibration (entering known elevation) is usually the best, but 130 does not allow
Any barometer can only measure the atmospheric pressure at its location. Devices like the 130 will use a standard mapping to represent that as an altitude, but as is commonly known the atmospheric pressure will vary at a location as the weather changes, by as much as 10%. The barometer cannot know what correction to apply for these changes, so cannot be relied upon to give accurate elevation readings on its own.
Devices with GPS can deduce a correction from the GPS’s elevation reading, but that can also be off by +- 25m, and also the WGS84 geodetic that GPS uses can differ from local sea level too, so total deviations of up to 50m can easily be experienced. (e.g. see link to gpsinformation.net for more details)
My Edge520 supports using a waypoint (with an accurate elevation set) at your start location (i.e. when you press ‘start’) to calibrate the elevation for that ride. I do not know if the 130 has that feature.
Normally the ascent/descent cumulatives are very accurate and on a circular route will be pretty close to being equal, but if the atmospheric pressure is changing during your ride – which can happen quite rapidly if a storm is approaching, for example – then there will be a drift.
Sure, I get that, but it’s consistently and reliably reporting my home as being between 40 and 60m below sea level and has been for some time. I’d always found GPS altitudes to be ‘good enough’ but this is useless for ‘actual’ altitude.
Total climb for a ride – fine. How much to the top of the hill of known altitude from half way up? no use at all as ‘current elevation’ is just wrong with no way of correcting.
It has no way of calibrating, which is just crap.
the pure GPS elevation of my 200 and touring worked. this doesn’t
Hi, first time reader. I’m struggling to figure out if this is a good upgrade from the edge 500 in combination with the vivosmart hr. I broadcast the hr reading to my 500, and can’t seem to confirm if the 130 can receive this broadcast.
Also, would the 130 use the same stem mount as the 500? I’m new into MTB and worry that if the mount sticks the 130 out from the bike it’s not going to last long with my occasional stacks.
I can’t confirm the heart rate question, but as for the MTN bike …if you turn the mount ‘around’ you can have it sit right over your stem. The 130 will use the same mount as the 500.
The 130 connects to any bluetooth or ANT+ HR devices, so there’s no reason why it wouldn’t connect to the VSHR, which broadcasts over ANT+
It comes with the standard rubber band stem mount, not the out front one, so there’s no issue with MTB use. There is a specific MTB bundle that includes a handlebar mount that goes backwards, so the unit is over the stem. I’m not really sure what benefit that has over the standard mount, although it also includes the remote if that’s important to you.
Hello, miserable Garmin users. I have found another bug in edge 130, yay… After about 96-99 recorded activities in the device’s internal memory, history screen stops showing the newest activities! They are synchronized though if you will delete old activities newer one will show, but you will not be able to see more than 96-99 starting from the oldest.
I would report this on Garmin forum, but it keeps logging me off, I have tried various browser. I will not bother anymore. Keep up good job Garmin.
Is anyone using a BLE speed/cadence sensor with the 130? It fails to receive data from my no-name sensor which otherwise works fine with an old TomTom Multisport.
I have posted on the Garmin forum and emailed their local support without response.
I was just wondering if there is, or has anyone found, a quick way to adjust the setting for a flare RT rear light with the 130.. the current process, where you need to to the main menu -> sensors -> select light, etc.. seems really cumbersome.
This seems to defeat the purpose of being easily able to adjust the light on the fly from the bars? Any ideas?
In the specs of the 130 on Garmins website (e.g. link to buy.garmin.com) an accelerometer is listed as a sensor. Does anyone know what this is used for in the device?
Ive had 130 for two months now. It works fine. My one gripe is not having Last Lap data fields. The 130 is for people who want to train and race. It is not for ramblers, long distance adveturers, they all should get the 520 or 1030. For the racers, Last Lap for power, HR, avg speed, is really critical. Garmin designed a powerful, light computer perfect for racing, but left off three data fields we really need. 48 data field options is plenty, we just need those three more, drop the 10(!) goofy navigation data fields.
Not having last lap data while you train or race is a serious shortcoming.
Two major issues here (many comments on the matter on garmin forum, many people impacted, also opened an incident at garmin support – there are at least 8 people with same issues, but IMO there are far more).
After 3.0 update, the data field elevation (altitude) is always 0 as if i would live at sea level. My Fenix 3 shows elevation 93M (correct data, cross checked with multiple sources) but EDGE 130 shows 0. If i go up a hill it goes to 3,4,5 m or if I descent it goes with – (minus). sensor works but initial value is not read from gps.
ps. I really wait minutes for gps fix, out in the clear blue sky, no buildings, and so on. no matter how long i would wait there is always a huge difference, in my case always 0 (elevation). but the sensor works because it shows ascent or descent if I do that).
2nd issue. the actual speed data field shows erratic readings . i can check with 2 other gps (fenix 3, polar m430) that i run at a constant speed of (eg.) 21km/h, i try to run as smoothly and as constant as possible. the edge 130 shows in 5 seconds (21.4, 23,1, 20,9, 21,2, 22,4 etc) while the other 2 barely change from 21.2km/h
Today, after powering on the device (EDGE 130) I waited for GPS FIX, stood still, but elevation is -10m (see photo). My city has lowest elevation (altitude) 83m and highest 96m. Garmin support says it`s normal to be off to about 100 feet, but from -11m (shown) to 96m (real) there are 351 feet.
Hi there
Maybe I am to stupid to find out, but in opposite to my Edge 1000 there seems to be no possibility with the Edge 130 to establish a Light Network where the ANT+ light, in case a Bontrager Flare RT, starts only when the timer starts and not when the unit is switched on. Or do I miss something?
Regards, John
Great review. Just p/u a Varia RTL510 to go with my 130 and I can’t figure out how to put the car the radar displays on the left side instead of the right. Can’t find any 130 specific instructions. Tried following instructions for other Edgemodels but doesn’t give me same options on 130.
I see in one of your pictures you have radar displayed on left. How did you do it?
Thanks!
John.
Will this read a .TCX file directly? I have the Edge 20, generally quite happy, but one local ride uses RidewithGPS, and the typical offered download is a .TCX file. I have an older Edge Touring which can handle .TCX, so I grab the file, upload it to my Touring, unplug-(convert)-replug, and then I can grab the .FIT and move it > PC > Edge 20. Pain in the butt.
I might have missed it in all the highjacking worrying about whether the gps would be a few inches or cm off target…
Did you (or can you) test / does the “extended display” feature work with the 920xt or 910xt watches? Also, when in “extended display” mode, do you retain the tracking and advanced power metrics that a watch like the 920xt would be recording (such as cycling dynamics from dual sided vectors)?
Looking for that sweet spot to see bike metrics during the bike split of a triathlon without having to sit up from an aero tuck to view the watch and not crash!
Hi Ray, thanks for the great reviews; It’s prompted me to go and get a shiny new Edge 130. On the whole, it’s awesome; straightforward, clear, and easily adaptable. But I’ve just emailed garmin about a couple of user interface oversights:
The minor one – when you add a sensor, e.g. power or heart rate, it prompts you to add a data screen to your ride setup to show relevant data. For example when I paired an ANT HR belt, I set up a screen with heart rate, average HR and calories burned. This is super useful if I’m actively training. However when I’m just going for a general ride, I won’t use the HR belt. So I disable the sensor to save battery… but the screen stays in my ride set. That means I have to scroll past a blank set of data fields. It’d be much better if disabling the sensor also temporarily removed that data screen.
Second, and much more important – using elevation profiles. One of the standout features of the unit is that it shows, graphically, the elevation profile of a ride. So I can load a course, and when I preview the elevation, it shows me the overall profile – I can see where the major climbs are and when they occur. BUT – when I’m actually riding the course, instead of being able to see the whole course profile and where I am on it, I get whatever bit of it the device wants to show me; for example on a 50km course, the X axis is showing just four, 0.75km increments. This is pretty useless. I already know I’m going up hill – I can feel that. What I want to be able to see is how much more of that hill there is, and how many more hills there are on the rest of the ride. This is basic pacing information – otherwise what’s the point of it? As so often with Garmin, the device is 95% of the way there – a riding screen showing the elevation preview that already exists when you preview the course profile, with a dot on it to show where the rider is, and it’s done.
have you found a way to display the full route? I’m looking for a new device, but I think (strangely) Wahoo are the only ones who care about this issue.
I just don’t get why not everyone in the market is doing this as standard…
I would need a little help here:
Wanted to Pair a Polar H7 Heart Rate Strap with the Edge, Pairing went without issues but doesnt show any numbers. Did I miss something in the settings.
Previously the Sensor has been used with a Polar V800 for Running and works fine.
When I am totally wrong, no chance. Polar still working with ANT and Garmin ANT+. At least nearly every Monitor should work with Garmin, except Polar and pure BLE devices.
Can you drag and drop routes created in Strava onto the 130 or do you need make and send routes from garmin connect to the unit? I noticed this issue with a friends edge 25, where on my old edge 500 I can drop route files into the new files folder.
This device looks great to act as remote display, still expensive for such basic thing but at least cost much less then other garmin devices. I have really two questions where I didn’t find answer. If I run workouts on my 935 does extended display show it ? What is battery life when I use it only for remote display ?
R
JD
Hello again,
I didn’t get relly answer to my questions but I decided to go with 130, need something really small that I can use on aerobars. I didn’t ride with it yet but few thoughts after I play with it:
– to answer to my previous question extended display will not display workouts that I started on my 935 🙁
– I didn’t check this earlier but this device do not support DI2, relly don’t get this why
– I do not see really big value from using extended display, as it only support 4 fields from my watch and do not support workouts, if I use device in triatlon I can start new ride on it, if I want to check overall time I can do it alwys on my watch, this is not something that you need to see all the time
– extended display allow to use stuff not avalible on device like di2 and transmit it from 935 but you are limited to only 4 fields so I’m afraid that this will help only partly as basic stuff that you want too see can be handled by 130 (without extended display) and for other fields you need to go to separate screen
– once again dont get why garmin limiting data fields and sensors, now I’m thinking whether this was good choice and maybe insted I should pay liitle bit more and buy wahoo elemnt bolt
Few additional comments after first ride:
– device was fully charged
– software version 3.30
– I setup screens and turn it off (I use it for max 20 min), ride was 2 days later
– backlight: 10s
– GPS+GLONASS
– sensors: heart rate + power, both ANT+
– temperature outside around 10C
Things that I like:
– screen contrast very good
– size of device, and controls
– GPS recording/elevation no problems, it was matching exactly my forerunner 935
Additional things that I notice:
– battery indicator it’s still bar type with 5 levels even it I add it as data field (prefer to have %)
– when I connect device to charger and turn it off there is no information about charging progress,
very very strange
– autopause – there is no options for this (both edge 1000 and forerunner 935 you can setup minimal speed
here you can only turn it on or off)
– power data fields, there is only 3s avg power, there is no Power field, why ????
Generally I was happy till device reached 3h and 54 minutes elapsed time and suddenly turn off. I was able to turn it on again to see that battery is empty, I didn’t notice any warning. My complete ride with one break was about 4h and during that time battery on my forerunner 935 (the same sensors connected, the same GPS settings) went to 70% (not sure starting point but it was for sure less then 100%). Even if I assume that battery is not formatted yet as I charged it only once, this is some kind of joke for this type of device. I will try once again and if I see the same problem this device go back to shop or to Garmin for replacement.
R
Two more tests:
a) device fully charged, GPS+GALILEGO, backlight 10s, no sensors connected
– device was located under roof windows with GPS fix
– recorded ~7h 30min and turn off
– not possible to sync that activity using garmin connect, need to copy it manually
b) device full charged , the same settings as above with 2 ANT+ sensors heart rate and power
– after about 3h, battery on 1 bar
Not sure what is going on here,but as I see forums a lot of people have those issues and Garmin didn’t release new firmware from 2 months. I returned it back, was thinking to buy 520 plus, but as I need it only for TRI bike I decided to go with Elemnt Bolt.
Just did my first ride with the Edge 130 this morning.. used my Forerunner 35 to broadcast heart rate to the Edge 130. It was showing up on the Edge’s date field too. After the ride, realised no intensity minutes recorded for the ride.. over 5h worth of minutes.. bot recorded 🙁
This device is still broken for altitude and the way the barometer is being used, which should increase accuracy, means in most situations the information it gives is garbage. In a recent update the ability to manually set the current altitude was added. That adds another fiddly process to go through at the start of most rides.
There’s a really simple solution to altitude – Take the altitude reading it gets from the first gps fix. It might not be 100% (if you care you can manually alter) but it will be close enough for 99% of users ((% of the time). Then use the barometer to give climb/ascent figures.
at the moment altitude is unusable. It was absolutely fine on my 10 year old 200. Why did they mess with it?
The Edge 500 behaves the same. I don’t think your proposed fix is a good idea because GPS altitude errors can be worse than barometric calibration errors. The original Edge 500 tried to calibrate the barometer from GPS as it proceeded, but this introduces all sorts of difficulties (and the attempt introduced bugs – if you switch the device off and on, some recalibration code gets invoked which introduces anomolous readings). I wish the device recorded GPS and barometric altitudes separately: at least then it would be easy to calibrate the latter from the former.
Try this. It may not work on the 130, but it will certainly work on the 500. Since most of us start from home most of the time, create a POI for home, and edit it and give it the correct altitude. Since the Edge 705, Edges will recognize that it’s very close to that POI when you hit start and use the altitude to calibrate; you’ll get a little message “Elevation calibrated from location” when that happens.
Using GPS to calibrate elevation simply doesn’t work well enough, although Garmin does that with the cameras and some watches. I don’t think the 500 ever used GPS to calibrate elevation as you proceeded, but some of the watches do. The only Garmin watch I’ve owned where that actually worked was the Fenix 1; it didn’t on the Epix, and I haven’t used my new Fenix 5+ enough to come to a conclusion. GPS altitude is mostly useless, although you can be sure that it’s within about 100 ft of being correct. Barometric altimeters are much more accurate provided you keep them calibrated.
Within 100ft is good enough most of the time. Bottom of valley/top of ridge. Climb remaining to summit. 30m accuracybisnt terrible. Whereas uncalibrated barometric is useless. Often 150m or more wrong.
Which is it that you care about, accuracy or precision? A barometric altimeter will always be more precise no matter how accurate it is. If a climb is 1000ft then you’ll be close to that every time (unless you take hours doing it and a front moves through). GPS altitude errors will be bounded, but one time you go up a climb it might be 100ft high at the bottom and 100ft low at the top, the next time the reverse, and occasionally it will even be right. I wouldn’t trust GPS for climb remaining. The best accuracy and precision will obtain with a calibrated barometric altimeter, and Edges (high end ones at least) give you a way to do that automatically and a way (all the ones I’ve owned at least) to do that manually if you have to.
I looked for the follow up article that was more Edge 130 + Triathlon related and am unable to find it. Long story short my 3rd Forerunner 935 in less than 2 years has a bad barometer (same as the previous 2) and Garmin has offered to replace it with a Fenix 5 (not plus) and an Edge 130 because the quick release I have is not compatible with the Fenix and it doesn’t have one. I’m concerned about a couple of things…. The most important is all the faffing about I’d have to do with the 130 in transition and the other is the power meter data. I love the 935 but not it’s craptastic barometer…..
I think I know the answer, given I haven’t been able to find anything. I got my wife a 130 and was trying to pair it to the kinetic inride (older version, not latest gen if that makes a difference). Don’t see that this is possible. Am I missing something else?
If you’re considering buying this device, please be aware that it is unlikely to achieve the advertised battery life. Most real-world tests suggest 9 hours max (not 15) with 2 sensors and Bluetooth off, and the battery level reported by the firmware will be random and nonsense during this period. See link to forums.garmin.com for details on the pain.
There’s also no way to tell when the unit’s fully charged.
Oh, and there have been no firmware updates since around January 2019, for a unit that way less than a year old by that point. Judge for yourself how much Garmin care about their customers.
I bought this unit for my wife, and I’m seriously regretting not spending a few pounds more to buy a Wahoo or Lezyne unit.
Never again, Garmin. Too many bugs. I’ve had enough. I’m out.
Thanks to Ray and to all who have posted here for the valuable information. I’d been thinking of buying a 130 to replace my old Edge 500 purely in the hope that it would have fewer bugs. Evidently I’d have been disappointed. Since the bugginess of the firmware seems to be a major aspect, it’s hard for reviewers to assess the devices in limited time.
It’s interesting that Ray says that to ‘pull Strava routes onto it… you’ll need to plug it in via USB and transfer the file over’ while the Cycling Weekly reviewer said that he was unable to upload a TCX file from Strava, which was his preferred method (link to cyclingweekly.com). This says something about the quality of Garmin’s documentation.
Yep, the 130 is a dog. It was a bad, and unnecessary, attempt at Garmin to compete with Lezyne. It’s a shame Garmin can’t even produce a cheap no-frills computer without bugs. This is definitely a “do not buy.” Sent mine back and got a 520 plus that’s full of bugs but at least the basics kinda work.
Hey Ray, have you come to a conclusion about which combination is the most precise?
Say, GPS + Glonass or GPS + Galileo?
Any other point worth commenting on? Say how much each one increases battery consumption?
Cheers
When using multiple bikes do you just turn on or go or do you set up different bike profiles. And piggybacking on that how does the 130 handle different wheel sizes.
I’ve got a cross and a road bike bothe with power meter hubs. The road is running 25 mm and the cross is a knobby 38mm. Does the 130 just use gps for speed and distance or do you set a tire size?
Do you need hackers for hire? Do you need to keep an eye on your spouse by gaining access to their emails? As a parent do you want to know what your kids do on a daily basis on social networks ( This includes facebook, twitter , instagram, whatsapp, WeChat and others to make sure they’re not getting into trouble? Whatever it is, Ranging from Bank Jobs, Flipping cash, Criminal records, DMV, Taxes, Name it, We can get the job done. We’re a group of professional hackers with 10 Years+ experience. ( Contact at wisetechhacker @ gmail com ) … Send an email and Its done. Its that easy, try us out today.
I’m looking at the Garmin rear view sonar, how does the 130 display that device’s output – just a text description will be fine, don’t need a photo or anything. Love your site – was recommended by a bicycle custom builder earlier this week. I’ll buy no bike accessories without looking at your input!
DC included a picture of the E130 display with a radar contact in this review. Search for the text “Here’s what a few of those look like mid-ride” and then examine the pictures immediately following that text.
The picture listing an “ance” of 19.03 is the E130 temporarily rendering a black border on the left side of the screen where the single white dot represents the radar’s estimation of distance to the rider which is the white triangle at the top.
Hi! This is probably a bit overdue but my Edge 510 is about to go kaput & I’m considering the Edge 130 as a replacement … from what I’ve read, it does just about everything the 510 does & probably more.
I’ve set up 2 profiles on my 510 for my roadbike & my MTB – will i be able to do this on the 130?
Edge 130 does not support ‘profiles’. You can only pick type of the ride when you are saving your trip.
Garmin was lying from the beginning about specification, features, run time, etc, it is still bug-ridden. To be honest, do not buy any Garmin product. Their response to any issues was poor and lacking.
Just revisited this thread since yeah… Ray is the “go-to” source fro anything related to geeking out on sport stuff. I’ve recently upgraded from an AW5 towards a Fenix 6S PRO in order to get a life less depend on a relationship with the charger but als to get a deeper level of running and cycling performance metrics.
With that I’m looking to add an Edge 130 to the collection in order to have the date in line of sight while riding. Although this unit lacks the real navigation features I do feel this answers all my needs in a slim and budget package… HOWEVER… I’ve noticed rumors on the approaching Edge 130 Plus version which might introduce some additional features… Not expecting any pre-releases here but would be interesting to see if there would be an advice to hold for a couple more days/weeks with a purchase. (Edge 130 prices are dropping currently)
Thanks for sharing great thing as always; your web indeed is one of the most comprehensive library for tracker information. I need some help, been trying to find some information without getting any definite answer.
Currently am using Fitbit Inspire HR and start using it for my cycling; I love the how Fitbit able to connect with Strava (this is the two trackers app that am using for my cycling); it does have all necessary information that I need.
Am thinking to get some cycle computer to make my activity easier (as Fitbit Inspire HR would still require my phone to tap the GPS information), however am still want to use my Fitbit as the main tracker for my HR (am not fancy to buy another tools especially the strap for HR). So my question is, would it be possible for me to use this Garmin Edge 130 to kick off my activity and utilising the GPS (thus I won’t activate my activity on my Fitbit), but at the same time sync my HR data when it’s uploaded into Strava? Am sorry if this topic has been discussed previously.
As an alternative I was thinking to upgrade my Fitbit into Charge 4 (which thanks to you again for providing detail thorough information), and buy normal cycle computer just to show my speed etc; but again some fancier cycle computer will still be better, if there’s a way to sync this together 😉 I tried to find some info on google but again no definite answer it just said there’s possibility to use 3rd party app which those app was not updated for some time.
I just purchased the Edge 130 with sensors. I have a Lemond Revmaster spinner with a solid weighted wheel and am wondering if there is an ant+ speed sensor that will work with the Edge 130 and a solid wheel – as there is no hub on which to attach the Garmin speed sensor?
In speaking with Garmin they tell me there is no way to send waypoints to the Edge 130 using a computer. So there’s memory for 100 waypoints/favorites but the only way to get them on the device is adding them on the device? Is this correct? This would seem like a MAJOR miss? Any hacks/work arounds?
To answer my own question, I had a Garmin support person tell me how to hack in the waypoints from another Garmin device, in my case a Fenix 6. Simply copy the locations directory contents from the Fenix into the newfiles directory on the 130 (using a computer). All of the locations and names will transfer perfectly! The Edge 130 is not supported as a device to send to in Basecamp.
Aging Lezyne super GPS…about time for a replacement ( USB cable connection going bad )
I’m looking for a computer that will let me load segments and show them on screen – giving +/- time etc ( like live segments ) but without paying for Strava premium. It seems that you can do this with Garmin Segments/Garmin connect. ( I don’t care about competing against the full strava leader board, just my own PR ) On the Lezyne, I could sign up for one month, sync the segments I wanted then stop the subscription – the segments don’t go away 😉
Does the 130 do this? Any other computers?
Finally – a few different comments on 130 vs. 520. Anyone have more feelings there. ( DCR? )
I just bought one of these, which Garmin has on sale, “refurbished,” for $99. I was leaning toward a Wahoo for the better UI and real buttons. But I only use basic info anyway, so this is more than I need, and I couldn’t pass up the price.
The main downside is downloading/uploading courses and rides is cumbersome, having to go through the web app, then the phone app, etc. For me, this doesn’t matter much: most of the time is in the planning and creating, if I’m bothering to do it at all.
A glitch I don’t understand is auto-shutoff during a ride. I’d get a prompt saying it would shut down in 30 seconds, which it would, unless I hit the enter/go button. It’s easy to miss this, so I had several shutdowns and missed parts of rides. I don’t get why it would do this while still reading movement from GPS, and getting input from speed and cadence sensors. So I disabled auto-shutoff. Now I have to start/stop manually, but no big deal.
Anyway, great little unit, and great value at $99. I’m very happy with it.
auto shutoff can be suppressed in setting I believe.
I got a refurb and the battery capacity was clearly low. I tried to contact support and allO got was that the capacity was within the specified range. ai tried to explain the range applied to different settings (pairing, navigation) not quality control in the lowest power setting. Eventually it just completely died and they told me it was now out of warranty. I complained that I had initially contacted them within the warranty period and they sent me a new one.
I just did the Redbull Bay Climb race and up 21% grades I don’t want big screens and fancy maps: I just want simple data. This is the perfect computer for that and for most race situations. Unfortunately my legs weren’t enough to make the finals but at least I can’t blame my bike computer for weighing me down.
I swim, bike and run. Then, I come here and write about my adventures. It’s as simple as that. Most of the time. If you’re new around these parts, here’s the long version of my story.
You'll support the site, and get ad-free DCR! Plus, you'll be more awesome. Click above for all the details. Oh, and you can sign-up for the newsletter here!
Here’s how to save!
Wanna save some cash and support the site? These companies help support the site! With Backcountry.com or Competitive Cyclist with either the coupon code DCRAINMAKER for first time users saving 15% on applicable products.
You can also pick-up tons of gear at REI via these links, which is a long-time supporter as well:
With TPC (The Pro's Closet), you'll save $40 on purchases over $200 with coupon code DCRAIN40 for tech and non-tech purchases!
Alternatively, for everything else on the planet, simply buy your goods from Amazon via the link below and I get a tiny bit back as an Amazon Associate. No cost to you, easy as pie!
You can use the above link for any Amazon country and it (should) automatically redirect to your local Amazon site.
Want to compare the features of each product, down to the nitty-gritty? No problem, the product comparison data is constantly updated with new products and new features added to old products!
Wanna create comparison chart graphs just like I do for GPS, heart rate, power meters and more? No problem, here's the platform I use - you can too!
Think my written reviews are deep? You should check out my videos. I take things to a whole new level of interactive depth!
Smart Trainers Buyers Guide: Looking at a smart trainer this winter? I cover all the units to buy (and avoid) for indoor training. The good, the bad, and the ugly.
Check out
my weekly podcast - with DesFit, which is packed with both gadget and non-gadget goodness!
Get all your awesome DC Rainmaker gear here!
FAQ’s
I have built an extensive list of my most frequently asked questions. Below are the most popular.
You probably stumbled upon here looking for a review of a sports gadget. If you’re trying to decide which unit to buy – check out my in-depth reviews section. Some reviews are over 60 pages long when printed out, with hundreds of photos! I aim to leave no stone unturned.
I travel a fair bit, both for work and for fun. Here’s a bunch of random trip reports and daily trip-logs that I’ve put together and posted. I’ve sorted it all by world geography, in an attempt to make it easy to figure out where I’ve been.
The most common question I receive outside of the “what’s the best GPS watch for me” variant, are photography-esq based. So in efforts to combat the amount of emails I need to sort through on a daily basis, I’ve complied this “My Photography Gear” post for your curious minds! It’s a nice break from the day to day sports-tech talk, and I hope you get something out of it!
Many readers stumble into my website in search of information on the latest and greatest sports tech products. But at the end of the day, you might just be wondering “What does Ray use when not testing new products?”. So here is the most up to date list of products I like and fit the bill for me and my training needs best! DC Rainmaker 2023 swim, bike, run, and general gear list. But wait, are you a female and feel like these things might not apply to you? If that’s the case (but certainly not saying my choices aren’t good for women), and you just want to see a different gear junkies “picks”, check out The Girl’s Gear Guide too.
“The Edge 130 supports up to 8 data fields per page”. Alas. Since a few years I can read only 4 fields on my 810, anything more is to small, unless I am wearing my multifocals :(.
Any news on if the custom layouts are coming to the 820?
Hmm, good question – I’ll ask.
Any news back from Garmin?
Agree that Garmin should have figured out a wireless solution for loading Strava Routes onto the 130. ?
Yes yes yes! Finally! I’ve been wanting a smaller, more affordable device that still supports powermeters. Support for the lighting and radar is a plus, though I don’t know that I’ll ever actually use those.
I do miss the traditional side-by-side size comparisons, but bike radar had a picture with it next to the 520. Looks like about half the size. I have a couple mountain bikes for which the stem (my preferred mounting location) is very short, and fitting my garmin 810 is a squeeze. This one should fit well.
My 810 is getting long in the tooth, looks like I’ve found the replacement.
European link does not point to the Edge130.
My bad – all fixed. Here ya go! link to clevertraining.co.uk
If my Edge 500 ever stops working I might be tempted to get the 130. It ended up up in the washing machine last week and I thought it would be dead. However it is still going strong. Apart from the lack of Bluetooth it does everything I need. I don’t really need mapping and have my phone if I ever get lost.
Same. What did Garmin do right with the Edge 500? It seems to have reliability and life above and beyond all other models.
The 130 looks like the perfect replacement should anything ever happen to my Edge 500. I will miss NP and TSS as those are critical numbers for Powermeter users. (I like to see them on the fly vs after I’ve uploaded ride data)
Yeah… How the hell you go building a device that is probably like 5x more powerful, with wifi, BT and all.. And then leave out NP, 10s avg power? (didn’t see on video) and TSS, While still having an Edge 500 (a 10 year old device) which has supported it for a good 6 years now! Talk about market segmentation!
@rkantos I completely agree, I feel that Garmin was trying to force for the people who used those metrics to go for the 520/520+. I feel that taking out NP/TSS/10 Avg. Power kills any interest in this product for me. Honestly, it takes a big chunk of the powermeter’s utility away when you do this.
When I’m in doing a TT I typically have on my screen, 3s Power, 10s Power, 30s Power, Lap Power, Heart Rate and Cadence. Sometimes I’ll have HR on a separate screen so I can’t see how much I’m hurting. Anyways, without 10s Power and above it makes it really hard to keep your power trendlines on point, this it makes it much harder to adjust and fine tune the rider’s power output stick to their number.
When I’m doing a long training ride NP is a great metric, I think it’s honestly the best one, to train by and to ensure that the ride quality is where it needs to be or that it isn’t. Keeping track of your NP and average HR on a long ride can show at what point when you’re decoupling. Taking this away plus the TSS really data driven athletes who tracking their training and try to eliminate as many variables of uncertainty as possible when it comes to hitting training goals.
I use an Edge 500 currently and it doesn’t have a lot life left in it (one of the buttons is tearing), but when I do replace it it will likely be a 520+. All this being said, I think for the majority of cyclists this computer is a great option and it’s a good price point.
Probably because licensing NP, TSS is costly.
Sure, but what would be the cost of adding 10s/30s power? It would be the perfect sized computer for Mountainbiking but somehow my edge 500 still seems the better option.
Not having 10s power and NP really makes the Edge 130 almost useless for power. TSS and IF I can maybe live without as manually calculating these is easy. I assume Garmin has done this intentionally so as to not cannabilise the 520/820.
However are there Garmin IQ Data Fields for 10s power and NP that would provide a hack?
Training Peaks could absolutely make an NP/TSS/IF data field set (for any devices), it’d be trivial.
Of course, the metrics/calculations are largely well understood, so realistically someone else could make the same thing and just call it something else. For example – ‘Weighted power’, which is what Strava calls it. Other services call it other variants of the same thing.
I suspect if someone digs around the Connect IQ store these types of fields may already been created. Or, probably soon will be.
(To be clear, I totally agree that the lack of fields is silly. I do get it though – they’re trying to differentiate. The challenge is Garmin looks at the differentiation on a software level, whereas most consumers area actually looking at it from a hardware (size) standpoint. The Edge 130 isn’t seen as a successor to the Edge 500, rather, the Edge 510, then Edge 520 was. Ideally, Garmin would get to the point where you could just unlock features on whatever hardware sized you wanted…but I think that’s many years away still.)
Hi Ray – thanks for all you do!
I think you’re bang-on regarding the silliness of dropping certain function off the Edge 130. I want the form AND the function as I move on from my ever-trusty Edge 500. One of those features missing from the 130 is Vertical Speed (meters/hr) – it’s a great measure of climbing exertion on steeper grades. Like power in a way.
So I did some searching and found good reviews of “AppBuilder” on Garmin Connect IQ – basically you build and code your own data fields in the app. He has examples of BOTH NP Normalized Power and VS (or VAM to some like Strava) – says it’s compatible with Edge 130 units but I haven’t tried.
here’s the App:
link to apps.garmin.com
and there’s a good blog with instructions
Has anyone tried this for the 130?? Anyone?? Bueller? Anyone?
Nate, I think you want to check out AppBuilder – I haven’t used the app but I think all this can be done on the 130. It’s just simple math and this guy has figured it out.
link to apps.garmin.com
<>
Hello Ray, I created a normalized power data field for the Edge 130 so we can all be happy now! link to apps.garmin.com
Really hoping the Fenix 5 mirror display comes to the 520. Would solve my “having to use both devices to share metrics issue”
I’ve been making the case for it!
Any hope that Forerunner 645 can be paired too (like the Fenix 5 series or FR935)?
This is hell of a feature. If I am not mistaken, Edge 130 does not support firstbeat advanced training metrics (520 plus does not either) and also custom workouts. So, this feature should overcome these problems. Hopefully it will be able to relay functions like strava live segments directly from Fenix 5 (through mirroring) as well. Looking forward to hear more about that.
The FR645 isn’t currently on the list, which somewhat makes sense as it’s not a triathlete focused unit. But, I can at least propose it…
That would be nice, indeed.
So, my usual question – any idea if it actually supports dual-frequency Galileo? Guessing not, they’d be making a big deal of it if so.
Galileo’s 1-cm resolution band is pay-to-play, and the signal is encrypted to enforce that. There’s no way we’re going to see that on a 200USD/€200 device.
Some misunderstanding here, I think. I’m talking about the E1/E5 combination (which is an open service, but outperforms single-frequency GPS, largely due to improved multipath resistance), not the commercial E6 service. This kind of implementation.
It’s interesting that the chip Broadcom BCM47755 supports also dual frequency GPS (GPS L1 and GPS L5).
Unfortunately I read a japanese study where they told that dual frequency in sport usage is not always better than single frequency (they told that dual frequency took too much time to function better than single frequency, circa half an hour. Single frequency is much faster to find a good position, it takes just few minutes. This japanese study is two year old, so perhaps now things are different).
Yeah, there is a new signal installed on the newest GPS satellites which will perform similarly to the E5 Galileo signal. I don’t know how many of the constellation have that at the moment, it’s being rolled out as old satellites are retired and replaced, though I think that Galileo’s E5 will be reliable before that.
Do you have a link to that study, Mirko?
I can’t find the japanese study any more. But I think I was referring to this article
link to insidegnss.com
IG INSIDE GNSS “Single- versus Dual-Frequency Precise Point Positioning” of year 2012
The complete pdf article is here: link to insidegnss.com
I just found also this article of year 2003, that I can’t understand very well and I don’t know if is appropriate for sport watches, but it seems that dual frequency is not a clear winner over single frequency
link to fig.net Static and Dyn/I10.pdf
link to google.it
This japanese article compares one dual frequency with one single frequency commercial receiver. In the conclusion it says that there is some advantages for the dual frequency receiver, but it does not seem anything shocking. I don’t know the year of the article, maybe is an old article.
Regarding Galileo satellites, I asked, from Garmin: “To date, all Garmin products (fitness or otherwise) support single frequency satellites.”
Thanks, Ray!
Thanks for the links, Mirko – I’ll dig into them over the weekend.
Dual frequency is coming but won’t be in any of this year’s devices. Qualcomm (the chip in Samsung S9, but without the other things -antennas etc to use it dual frequency) and ublox (engineering samples this summer) have released dual frequency consumer grade (not surveying grade very expensive) chips, broadcomm and mediatek (who own Garmin) will probably follow soon (these 4 companies make 99.99%of the GPS chips in the world). But you might see it on phones this year or next, and in sports devices a year or two later. If this is really Garmin’s first Galileo capable device, which is something that has been in phones for 3+years take that as an indication of how long it will take them to put in dual frequency chips. You need different antennas and front ends so it’s not a simple component swap.
Believe it’s actually Broadcom, not Qualcomm, who were first to market there.
I agree with you that it’s unlikely to be this year (Mirko and I were discussing this earlier in the 645 hands-on), and about the challenges of dual-frequency antennae and receiver front ends.
Mediatek own Garmin? Since when?
Maybe Garmin waited a long time with Galileo satellites because the Galileo costellation was not fully operational -it seems that just now there is in the sky a good number of operational Galileo satellites- (so the delay maybe it is the fault of Galileo and not of Garmin).
Perhaps with dual frequency they are quicker. If not, it could be that there are construction problems (with dimension of components and power requirements), or that for sport watches the advantages are not so big.
I’m curious to see some review of dual frequency GPS phones, when they come out this year or next, and see the real accuracy improvement. Are you sure there is no phone with dual frequency now? Or maybe some consumer grade outdoor trekking device?
It could also be that there is no commercial advantage for the brands to sell consumer grade dual frequency device, due to the higher cost of the dual frequency components (chipset, processor, antenna, battery) that could limit the volume of units sold and so the profit for the brands.
MediaTek definitely doesn’t own Garmin (nor the other way around).
In one article link to gpsworld-com.cdn.ampproject.org
They say that in 2017 Europe decided to give the PPP for free without charge. With the right receiver this could give 10 cm accuracy. If I understand well, they say that with normal receiver accuracy from 5 meters will be 2.5 meters
The questions are two:
1- when will be produced the first sport watch with multiple frequencies?
2- when will be produced the first sport watch with PPP service? It is possible to have a PPP receiver in a sport watch or it is too expensive or the watch is too little to contain a PPP receiver?
In summary, I think that the article I cited above tells this about accuracy:
1- accuracy of a receiver with single frequency Galileo satellites in open field without tree is between 5 meter and 2,5 meter.
2- with dual frequency they say “In 2018, dual-frequency technology like this will provide an order of magnitude increase in the performance of mobile device location-based services (LBS), especially in urban environments”. So we can assume that also under tree and in urban canyons the accuracy of the receiver remains between 5 meter and 2,5 meter, because multipath errors are avoided due to multiple frequency.
3- with single frequency or double frequency PPP they say: “In 2017 the EC confirmed the decision to implement the commercial service using E6-B with both encrypted and open components so all users could benefit for all frequency bands. Now, with the decision to make the service available free of charge, all users of Galileo, with the right type of receiver, will be able to achieve position fixes with an accuracy around 10 cm from Galileo’s first-generation constellation by 2020/2021”. So with PPP accuracy should be around 10 cm. Someone knows if real time PPP technology can be used in sport, were the receiver is moving very fast, or real time PPP technology can be used just for stationary object?
In wikipedia they write that PPP “Historically precise positioning was associated with surveying and geodesy”. They also say “Precise positioning is also increasingly used in the fields of robotics and autonomous navigation”. If they are using it for autonomous car, perhaps it could be that in the future PPP (Precise Point Positioning) could be used also in sport or outdoor devices, that will have centimeter accuracy. But I believe that we won’t see it anytime soon 🙁
Historically, precise positioning has been done by locking to the phase of the carrier signal, and using the timing of that relative to bit transitions to calculate the pseudorange more precisely than the bit transitions alone allow. I think that’s what a lot of the papers you cited a few days back were talking about, and that’s partly why it took so long to get the stable position.
DOP isn’t actually in metres, if you’re reading the PDOP as 5 means 5 metres of imprecision; it’s a scaling factor for the theoretical accuracy of the system at best performance.The key thing there, as you say, is that the performance shouldn’t degrade anything like as quickly with poorer sky views (though geometrical issues from only having a narrow sky view in an urban canyon will remain).
I think the E6 signal is designed to be real-time like the others, but I have not read much about it; there are no chips out there using it yet, so not holding my breath on that one.
It’s totally random tangents like this that are the reason I love DCR Commenters.
Cars have lots of room for big antennas and a power bus that can handle good processors. Watches not so much. And the question still remains what would knowing your position to 10 cm rather than 2 m gain you when cycling or running or other outdoor sports? (Better pace for runners, maybe? But a simple cheap sensor more or less fixes that, doesn’t it?)
It seems that I completely didn’t understand what PDOP is 🙂
I didn’t know that things are so complex and I thought that PDOP was simply the accuracy in meters, but it’s not!
Maybe is better to evaluate the accuracy that the Garmin 130 can reach in the configuration GPS+GALILEO reading the value of accuaracy showed by the device (for example my old Garmin 610 gives me an estimation af the accuracy in menu -> system -> gps: it shows me the satellites and shows the accuracy : at the beginning it’s circa 30 meters, when the signals is good it ‘s 5 meters). Ray, con you please tell us wich accuracy shows the Garmin 130 in the system menu with the GPS+GALILEO configuration?
There is a beautiful article of “GalileoGNSS” posted on april 22, 2018
galileognss.eu/the-path-to-high-gnss-accuracy/#more-3073
link to galileognss.eu
where they say that we have now the technologies that make high precision GNSS attractive to the mass market.
“High precision GNSS systems dramatically improve precision using GNSS correction data to cancel out GNSS errors.”
“High precision GNSS isn’t new. Surveyors and other professionals have had access to the technology for decades. But high device cost and dependence on expensive correction services have prevented the technology from expanding out of this niche market. What is new is that we now have technologies that make high precision GNSS attractive to the mass market, enabling applications such as lane accurate navigation, augmented reality, aerial drone precision flights and landing, unmanned lawnmowers and tractors, and vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communication in which connected vehicles communicate wirelessly with other vehicles and infrastructure for collision avoidance. Many more applications will undoubtedly emerge as the technology takes hold.”
But I think that they are optimistic and that we won’t see PPP (high precision GNSS positioning) in sport watches for a long time 🙁 , so we won’t have centimeter accuracy in sport watches for at least 10 years. And in 10 years maybe I’m not running any more!!!
@ Paul, you are right, cars have lots of room and watches not, this is why I think that centimeter accuracy will be in watches not in the near future. For cars it seems that centimeter accuracy is already operational.
Yes, maybe if the accuracy is 2 meter would be sufficient also for instant pace, if this accuracy remains also under trees and in urban canyons always costant without multipath errors.
So maybe new watches with dual frequency will be enough to have a better GPS experience with sport watches, without the need of PPP (high precision GNSS positioning).
But I’m really hoping that with Galileo satellites and the new technologies that are coming there is some improvement in GPS accuracy, because I have a Garmin FR610 of year 2011 and a Garmin FR35 of year 2017, and it seems to me that GPS accuracy is the same.
All the other things improved (now the watches are water proof till 50 meters, the battery is better, the menu are better, materials are better). Why not they improve also GPS accuracy?
That said, I’m quite happy with the GPS accuracy that I have now with the FR610 and the FR35.
For instant pace I tried a Garmin footpod, but with me it never functioned well for instant pace (my FR610 let me the choice between pace from GPS or pace from footpod). Now I read that the Stryd footpod is very good, but it’s rather expensive and I don’t want to try again, because instant pace of the recent Garmin FR35 is ok for me.
This is an extract of the previous article.
They say something about accuracy.
“high precision GNSS – enabled using multiband receivers and SSR correction data – will reliably deliver a guaranteed position of the vehicle, regardless of the circumstance. Ultimately, it will have to be accurate to the decimeter level on open highways, and to the sub-meter level on more challenging urban highways”.
They say that with high precisione GNSS (PPP) (using multiple frequency and the correction service) the accuracy is 10 cm level in open field, and 1 meter in the urban canyon.
Even with multiple frequency it seems that in urban canyons accuracy is a lot worse than in an open field by a factor of 10.
It will be interesting to see what is the accuracy of dual frequency Galileo using multiple frequency, but without the service correction (PPP), in open field and in urban canyons.
My guess is 2 meter in open field and 10 meters in urban canyon.
Now without dual frequency should be a lot worse, my guess is 5 meter in open field and 20 meters in urban canyon.
Sorry, just speculation… Better that I stop here 🙂
Ray says “Just make cool shit.”
versus
Dom says “using the timing of that relative to bit transitions to calculate the pseudorange more precisely.”
I’m sure Dom is right but I understand “just make cool shit” much better.
My 130 should be here tomorrow!!!
Can you tell us what does the 130 says under the voice menu -> system -> GPS -> accuracy in meter
with the GPS+GALILEO configuration (after waiting 5 minutes in open field to find a good lock with the satellites)? Thanks
Now without dual frequency should be a lot worse, my guess is 5 meter in open field and 20 meters in urban canyon.
Sorry, just speculation… Better that I stop here 🙂
All we can do is informed speculation until one of these devices actually turns up on someone’s wrist! I’d say without dual frequency, if we’re lucky GPS+Galileo will slightly outperform GPS alone in canyons, and if we’re not it won’t (I stopped using GPS+GLONASS because it wasn’t helping). I should post about my thoughts on chip differences sometime.
I’m sure Dom is right but I understand “just make cool shit” much better.
LOL. For some reason my equation-heavy blog posts about the most economical way to calculate GPS distances by the Haversine formula just don’t get Ray’s readership 🙂
Hope you’ll report back about your 130’s performance!
Garmin at this link
www8.garmin.com/aboutGPS/waas.html
link to www8.garmin.com says that :
– accuracy of GPS is 15 meter
– accuracy of GPS + WAAS enabled (WAAS is a service correction) is 3 meter
Now GPS+WAAS is available only in outdoor devices, like the Garmin FORETREK.
Probably sport watches don’t have WAAS because it uses a lot of processor power and drains battery very quickly, and it’s possible to use it only in bigger devices with bigger battery.
The problem of WAAS is that for example in Europe there are only two satellites that communicate the corrections, so it could function well in open field but in urban canyon is quite impossibile to receive the signal of the two satellites.
If I understand correctly, the main advantage of the PPP signal in Galileo satellites (the B6 frequency) is that each satellite communicate the correction, so it’s impossibile to lose this correction also in urban canyon.
Unfortunately the PPP service will also needs a lot of power and it probably will drain battery, so it’s unlikely to see it in sport watches (like we don’t see WAAS in the Fenix5).
My Garmin FR35 understood that I’m controlling GPS accuracy and today it did the best track ever 🙂
Garmin says that accuracy of GPS without WAAS is 15 meters, but my FR610 showed 5 meters most of the time and 8 meters under tree and near building. Still and in open field it shows 3 meter accuracy.
Garmin have never been terribly clear about which devices support WAAS/EGNOS. The Fenix 3 has the logo on the packaging, the Fenix 5 doesn’t, but isn’t appreciably different in accuracy.
I don’t know much about the WAAS/EGNOS signals, other than that there’s a fast and slow component, and the fast component is supposed to be updated in real-time. Given the satellite locations and sky view limitations, a sensible engineering approach to the chip design would be to grab whatever data possible when the satellite is visible and use the last good data when it isn’t. Speculation on my part.
It could be that in the Fenix3 and Fenix5 there is this kind of implementation for using WAAS like you describe.
But I think that in the Fenix there is no WAAS, because in the Foretrex 601 you can choose in menu -> system -> if you want WAAS ON or WAAS OFF. I attach an image of the menu of the old Foretrex 401. In the Foretrex 601 manual, Garmin explains how to activate WAAS (menu – > system -> WAAS ON or WAAS OFF).
In the Fenix manual they never speak about WAAS and this option is not in the menu. I would expect in the Fenix a similar menu setup like in the Foretrex.
I think there is one of these possibilities:
1- there is WAAS in the Fenix and it operates behind the scene in the way that you describe (it would be very clever from Garmin)
2- the Fenix is ready for WAAS, but Garmin didn’t enable it. It could maybe possible just with a firmware update.
3- the chipset of Fenix is just not WAAS-capable
It would be interesting if some owner of the Foretrex describes how quickly the battery goes down with WAAS enabled.
If we know this, we could understand if it will be possible from a battery standpoint to have in the near future WAAS in the Fenix, and maybe Galileo PPP E6 service in 2020-2021 when it will be ready.
By the way, it seems that everyone’s advice is to not use WAAS, because the signal is too weak, except in open field, where the accuracy of the normal GPS without WAAS is already enough.
For example in this review they explain why is better to not use WAAS
h ttps://backpackinglight.com/garmin_foretrex_101_gps_review/
link to backpackinglight.com
“The Foretrex 101 is equipped with the capability to receive WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) satellite correction signals to increase positional accuracy. WAAS is not utilized when in the backcountry for the following reasons. First, WAAS decreases battery life for all GPS units when enabled. Second, since the WAAS system uses one of two geostationary satellites, reception can be difficult in all but open land and marine settings. Canyons and forested or mountainous areas frequented when hiking often do not receive strong WAAS signals. Third, increased positional accuracy achieved with WAAS does little to aid backcountry navigation where position accuracy is normally less than 15 meters without WAAS. Thus for most hiking activities, the WAAS mode is kept off.”
But the Galileo PPP E6 signal should be good also under trees and in urban canyons, so for us would be much more interesting.
Confused. I just found the manual of the Fenix 2 and it has the option to turn on WAAS.
In the Fenix 3 and Fenix 5 manual they don’t speak about WAAS any more.
Dom, probably in the Fenix 3 and in the Fenix 5 WAAS functions in the way you describe.
I hope that in the future it will be possibile to use also the E6 signal of Galileo for high precision positioning (PPP service). Maybe there are not so big battery problems.
In this german article link to kowoma.de they say that with WAAS in Garmin devices the battery lasts half the time (they say that you must use “normal mode” and not “low energy mode” in the settings). They repeat that WAAS was thinked for airplanes, so the satellites are very low on the horizon (in Munich 34°) and the reception near mountains and in woods is very bad. They show an image where they reach an accuracy of 2 meters.
I attach the image of the article cited above about the accuracy of the device Garmin Vista with WAAS enabled. The image shows the page of satellites with a differential correction with EGNOS (the european equivalent of WAAS). The letter D in the graphic of the satellites shows that for the signal of the corrispondent satellite correction data are received and utilized.
Empewu the 3 april 2014 made this comment in the DC Rainmaker Fenix2 in depth review (he thinks that WAAS doesn’t require a lot of extra power consumption). By the way, I read the other comments in the DC Rainmaker review and it seems (as we expected) that WAAS didn’t help for accuracy, most users didn’t see any difference with WAAS on or off. Some users reported that with WAAS on they had more problems.
The comment of Empewu:
“Enabling WAAS means enabling EGNOS. You can actually see when EGNOS kicks in. If you go to “GPS Tools” menu, and then “Satellite”, and scroll down you will see IDs of satellites from which watch is currently receiving signal. Anything up to 32 are regular GPS satellites, above that are WAAS and EGNOS (and also Indian and Chineese equivalent systems) satellites. For example in Europe my Fenix locks on Sattelite with ID 39, which is Inmarsat 4-F2. When switched on, EGNOS in theory improves horizontal accuracy from 10 m up to 3m. As for the power consumption – it increases as GPS chip performs extra signal decoding and position correction calculations. However this increase is small. I do not know what chip Garmin has used in fenix, but I would assume it should not be more than extra 1mA of current. Fenix has 500 mAh battery so you can do a math how the watch operating time will decrease with WAAS/EGNOS enabled.”
Hi Mirko, I found the Foretrex 101 manual here and what it say about the power-saving mode is that “When the Foretrex 101 is in Battery Save mode, the GPS receiver turns off and on alternately to save power”. So it’s like Ultratrac, basically, and it doesn’t really tell us anything about how WAAS affects battery life in normal GPS mode.
Good observation. The german article was referring to the Garmin eTrex Vista of year 2001 🙂
manual here link to tramsoft.ch,
and I see that “battery save mode” has the same meaning that in the Foretrex 101.
Oops, yeah, I was mixing up the German article with the Foretrex 101 review above, thanks.
Update of accuracy of the Galileo PPP E6 service, that Europe decided to give for free . Director of GSA said in novembre 2017 that accuracy in open field will be 20 cm with convergence time of 5 minutes (not 10 centimeter like I believed).
The service will maybe start in 2020-2021 when the satellite constellation will be complete, but perhaps 2019. In the article the director of GSA says “Right now, no one can say when the system will become available. Of course everybody prefers 2018, but we need to wait and see how this current discussion goes.”
The main reason Europe decided to announce to give an high accuracy service for free was that Europe wants to be the first to give a high accuracy PPP service for free (before China and Japan, that will probably give the same service for free in the future, China perhaps and Japan for sure).
Article here
h ttp://insidegnss.com/fundamental-rethink-for-galileo-commercial-service/
link to insidegnss.com
Extract of article:
Des Dorides said the GSA and the Commission see location and navigation technologies going in the direction of multi-system, multi-GNSS, which by itself will continue to provide better and better accuracy, ultimately limiting the draw of a fee-based high-accuracy system.
“So, the expected revenues are shrinking,” he said, “while on the other hand there is still the idea that Galileo can be the first mover to provide a high-accuracy service, but as a free service.”
“By high accuracy we mean around 20 centimeters,” des Dorides said, “not the 10 centimeters that you can find offered by various manufacturers in the market — these are different. We are talking about 20 centimeters with a convergence time on the order of five minutes, and you know that 10 centimeter accuracy I mentioned comes with a 15-minute convergence time, so it’s a different market.”
Thus, he said, an accuracy on the order of 20 centimeters, delivered for free, could represent a competitive advantage for Galileo vis-a-vis the other GNSS systems.
In the previous article they don’t specify that the Galileo high accuracy PPP B6 service reach 20 cm accuracy for a stationary object in open sky after waiting 20 minutes to reach a good convergence.
For moving object in challenging urban environment preliminary tests show that accuracy should be circa 2 meters (with errors up to 6 meters).
Article about the test of year 2015 here link to spcomnav.uab.es
View figure 12 in dense urban environment. For running or cycling would be still very good
link to insidegnss.com
It seems that ublox has the chip for high precision receiver, that they will use also for bike sharing.
Extract of article of 8 maj 2018: “u‑blox and Qianxun Spatial Intelligence Inc. are joining forces to deliver high precision positioning solutions to the Chinese market. By coordinating their product offerings, they seek to meet growing demand for increased positioning accuracy for mass market applications.”
I understand that ublox gives the high precision chip and that the other company gives the correction signal wireless. In this case they use a chip F9 that doesn’t use PPP (Precise Point Positioning, the technology that is used by the not still ready E6 signal of Galileo) but RTK (Real Time Kinemakic).
But ublox produces also PPP chipset , for example NEO-7P u-blox 7 PPP Precise Point Positioning
link to u-blox.com
I read the manual and it says “NEO-7 P supports operation as a D-GPS rover as an alternative to PPP and SBAS corrections (applicable to GPS operation only).”
So it seems that the ublox chips can work with all these technologies.
It seems that when the Galileo PPP E6 signal will be ready, the chipset for the mass market are ready, because probably the F9 chipset can work with PPP signal also and it will be ready for the PPP service of Galileo with some modification.
I think that now we have:
1- chip with dual frequency (the Broadcom)
2- chip that support PPP (ublox F9)
Which will be the first to appear in the cellular phones and wich will be better for phones and maybe sport watches?
The service of high accurate positioning will be available in China at the end of 2018. Probably the service of Qianxun is not free of charge.
link to u-blox.com
This is the exact link of chip ublox neo-7P for PPP high precise positioning GNSS
Correction: the chip u-blox F9 is both multi frequency (E1-E2-E5) and PPP high precision capable.
It’ also multiconstellation (GPS, GLONASS, GALILEO, BEIDOU).
The indicative power requirements of the other single frequency PPP chip, the Neo7- P are 22 mA 3V in Icc Tracking (continuous mode/PPP).
I can’t find technical specification of the new u-blox F9 chip.
It seems that these kind of chips could fit well in a Fenix 🙂
Ublox F9 chip power consumption: 68 mA @ 3V (continuous)
🙁 a bit too much for Fenix I think
Yup, that’s 204mW compared to 37mW acquisition and 27mW tracking for the MT3333 in the Fenix 3 (and probably the Fenix 5 too, don’t recall). It’s quite big, too, at 17×22 mm compared with 4.3×4.3 for the MT3333. I can’t find out how big the BCM47758 is, but it’s described as small and as a 77-ball WLBGA package, where the 3333 is 57 balls 0.5mm pitch. So, certainly a bit bigger than that, depending on the pitch.
link to mwrf.com
The hope to install a dual frequency GNSS chip in the Fenix remains the chip Broadcom BCM47755. I can’t find the power consumption of the Broadcom BCM47755, but the link above says that the chip is based on the 28 nanometers technology and it needs half the power of the previous generation chip. Extract of article : “current consumption can be less than 5mA during GNSS tracking”. I assume they are talking about 5mA and 3V, so circa 15 mW.
Maybe ublox still uses a 45 nanometer process technology. In ublox power consumption with multiple frequencies increases a lot from the chip 7 (single constellation and single frequence) and 8 (multiple constellation and single frequence) to the chip 9 (multiconstellation and multiple frequencies). It’s a pity, because I saw a webinar of ublox where they show that with the chip 9 they are a lot quicker to find again a good signal and a good precision, in comparison to the chip 8, driving with a car after a tunnel or after a problem that interrupted a good reception. I hope that they will produce it in a smaller form factor and less power hungry.
In his web page u-blox makes a distinction between standard precision GNSS module (where we can find a small form factor, ad example size of 5x5x1 mm for the the ZOE-M8) and high precision GNSS module (accuracy < 1 meter with correction service), where also the NEO-7P, that is mono constellation and single frequency, is quite big (size 12,2x16x2,4 mm).
I read this whitepaper (the challenge of low power and good GNSS performance) of u-box about the difficulties to put a GNSS receiver in a sport watch: now I am a bit discouraged that the designers will be successful to deliver a better gps performance in a sport watch. In their test they found that gps 2D-accuracy (95% confidence) in urban environment is 25 meter, in suburban environment 15 meter with a standard accuracy gps receiver while running.
Maybe a good solution could be to produce a separate gps sensor. Optical heart rate was another thing that didn’t function so well for many people in a wrist watch, and a good solution was a separate sensor in the upper arm.
The solution that u-blox suggest is a low-energy mode that they call “Super-E mode”, where they have less power consumption but worse performance. Unfortunately the Galileo signal must work with full energy mode , and I think that manufacturers should forget power-save mode and they should try to deliver better gps performance.
This is an extract of the whitepaper:
“When it comes to portable applications such as smart wearable platforms (e.g. watches or trackers), manufacturers have struggled to find the best balance of size and performance resulting in a lower-than-expected adoption rate that has disappointed many traders.
Much of the challenge has been around the GNSS antenna, which has to be very small to fit inside a wearable product. The extreme size-related constraints on antenna design inevitably involve performance compromises. Compromised antenna designs result in weak signals and the antenna placement (e.g. on wrist) can generate very high dynamics for the receiver even with moderate movement from the user. As a result, GNSS receivers are hard pressed to decode signals and provide accurate positions. As well, a short battery life due to small batteries has always been one obstacle, if not the primary obstacle, for wearable GNSS applications. The paradox of performance and low power has consistently limited GNSS adoption in this market. Customers want GNSS positioning implemented in small and battery powered devices, yet with accurate performance. The challenge is to use hard performance requirements in parallel with reduced power spending to enable new market opportunities. To this end, Swiss-based u-blox has developed the new super-efficient Super-E mode running on its new UBX-M8230-CT GNSS chip and ZOE-M8B System in Package (SiP) solution, a next
generation answer to the power versus performance challenge in the wearable market.”
Garmin produces GPS sensor like the GLO link to buy.garmin.com
This sensor is gps+glonass and I think that can be used just with phones (not with watches).
Maybe in the future Garmin will produce a centimeter accurate GPS sensor with Galileo that can be used also with watches. 🙂
In year 2011 Polar produced this GPS sensor to be used with polar watches. Maybe the easiest way is to go back in the past, and to produce a gps sensor with Galileo. It should be a little smaller and it should be compatible not only with Polar products, but with all brands. I know it would be a little unconfortable to have another sensor in the arm, but we could use it only when we need extra accuracy, for example in races or in intervals workout or in trail running.
We would have another sensor to attacch, but we could use smaller watches with longer battery life (because the battery of the watch wouldn’t have to feed the gps sensor) and better gps accuracy (because the gps sensor could have a bigger battery, a bigger antenna and a more powerful gps chipset with multiple frequency and maybe with the centimeter accuracy of the E6 Galileo service correction)
Another article about accuracy of SF-PPP with the chip ublox NEO-7P (single frequency precise point positioning). In urban environment results are not very good, they don’t reach sub-meter accuracy, in urban environment accuracy is circa 3 meter even with the PPP correction service. They conclude that to improve accuracy is better to go with dual frequency. Maybe Galileo dual frequency is better than PPP-single frequency.
Extract of the article:
“Autonomous vehicles require accurate position at all times in different environments at an affordable price. This accurate position can only be achieved when combining multiple positioning methods. One of these methods is presented in this paper: positioning based on a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) to obtain absolute position. This solution should be at an affordable price with sub-meter position accuracy. At the University of Delft, the Netherlands, a low cost solution was developed in Matlab for open areas which is called Single Frequency Precise Point Positioning (SF-PPP). It uses a low cost receiver with single frequency, single antenna and single GNSS constellation (GPS). The receiver provides raw measurements to the SF-PPP algorithm which corrects them for different kind of errors. This method was ported to a low cost Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) embedded platform in C++. The selected platform is a Raspberry Pi version 2 with a u-Blox NEO 7P GPS receiver. The corrections for the raw measurements are received from a network service via a 4G modem. The PPP method is validated with an RTK system which is cm accurate. We evaluated the PPP method in different environments and conditions, with focus on open area, but also for harsh conditions on the highway and in an urban environment to know the current limitations of the method. For the open area environment a horizontal root mean square error (RMSe) of 0.5 m on position coordinates was achieved which fulfills our target of submeter accuracy. In harsh environments we suffer from reflections (caused by multipath receptions) and poor satellite availability due to obstructions from trees and buildings which makes the accuracy varying from 0.5 m up to 3 m. Future plans to improve the results involve using more satellites from other constellations like GLONASS, using the Doppler shift to estimate the vehicle speed, using dual frequency receiver for ionosphere removal and closer integration with other low-cost sensors and vehicle model.”
link to gsa.europa.eu
First smartphone with the dual frequency chipset Broadcom 47755
News on highly accurate GNSS with the technique PPP (Precise Point Positioning).
With new satellites and multiple frequency convergence time is no more 10-20 minutes, but it can be istantaneous. A big role in accuracy could be the use of the now free E6 Galileo frequency.
Article of July 4, 2018 – By Denis Laurichesse and Simon Banville here: link to gpsworld.com
Extract of article:
“The technique of precise point positioning (PPP) is making inroads in the positioning industry. However, one issue hampering its more widespread adoption is the convergence time required for the carrier-phase ambiguities to be fully resolved so that the 10-centimeter-accuracy threshold can be surpassed. By using a multi-system, multi-carrier-frequency approach, instantaneous centimeter-level PPP can be achieved.”
link to eprints.nottingham.ac.uk
interesting article about PPP in urban environment. Extracts:
“The poor signal visibility and continuity associated with urban environments together with the slow convergence/re-convergence time of Precise Point Positioning (PPP), usually makes PPP unsuitable for land navigation in cities. However, results based on simulated open areas demonstrated that, once Galileo reaches final operational
capability, PPP convergence time will be cut in a half using dual-constellation GPS/Galileo observations. Therefore, it might be possible to extend the
applicability of PPP to land navigation in certain urban areas. Preliminary results,
based on simulations, showed that GPS/Galileo PPP is possible where buildings are relatively short and satellites minimum visibility requirement is met for most of
the time. In urban environments, signal discontinuity and re-convergence still represent the major problem for traditional PPP, which is based on the ionosphere-free combination of two-frequency pseudo-range and carrier phase.”
“From this preliminary study, it seems clear that high
accuracy positioning in urban environments is possible, but
only in some areas. Traditional European cities with narrow
streets and six or more story buildings packed together aren’t
good candidates for PPP. PPP can in theory be performed in
those urban areas where buildings are relatively short that
provides good signal availability and geometry. However, it is
well known that an additional obstacle of urban environments
for PPP is signal discontinuity. Indeed, in case the GNSS
receiver loses track of the carrier phase, the positioning filter
needs to be reinitialized, meaning that further tens of minutes
are required before re-convergence”
It depends what you call precise.
First of all that is one reason to have 2 navigation setting run in parallel. So you have more “visible” satellites. Furthermore navigation in cities will not need that level of precision. Coutryside this would mean an issue, there you will have not big building, but maybe deep forest.
I did a run years ago London Canary Wharf and even there and with this old device to the track was ok. The issue was noticable, but not really an issue.
Finally this is well know and to me has nothing specifically to the 130.
Mirko (and Dom), the FCC just announced approval of consumer and industry use in the United States “will now be permitted to access the E1 and E5 Galileo signals to augment GPS.”
link to gpsworld.com
But later in the same press release the FCC specially excludes the E6 band:
“The order does not grant access to the Galileo E6 signal, which is transmitted over the 1260-1300 MHz frequency band, since this band is not allocated for RNSS in the United States or used by the U.S. GPS to provide PNT [positioning, navigation, and timing] service.”
What impact would that have on the discussion of higher resolution positioning (above)?
Hi John, just speculations on my side.
Sean Barbeau, the author of this article “Why Galileo is not seen in United States”
link to galileognss.eu
is wondering if the limitation of receiveng Galileo satellites in the USA was for all smartphones before the FCC rule of 15 November 2018.
In the article that you shared gpsworld writes: “While private users were free to use the European GNSS, with this ruling entities such as telecommunications companies can now also use Galileo.”
So maybe in the USA smartphones and smartwatch could use Galileo satellites also before 15 November because the users were private and not “entities such as telecommunications companies”.
Your question: the FCC doesn’t grant access to the Galileo E6signal. This signal should give “PPP (Precise Point Positioning) transmission free provision : broadcast correction in real time across the globe.” This rule is only for USA, so for the rest of the world it has no impact.
As far as I know, the free PPP service with Galileo (using the frequency E6B) is still not operational. So I would say that now it has zero impact also for USA.
When will be ready the Galileo free PPP using the E6B frequency?
link to slideshare.net
I found this slide of 5 giugno 2018 where they write that this is a NEW service and it will have a gradual implementation 2018-2020.
In the near future how it will impact devices in the USA?
– this will not impact smartwatches because they can’t use PPP techology, because it uses too much power and watches have battery limitations. The cost of a PPP chipset is also a lot bigger of a chipset with standard accuracy. I think that no brand will produce a PPP smartwatch in the near future. Maybe Polar or Garmin could produce an external Gnss sensor with PPP accuracy? They could, but probably they are more interested in selling watches than gnss sensors (Polar used gps sensor in the past, but no more. So probably it’s not good from a commercial point of view).
– maybe smartphone will have PPP technology? Probably. Some applications for smartphones can now give high accuracy with the newer version of Android using not the Galileo E6 signal but internet services. So it would be enough to produce a chipset that could receive this new frequency. Maybe in the USA smartphones could use the Galileo E6 frequency becayse smartphones are held by private users?
– other applications: bike sharing, farming, survey. Galileo with his free PPP service with the E6 frequency wants to give high accuracy at decimeter level.
So applications where centimeter accuracy is requested are out of discussion.
But where decimeter accuracy is enough, companies who gain their living giving their services for a fee (RTK or PPP with internet wi-fi transmission or radio transmission) will suffer the competition of the free (without fee) Galileo service.
It is possible that in the future Europe and the FCC will find an agreement for this new frequency, so in the future also in United States of America they could use the Galileo free PPP service.
Or maybe for political or economic reasons United States will say that the E6 frequency is not allowed (but again: private users could benefit of this frequency? Maybe yes, because gpsworld says that FCC rules are not for private users but just for companies).
Or maybe Europe will change his mind and it will give the service for a fee.
When will we see this new E6B signal? Maybe in 2019, maybe in 2020.
When will we see new devices that could use this PPP service?
In sport we will have to wait a long, long time (the5krunner just says in short: “buy a STRYD if you want accurate instant pace”. This will be always be true, because PPP doesn’t function near building and other obstacles, where PPP receiver function in the same way of receiver of standard accuracy. But it would be nice for intervals on a track where are no buildings!).
In other applications (survey, farming etc) I don’t know, and I’m not interested. Probably also Galileo is waiting to see which new application could use his free PPP service.
If you have to pay 1000 € in a year for a subscription fee for a PPP service, this will remain a niche product. If it’s free, it will be interesting for everyone (the European agency GSA says “high accuracy for the masses”).
link to insidegnss.com
GPSmap 66s can give high accuracy with post processing: extract from article
“Professionals and serious GPS enthusiasts will appreciate the inclusion of RINEX data logging, which allows for sub meter accuracy of GPS position after post processing.”
A step forward toward high accuracy in real time with Garmin devices?
But later in the same press release the FCC specially excludes the E6 band:
“The order does not grant access to the Galileo E6 signal, which is transmitted over the 1260-1300 MHz frequency band, since this band is not allocated for RNSS in the United States or used by the U.S. GPS to provide PNT [positioning, navigation, and timing] service.”
What impact would that have on the discussion of higher resolution positioning (above)?
Interesting. Particularly the sentence While private users were free to use the European GNSS, with this ruling entities such as telecommunications companies can now also use Galileo in the link. As far as precision goes, E1+E5 can give you better accuracy than the standard single-frequency GPS we’re currently using (as above, a lot of this is better multipath resistance, so the performance in urban canyons doesn’t degrade as fast), where E6 would give you accuracy to ~10cm with good sky view. The “private users” bit suggests there’s nothing stopping Garmin or Suunto selling devices that use E6, since they are aimed at end users for personal use – after all, Garmin have been selling units that use E1 for many months now, and the FCC haven’t said anything about that. Implementing that would still depend on the availability of small, low power chips suitable for a watch, plus antenna designs suitable for the required frequencies.
Who is right?
Sean Barbeau, the developer of the app GPStest, tells that before 15 November 2018 smartphone could receive Galileo satellites outside United States but not in United States (see link above).
GpsWorld says that smartphones of private users could use Galileo satellites also before 15 November 2018.
If GPSworld is wrong, probably in United States devices receiving gnss signals will be inhibited to receive the frequency E6, when this third frequency will be available.
I think that we can’t be sure that the devices that Garmin has sold before 15 November could receive the E1 frequency of Galileo satellites, because I think that in the new units Garmin doesn’t show any more which satellites are used to find a position fix.
In my old Garmin FR610, under menu -> system -> gps was possibile to see which satellites were in view and the strenght of the signal, but in the fenix and in the other devices there is this option any more, I think (I don’t have a fenix). Maybe in the firmware Garmin put an option to not permit the reception of Galileo satellites in United States.
It would be nice if Garmin would allow again to show the numbers of satellites in view, which satellites are used to obtain the fix and the DOP value (the firmware should know this second after second). With these data we could develop an app in CIQ field that shows number of satellites and DOP value and report it in a graph in GarminConnect with the other metrics of the run. Looking at the DOP value, we can understand in which point GPS had trouble.
Sean Barbeau in the comments of his forum says: ” I believe the only smartphones/watches that have shown Galileo satellites in the past are international variants that don’t have the filtering enabled as they weren’t intended to be distributed in the U.S. The issue with mobile devices is that device location computed with GNSS is used for a lot of different services, including telecommunication system operation (and E911), app location, Google Play Services, etc., so it’s not just the end user benefiting from the calculated GNSS position.”
See link to medium.com
In the comments of the same link above in the Sean Barbeau forum an user writes on 6th December 2018:
“I just purchased a brand new Samsung G8 (U.S. variant, unlocked) from BestBuy, ran GPSTest, and no Galileo satellites are shown. Glonass satellites are, of course, visible. So as of Dec. 5, 2018, Galileo is not visible. The G8 definitely has the hardware required to see Galileo (according to Qualcomm and its Snapdragon 835 processor), and the device is listed on the UseGalileo.EU list from the GSA. So, we are still waiting. Pretty pathetic” situation.
GPS Alliance Asks FCC to Reconsider Denial of Galileo E6 Signal
Article of insidegnss
link to insidegnss.com
Tweet of Sean Barbeau of 6th January 2019
“@SamsungMobileUS has rolled out two firmware updates in the last month for the U.S. @Sprint variant of the Galaxy S8+, and each time I hope to see #Galileo satellites on U.S. soil. But, no luck yet following today’s update…”
Hey,
Does it still have the terrible shreek beep sound? Nothing quite spoils a nice lonely mountain road more than a Garmin beep
Yes, still the same terrible sounds of the historical Garmins.
do you know if you can pair multiple speed/cadence sensors to the 130 w/o having to re-pair?
The Edge 25, you could only have 1 paired at a time so that meant that you had to either take off the sensors or re-pair to bike 2.
I’ve paired multiple power meters, so it looks like it follows the newer device model versus the older one where it was single-pairing focused.
Do you by chance know if it is compatible with the Vector 2s? When looking at their page it only shows the Vector 3.
Yes, compatible. Same restrictions as Vector 3 though: No cycling dynamics, no power balance. Just total power and the handful of data fields for power.
Any chance you think that eventually, the unit will at least record the cycling dynamics and power balance? I just got one Edge 130 last week. I really like it so far but I will not keep it if those data fields are not accessible…
Thanks a lot!
What it will record and what you are able to show by datafields may defer.
You have to options:
– Connect it and check the date with your favorite sports software.
– Check for a CIQ datafield for the 130 that may show that field.
Primarily what has been determined so far is, the 130 has almost every field internally available. But ther is no guarantee it could be used by a datafield and/or imported.
You may like to ask you question in the Edge 130 Garmin Support forum.
“You may like to ask you question in the Edge 130 Garmin Support forum.”
I just had a chat with them. This is the reply I got when I asked if there was any chance they would include cycling dynamics information and power balance in future software/firmware upgrades:
“I would say that there would be a very slim chance that any features outside of just ‘Power’ would be added in the future.”
That was my guess. BUT
1. As option there are CIQ datafields, that my contain what you need live.
2. I do not understand why you simple could not check yourself the imported date contains that stuff recorded.
1 – Great idea. Now looking into this.
2 – I am not sure what you mean?
Update… Power balance and Cycling dynamics are just not recorded and CIQ apps are not available.
2 – You have stated you got one. So why not test yourself what has been recorded? If you are keen on specific data my assumption was you have some favourite software you use and this will the data or not.
My apologies for not understanding at first. Yes, this is what I did, and those parameters are not available. Too bad, otherwise the 130 would be the perfect unit.
Thank you again!
Have look at the Lezyne Mega C maybe.
I am disappointed by the 130 and Garmin again.
The Wahoo Bolt for me is not an alternative as the Display is to bad. But maybe something for you. The sport functions should feed your needs.
Thanks Ray. Plus 1 on the ability to extend the screen to the old E520 from a FR935.
hey ray. great review. can you update vector 3 firmware with 130?
No, you cannot. It would be via phone.
Update: Garmin has tweaked and said the Edge 130 will support Vector 3 updates.
Is it worth changing almost new Edge 500 to Edge 130? Edge is used as display device during triathlon, main device is Fenix 3.
based on my experience of both devices, the answer is NO. Edge 130 has been a disappointing “upgrade” for me. Breadcrumb screen doesn’t scroll when following a course, elevation data is garbage (and i dont think you can set elevation points, like the 500), battery life is garbage (WAY worse than 500).
Ray, Any chance that the Extended Display feature will come to FR920XT? Thanks!
It doesn’t sound like it. Basically, it takes new firmware on the device, and I think by and large the firmware updates for new features have ceased for the FR920XT.
I assumed that would be the case, but wanted to be told to go out and get a FR935. 😮
I had the this exact question about my trusty 920. Is there a technical reason that the 920xt couldn’t support screen mirroring, or is it that Garmin’s just lost interest in it and is trying to push us to buy a new device?
What about the Fenix 3? And do you think FE-C control is something that can be added in an update?
No, I wouldn’t expect that to occur. That said, I vaguely remember someone publishing an FE-C app, but I’m not sure if it’s still around. I know Kinomap had talked about it, but also not sure if it ever came true.
Since the E130 only supports GCIQ data fields, a firmware update to support full GCIQ apps would be needed along with an FE-C app. Suspect that is even less likely than just having an intern try to port the E520 FE-C code over to the E130.
I think you missed something here:
Note that if you have a Garmin Vector power meter, it does NOT recording the Cycling Dynamics information. Nor oddly, power balance. I say this because the Lezyne budge units as well a the Polar M460 all track power balance just fine.
I think you mean “does not record the Cycling Dynamic” and a bit further “Lezyne budget units”
Keep up the great work
And one more thing….let’s see what Wahoo does in response. 🙂
I’m sure Wahoo will do something, but they don’t have the mapping engine (or experience, or data for that matter) that Garmin has. Nor do they have anything like ConnectIQ. They certainly can press Garmin on usability, reliability and some unique features (maybe even price), but they will probably lose in terms of navigation and advanced feature sets.
This isn’t a complaint just on this product but the thing I really like about Wahoo’s units is being able to do all the settings on the phone and have them port over. It makes setting data fields so much easier.
Question on the mirroring: Let’s say I have a 935 and want to mirror, can I only display 4 fields since that’s all the 935 lets me do? Or can I somehow do 8 since the unit allows 8?
I really don’t get why you would support power meters and not structured workouts.
I’m surprised there wasn’t more comparison to the Lezyne Super GPS? A couple of nice features with the watch display mirroring and real time Strava segment racing, but beyond that I think the Lezyne may give you more for your money.
Simple: I realized I didn’t have the entry in the database and plan to put it in shortly here. Been on my forever list.
I’ll also be doing a bit more of a detailed comparison of sub-$200 units in the near term, but given this week is Sea Otter…one never quite knows what might show up shortly.
I do agree that both Lezyne and Polar give you more features (structured workouts, better data collection) for the price, though I think Garmin is probably a cleaner implementation across their ecosystem. I suppose just a case of what one values.
BTW, I’m not currently seeing the Edge 520 Plus in the product comparison calculator?
Do you plan looking on Sigma ROX 11 in this occasion?
Do you also plan to include some of the Bryton product range in this comparison?
RE: Bryton – Not at the moment, mostly because every time I post about Bryton, I’ve found nobody really cares (comments/views/etc…) :-/
RE: Sigma – I do plan to include them…
That’s strange feedback from the community, given their direct aim at lowering prices. They are pushing it way harder than the big names. But is it the problem? They are not a sufficiently recognised name yet?
Well, specifically lack of feedback is really more the issue.
I suspect it’s partially distribution. They aren’t well known because they aren’t in places people can see and buy them, especially in North America. They are in Amazon now, which is an improvement over the past, but finding them in retail bike shops is tougher.
Wow, I might finally trade in my Edge 500 (which has been relegated to a backup, and racing).
Could someone (Ray?) explain what Galileo GPS is and how it differs from other options?
It cant be switched of by all hailed Trump because it is an European equivalent to GPS.
It’s the EU’s global positioning satellite constellation, which is close to complete now. The really exciting thing about it is that it has a secondary signal which is similar in precision to the GPS military band, much more resistant to multipath errors than current civilian GPS/GLONASS. There are dual-frequency chips reaching the market now which will support this, and it could give a huge leap in accuracy for small devices like watches. But – only for devices which have both a chip and an antenna supporting the two frequency bands required. My guess is that this unit has only single-frequency, so the GPS/Galileo setting would be similar in accuracy to the GPS/GLONASS combination – can help sometimes just because your device can see more satellites and fix position more accurately, but not a lot of help when multipath is the problem, or a narrow sky view in an urban canyon. But that’s just informed speculation, based on how recently the dual-frequency chips were announced and that Garmin would probably make a big deal of announcing a dual-frequency unit.
Is the absense of custom workouts not a big issue? How do you go about if you want to do intervals training?
If I can pair it to my Fenix, I’ll run the workout on my fenix and mirror the screen on the 130… seems doable?
Hi Ray, any idea if the extended display will be available for the 735XT watch? If so this will be a no-brainer for me!
+1 for Fenix 3hr.
+1 for extended display on the 735XT, I would upgrade from my Edge 500 if that was available.
Functional temperature range? Fat Bikers need this info. -10c doesn’t cut it.
Honestly -10C is about the same for every device out there.
Garmin 1030, 520, 820 etc are all rated down to -20c. I just checked the manual for the 130 on Garmin’s website. The 130 has a operating temperature range of -20c to 60c. That makes it Fat Biker worthy. Maybe you can add operating temperature to your info. There are a lot of us Fat Bikers out there. But especially since you call in a In-Depth review.
Interesting, was pretty sure off-hand they were all -10*c, guess not. I’ll ask if that’s just a typo, or if not why. Though it’s actually the first time anyone has ever asked.
What about a comparison between this and an Edge 25? Or will the replace it? Because in functionality they are very close!
@Koen, you can run your own comparison between the 130 and 25: link to dcrainmaker.com
The 130 has a ton of features the 25 doesn’t: doubled battery life, Strava segments, 1-second recording, Bluetooth sensor support, power meter support, live weather (via GCM), thermometer, barometric altimeter, Galileo positioning, longer support lifecycle, etc. I don’t understand why anyone would spring for the 25 to save the few dineros difference in price.
Really interested in how the mirroring from the 935 works. As far as I know (please correct me if I’m wrong!) Garmin doesn’t track “Training Status” (TSS) across multiple devices so being able to make use of the larger bike computer screen while still keeping everything recorded and all my stats on my 935 looks really appealing.
Of course it would be nice if they just implemented multi device Training Status tracking into Garmin Connect, especially for if/when your device dies.
Sounds like an awesome Edge 500 replacement. Ben Delany over at Bike Radar raves about the screen.
Are the Cycling Dynamics and L/R simply not available for display, or is this data actually filtered out of the ANT+ data stream so it’s not even there for post-ride analysis?
Also, just to verify, no Shimano Di2 data fields available?
No Di2 support, which means no support for the hidden buttons on the tops of the hoods ☹️, but it does support the Edge remote (which comes in the MTB bundle) which does have data page scrolling.
This would have been a great little device for the TT bike whereby you only wanted to view some key data with one of them being IF.
Amazed they could not include this!!!
Thanks for another great review of what seems to be great device (at least for my needs), although I also miss section with side to side comparison, weight, what’s in the box… Will it come, when you’ll be back home from Sea Otter.
Additionaly I have a couple of questions:
1a)Do I get this correct that you can’t upload Strava Routes to 130 via mobile app, but can upload recorded activities from 130 to Garmin Connect/Strava via mobile app (through Bluetooth)?
1b)WiFi is not suported for activity upload, right?
2)What exactly comes in sensors type bundle? I’m confused, because on CleverTraining(.com and. co.uk) says speed/cadence sensor, but you also mention something about heart rate strap. The confusing thing is price, if there is no heart rate strap. Given that base is 200$(195€) and bundle is 250$(252€), while Garmin speed and cadence sensor are sold separately for 40$(€). Can you clear this up, because it doesn’t make sense to me.
3)Is it just me or it looks really funny when such a small device like 130 is mounted on out-front mount (or is that extended version for Edge 1000/1030 you were using). Probably that’s why it come just with standart mount.
How do you find it, is it better when is mounted directly on top of stem/handelbars?
P.s.: Sorry for long post.
0) Yeah, the unboxing will come. I just got the final boxed versions last night and simply ran out of time to shoot them in the light. I’ll be up by tomorrow morning Kansas time. They had previously just sent over the final production unit, sans-box.
1) Correct. And correct, no WiFi.
2) It’s confusing indeed, because there’s two bundles. In the US it’s the Cadence/Speed sensor bundle, whereas in Europe it’s a HR strap bundle. I’ve been meaning to ask why that is, will find someone tonight. But that’s the SKU’s that’s been dealt.
3) It does look funny, but it was an extended mount. There are smaller mounts that’d look more pretty. I had already swapped the mount twice that day for some other stuff, and honestly didn’t want to dig through moving boxes to figure out where I put some smaller mounts. It looks good on the stem, though super small. I think there’s some pics above and in the video showing it that way.
Wow, that was a fast response. Thanks.
For 2) besides two different bundles, the price is more confusing for me. Wouldn’t be logical that bundle cost less, oppose to if you buy unit and sensors separately. 250$ vs 200$+40$.
As said, clear response from Garmin will be welcomed.
Ups, just found my mistake. Sensors (speed/cadence) are 40$ each or in bundle 70$ and in the end is indeed cheaper if you buy it with Edge.
So you can ignore previous comment, but anyway who knows why two different bundles.
You can beat the features for this price. It’s the fundamental basics. I don’t use most of the features on my 820. If I had this as an option I would have bought this.
One thing that is not clear is whether you can sync it with your phone over BLE?
David
Yup, totally sync via BLE over smartphone. The only thing that won’t sync that way is Strava Routes from Strava to the device. But your normal uploads from the device to Garmin Connect work just fine via BLE.
Hi Ray,
Having trouble connecting BLE and BLuetooth Smart sensors. They connect/pair fine but no data is displayed. Garmin support says:
“If the data from a BLE sensor is not recording correctly during your activity we recommend to un-pair or remove the sensor and re-pair it as an ANT+ sensor. ANT+ is the preferred way of getting data from sensors, as ANT+ is more mature and more complete than Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE).”
But when I try and pair them via ANT+ they don’t show up after scanning for devices.
Any suggestions?
(Topeak Panobike & Scosche speed & Cadence sensors)
Thanks Warren
Eeks.
So, my only concern there is that Topeak actually has a bit of a history in some of their older products of not properly supporting the Bluetooth Smart standard correctly. I haven’t used one in a few years, but I’m wondering if that’s perhaps part of the issue (and maybe also the issue on ANT+).
I don’t want to say that they don’t follow the standards now, as I don’t have one to validate, but I’m wondering if you’re running up against something like that from before?
That’s honestly the first time I’ve heard of issues with pairing here.
Thanks Ray,
it is an older Panobike spd/cad sensor so maybe that is the issue.
paired wonderfully (and so did my several cheap Scosche spd/cad sensors) with my Polar M450, but thats now for the ‘Oops something went wrong please reset’ screen and just doesn’t comeback to live, plus Polar didn’t want to help with a firmware reflash due to its age (4yrs old).
Yeah, that’s probably it.
In fact, somewhat compounding issues is that back in the day (right around 4 years ago), Polar actually did a ton of work to ‘fix’ everyone else’s issues with their product. It was right around when Polar was taking a lot of heat for their BT-only approach, and Bluetooth was just having never ending compatibility issues in sport sensors for everything but HR straps.
So Polar embarked on a ‘Fine, we’ll just make everyone else’s broken non-complying stuff work on our platform’. Mostly, because they had to.
Varia Vision?
No, not supported.
Another Garmin product that isn’t Varia Vision linked. Grrr. Wife likes her HUD. Guess it’s the 520 / 820 or 530 / 830 in due course.
I was so excited when I first read about this product, but IMO Garmin hasn’t got the feature set right.
All they needed to do here was modernise the Edge 500. That means adding GLONASS, livetrack, BLE and call/txt notifications. Things like TSS/NP and Power Balance (and power zone) should be a given in 2018! As should being able to send workouts to follow on the device.
They should have pulled mapping and Strava out completely and made this a “numbers” unit, with te 520 plus (or 530) the colour unit with mapping, strava and full app support.
Garmin has dropped their bundle!
Right there with you Robert. I want a bike computer with all the power metrics and live track to the size of the 500 or smaller. I am too slow to worry about Strava segments.
Ha ha, I am slow too, but you can still race Strava segments against your own times.
Does it support varia vision?
Nope.
The one thing that it’s missing that I’d like: FE-C. I suppose I could go back to using the iPhone to manage the resistance on the Kickr (and having used the 520 to do that job, it would probably be a lot simpler – the UI on the 520 for making changes on the fly is APPALLINGLY bad), but … well…
The ability to mirror what’s happening on my 935, though… that on its own is _almost_ enough to make me jump. Almost. The other differences between the 520 and the 130 don’t bother me.
Wahoo Bolt does FE-C.
I chatted with them a bit about it, in short, they just don’t see much usage of FE-C on their head units, and didn’t see much justification for adding it in here (balancing dev time versus people using it).
I generally tend to agree. I think the adding of FE-C to head units served its purpose of jumpstarting the standard and getting all the trainer/app companies to adopt it, but I wonder how many people actually use FE-C on a daily basis to control their trainers. Certainly some do, but I feel like overwhelmingly it’s more app-focused than not.
Thanks for explaining their decision making on the FE-C feature.
I’m one of the few riders that does use FE-C for most indoor training rides. I like to minimize the number of devices involved and keep the dashboard similar to my outdoor configuration. Replay of my more hilly rides from the head unit doesn’t always work perfectly, but it is more engaging to me than manually adjusting the resistance levels.
It would have been tempting to get the E130 as a backup for my E520 if it had FE-C, but oh well.
+1
Given the features of the 520 that I don’t use, the small form factor of the 130 may just find me looking to sell my nearly new 520. Never thought i’d see a feature laden small Garmin again.
I’m just an occasional cyclist who usually uses my 735xt for my riding, but one or twice a year I do an organized ride that has a tcx or gpx cue sheet available to download – is this something that can be uploaded, via garmin connect, to the 130 for navigation? Thanks!
You would be able to side load, via computer and USB cable.
Also have a read through “Quick Tip: Quickly creating routes on your phone for your Garmin & Wahoo devices” article on here. Some interesting tips (and more in comments) about getting a .GPX file to open in Garmin Connect App on Smart Phone then you can BT across to a paired Edge device.
just to be clear, can you upload ‘openstreet maps’ to the 130, like you can with the old 520?
No
Would you be able to post a picture of the 130 to the 500 to compare the size?
With that said, I have been waiting on something to replace my trusty 500. Wasn’t quite sold on the Bolt. You should tell them that no nominal power makes this a no go for triathlete with a power meter. It is a deal break, add those metrics and I would have my credit card ready.
Yeah, let me see if I can temporarily steal one today at Garmin, else you’ll have to wait till I get back home next week.
I can say that basically the Edge 130 is thinner (vertically) than the Edge 500, and I’d say a tiny bit less wide. I think it’s about the same length though. Again, just going off top of my head measurements.
Is it receiving 1 or 2 Galileo frequencies ? 2 frequencies would be more accuracy…
Thanx Ray for all your wonderful reviews, really appreciated… You the man !!
Sigh…I just picked up a Lezyne Super GPS 2 weeks ago. Throw me a bone and tell me why I’m not missing out?
Also why don’t you have the Lezyne products on the comparison calculator?
You’re actually not missing out on much (if anything). In fact, you’ve got better routing options than this. You have less sensor connectivity options (e.g. no radar/lights), but more data field options.
There’s no good reason for the Lezyne not being in there other than it been on my to-do list to knock out, and every time I sit down to do it I’m lacking a unit in front of me to double-check everything on. I may just grab the Lezyne guys tomorrow and Sea Otter and sit down and do it in their booth.
The Super GPS is a pretty good unit – longer battery life, also connects to both ANT+ and BTLE sensors, has routing, Strava segments, live tracking. And (though I’ll need to do a few more rides to be sure, only one ride since the update so far) the last update (6.75) appears to have fixed some serious issues.
If my Super GPS breaks, or they bring out another update that breaks half of its features AGAIN, I’ll probably go for the Edge 130. The radar/light and Galileo support isn’t a deal breaker for me (yet), so in no rush to spend another $200
If you are working on it with them, can you make a bit of a tutorial about the map screens on the SUPER GPS? Also a time to destination and distance to destination fields are lacking on the data fields.
The 130 should be sent out GRATIS to everyone who paid hard earned for tbe 820. Grumble grumble grumble…..
The 130 is a killer like the old 500! I think most cyclists will be pleased with it.
btw this review is less quality than your usual work. Guess it must be done in a rush. Keep your work up Ray!
i’m not sure what you might be expecting, but i fail to see how this is any poorer in quality than his other work.
as usual, aside from describing the various features, there’s also pretty in-depth analysis – whether said features work, their usefulness, whether they’re value for money etc. which is more than what many other reviewers do.
at several points in the review, he’s also pointed out areas which require further investigation as well. overall it’s extremely comprehensive. don’t think it is of any lesser quality.
Hi,
If possible please add side by side photo with older EDGE units. thx
Hi Ray,
Did You ride with speed sensor?
I would like to know, if the speed is primarly from speed sensor when one is attached.
I’m a bit of freek with my current speed, and GPS always take a little time to match to Your actual speed, Thats why ride with my GPS watch and simple sigma bike computer combo.
While I almost always have a speed sensor on my bike, I rarely use it connected to a unit. It’s usually there for random tests of things.
One short question Ray: as you say that Edge 130 struggles under bridges and tall buildings, what do you think the GPS accuracy will be in the forests? I only do mountain-biking and have been looking for a device like this for quite some time.
Thanks
No issues in forests on a road bike. My Paris ride goes through some without problems.
However, I didn’t have any place to test the mountain-bike type scenario. But…good news because later tonight I’ll land at Sea Otter, and have lots of mountain biking planned the next few days. 🙂
Thanks Ray for your answer, I am looking forward to your findings from your mountain-bike rides…
Any information regarding antenna strength? Any problems connecting to sensors? My Fenix 5 is a huge disappointment as it cannot keep a connection to my stages gen 2 with constant dropouts if it connects at all. My old Edge 510 working ok but problems with shorter dropouts now and then. Its due for replacement but if it’s as bad as the Fenix 5 it’s not an option.
I didn’t see any drop-outs connecting to a Shimano power meter and Vector 3, or finding the Quarq power meter. Nor any HR drop-outs.
But then again, none of those tend to be the units that have issues (like your Stages). I don’t really have a great way to test drop-outs from the head unit side of things (testing poor sensors is far easier because I can measure the RSSI values, whereas testing poor head units is tricky because I can’t measure the poorness within the head unit…if that makes sense). :-/
I guess I don’t understand the point of this device….you can get the 520 for $250 now?
That’s a bigger device that $50 more, some folks just want a smaller device. I do agree that perhaps something like $179 might be more appropriate.
really, no power balance or normalized power? I am surprised…
Auto scroll? Can you calibrate the altimeter (manual or POI) or does it use “automatic” calibration that doesn’t work very well?
Yes for auto scroll.
No manual calibration of altimeter at this point, just automatic.
You used to post size comparison pictures (lots) even when it was quite irrelevant.
But for something this tiny it would have been nice.
Photo comparo
Thanks!
Nice!
A just started to think, it is high time to buy a head unit.
In case of Edge 130 can I mix and match the sensors by communication type? (Like BTLE HR sensor with ANT+ Speed, Cadence sensors and Power meter?)
Hi Ray. Thanks a lot for this in-depth review; you rock as always! In the comparison chart, you’re referring to Polar M450, though the text says “In the case of the below chart, I picked ones I figured people would be comparing it against. These include the Polar M460 and Garmin Edge 520+.”
So, I’m newer to biking. Nothing fancy on my end. Probably train for century ride. I was looking into either the 520 or Bolt, but those may be way more than i need. Now the 520+ is out and this 130. For only $50 am i better long term going with the 520/Bolt or even a little more the new 520+, instead of spending $200 on the 130?
Ken,
Really, any of them will be fine. If you think you will need true turn-by-turn navigation, get the 520+. Otherwise, they will all track your time, speed, distance, cadence (with a sensor), power (with a sensor), heart rate (with a sensor), etc. If you are already a Garmin owner, you might want to stay in the ecosystem, if not, doesn’t matter. The 520/Bolt can control a smart trainer assuming you have one. However, most smart trainers are also controlled by their phone app and most people are using Zwift anyway. So, no real big deal.
More importantly, Ken, you exemplify the problem Garmin has got themselves in. They now are selling the 20, 25, 130, 520, 520+, 820, 1030 with a handful of 1000s still laying around. Not to mention, a dozen watches that will also track your bike ride. It’s confusing as hell. You don’t mention if you run. If you do, you might just want a watch that will track both. Most people who ride alot end up getting a dedicated bike computer but some, who run, just use their running watch. Not to get off track, but it’s almost amusing that Garmin put out the 130 to compete with Wahoo and Lezyne. That’s the only justification for it. But, this just makes their lineup all the more confusing. With the advent of the 520+, why not just drop the price of the 520 to $199 beating the Wahoo Bolt and call it good. But, NO, they create two new computers while they are getting beat in some markets by companies really just carrying one or two, i.e. Wahoo and Lezyne. When you really look at it Wahoo has one computer albeit two versions based on screen size. And Lezyne, really just has one, again just different sizes and displays. Here’s an idea Garmin, fix the horrible touch screen on the 820 and drop the price to $275 and drop the price on the 520 to $199 and save the gazillion dollars you spent on R&D bringing two new products to the market and you would own Wahoo and Lezyne!! Certainly, now that you have done it Garmin with the 130, kill the 20 and 25.
Ken, not only are you confused but so are bike shop owners who are certainly not carrying Garmin’s complete line. The problem for Garmin is simple. Your ma and pa bike shop will carry one Wahoo model and a couple Garmin models and that’s it. The bike shop owner will not try to carry them all and so the choice comes down to one or two models for most buyers. Price point becomes more important and Garmin has made it impossibly difficult.
So, Ken to answer your question. Sorry for the rant. Get the 130 and use the other $50 or $100 on a heart rate sensor and cadence sensor as you will want them anyway and they will improve you as a cyclist. Then start saving for a power meter.
Thank you so much for your info. You make a lot of great points. Yes, I am a runner. I use a Garmin watch for running so everything is already in Connect. I have a TomTom Sport that has cycling mode so I’ve been using that so far on my rides but it gets annoying to try to look at my wrist while riding. It has been easy enough to export the ride and import it into Garmin Connect. I purchased the Wahoo Bolt (only used it once so far). while I like it, I don’t think I’ll use most of the features right now, and it is a major pain to try to get the ride exported and imported into Garmin. Haven’t truly found a way yet. So it is probably going back. I think I’m going to try out the 130. I wish it was maybe $179 like someone mentioned. That would have made it more of a no brainer for me. at $200 it is barely less than getting a 520 or the Bolt. but still way less than the 520+. but I like your idea of going with the cheaper one and spending the extra $50 on the speed and cadence sensors.
Ken,
If I recall correctly, Tom Tom and Wahoo both have options to export automatically to Strava. Create a free Strava account, select for the Tom Tom and Wahoo to upload directly to Strava, Link your Strava and Garmin accounts and no need to do any difficult export then import. The data will automatically transfer from Strava to Garmin.
Ken,
I may have mislead you. Garmin uploads to Strava but not Strava to Garmin. I use Tapiriik.com which synchronizes Strava to Garmin. Nonetheless, it’s simple and only costs $2 a year. Ray has articles on it somewhere here.
I grabbed a Lezyne last year and one thing that has really impressed me is that they keep updating it and adding features…something you’d rarely see with Garmin.
It may not be quite as polished but for the price their stuff is great. I’ve always felt that Garmin artificially limits their devices to force people to get more expensive ones.
Questions regarding data on Edge vs data on Garmin Connect.
1. When the unit does not have Firstbeat features and 5s power-averages and so forth. Will this data also lack in garmin connect app/software?
2. When owning both a fenix5 watch and a garmin1030, firstbeat metric does not sync across units. But is the data in garmin connect aggregated from both units? (The data on the app/pc-software is aggregated, while the data on the gps-unit only have own activites)
I’m still using an Edge 500 for a few reasons but am ready to try the 130. The temperature gauge in the 520 was not accurate at all. On 90 degree scorcher days it would read in the mid 70’s. On days where it’s in the low 30’s I want to know the precise temp to dress accordingly for a commute to work. The grade readings on steep hills was also useless on the 520. Any short 14% hill would read 7% and wouldn’t change until after I’m over it and descending the other side. Based on other posts regarding that on the Garmin Forums it was not an isolated case. One last thing is can the 130 be charged while in use for very long rides?
good question on the “charging on the go” does anyone know if the 130 allows this capability? Thank you!
I wonder that one popular German bicycle online shop offers both Edge 520 and Edge 130 without sensors for same price now. I think that real price for Edge 130 should around $150.
I wonder if TSS/NP could be added with Connect IQ?
I too grabbed a Lezyne last year and have liked it except for the fact that it is annoying to upload to Garmin Connect. I wear a 235 so all of the data is there. Any tips on how to make the upload less annoying? For whatever reason the website does not accept the .fit.
I send my workout to Strava and then export a TCX to send to Garmin.
I may be missing it, but are you reporting screen sizes anywhere? Just wondering how the 520 (plus) and 130 compare to my 510.
In relation to the loss of NP and IF that I rely on a lot, will extended display from my FR935 allow those to be shown on screen?
Last thing, would extended display mode extend the battery if it’s not using GPS/ANT, or is that negligible compared to the screen power drain?
Thanks
I too am interested, and hopeful, that NP & IF can be displayed on edge 130 from Fenix 5s via ‘extended display’. Can anyone confirm? Cheers.
I have a Garmin 1000 that has always seemed oversized and this looks like it could be the option for me! Any chance you know the answers to these two:
– I have Di2 and I know the 130 can link with bluetooth sensors. Can I then use the button on the top of my Di2 shifters to change data screens like with the 1000?
– I know the screen is 1.8″ diagonal, but what are the screens length and width?
Does the 130 have a KJ (kilojoule) display option?
How many button presses to get to the power meter “Zero” screen ? (although garmin typcially misnames it “calibrate”).
The model 500 requires about 6 presses to drill down, and then back up … annoying.
It does have KJ.
All recent model Garmin’s (in the last few years) allow you to enable an option that displays the zero offset screen as soon as a power meter is connected, the Edge 130 included.
i’ve been wondering if there is a specific reason for the button layout? seems to me that Garmin has a penchant for placing buttons along the bottom edge of their devices, which would make them harder to access especially in an out front mount, where the stem and cables might get in the way.
i’m more of a recreational rider so it is merely an occasional annoyance, but i can imagine that someone doing specific training and recording their data might need quick and dependable access to the lap button.
it boggles my mind because the bottom edge seems to be the worst place for buttons, yet Garmin persists in doing so. even the Bolt places the buttons facing upwards.
Agree. Give me a Garmin Edge 500 plus. Just add Bluetooth to upload activity from a phone and improve the course/ navigation side of the unit. It can even be bread crumb style navigation.
I’ll go out a buy that unit today.
Agreed! Sounds like my dream unit – the 130 does not deliver this!
Sold my Edge 705 and Forerunner 220 recently to help fund an upgrade from my 2008 bike computer. Got about $150 for the pair on ebay.
Fast forward two months, and we’re moving house, and I’ll be commuting by bike again. The ANT+ light control for a Fly6 is now high on my list.
1) Is the light control of the 130 the same functionality as the 520 Plus? (do the 735 of 935 support ANT+ lighting?)
The only thing I feel I’d be missing, is the FE-C control of my Elite Direto, and workout mode. I was looking forward to recreating all my favorite workouts on my next Garmin. The 520 isn’t out of the question, but the small size and price of the 130 appeals a lot.
2) Is a workout mode possible under ConnectIQ? (not FE-C, just setting up intervals with a timer on the unit to then allow me to do workouts on the road?)
1) It’s not as complex in terms of UI options and configuration. But the basics of ‘turn lights on when powered on’ type of stuff is the same.
2) No workout mode natively of course, and creating it in CIQ would be tough since it doesn’t work with full-blown apps. For example, that’s what Xert’s CIQ app does (a workout mode), but that’s not a data field, which is all that the Edge 130 works with. Instead, that app is a full app, so it wouldn’t work here.
I noticed there’s an “Extended Display” option on my 935 under Add New Sensors & Accessories with the 8.0 firmware – – is that not working as expected right now?
My 735xt also has an option for “Extended Display” under ‘Add New Sensors & Accessoiries. I ordered the 130 and will quickly find out if this works..!
Hi Robbert, Did you find out if this works with the 735XT. Thanks
Hi Michael,
Unfortinately not. My order got cancelled due to availability issues in The Netherlands so I haven’t been able to test this.
Apart from that, I read that other users have not been able to try the extended display anyway, because the Garmin software is not yet compatible.
With the battery issues mentioned in the forum I guess I wait a bit longer to make a decision on which device to order…
Thanks for getting back to me Robbert.
I picked up the Garmin 130 yesterday, saw it as a sensible compromise to purchase that as well as the FR 735XT, instead of the more expensive FR 935. I’d be disappointed if I got the 735XT and it lacked the extended display functionality.
Can you refer me to the battery issues thread please, I did a search but can’t seem to find it. I’ll give that a read before opening up the Edge 130!
Thanks again
Hi Michael,
You can read (below) in this comment thread that some users experience a (much) shorter battery life than the acclaimed 15 hrs.
Of course this depends on many factors (e.g. what sensors are connected, what GPS type is used, brightness of the display etc). I hope some test results will be posted soon.
Since the FR 735xt is a triathlon watch, I suspect it will get the extended display functionality eventually, although i’m not 100% sure on that yet.
The watch itselfs rocks though!!
Cheers
I love the idea of the extended display. Ive always wished Garmin would do something like that but even simpler as in a device that is just an extended display. I always have my watch, it would be great to just have a simple device with crazy batter life because it is nothing but a secondary display for the watch info.
Hey DC
We are missing here real life battery-life test.
Are you planning to prepare it in the future?
Yup, definitely.
I generally don’t do the battery-life tests initially as part of the in-depth review since I usually can’t afford to leave a unit outside for a prolonged period of time at that point in the review.
The good news is that I now have of them, so I’ll charge them up and do a concurrent test: GPS, GPS+GLONASS, GPS+Galileo.
And this is good news!
Cheers 🙂
Why Garmin doesn’t allow to choose Galileo satellites alone without GPS? Other commercial receiver allow Galileo alone. Maybe for battery life it would be better than GPS+Galileo. For accuracy I don’t know.
Isn’t Galileo just barely operational?
Just received my 130… primarily for the extended display.
Now in FW2.20 I don’t have the Extended Display entry in the menu.
Ray what firmware did (or do) you have on the 130?
Anybody else tried extended display already?
tx,
*kris
They’ve temporarily removed Extended Display to sort out a few outstanding bugs, sounds like it should return shortly.
thx for the info!
regs,
k
Did you try connecting to it from your watch with the Extended Display “sensor”? No idea how it works, but thinking you’d have to initiate from the device you want to extend from.
Never mind, looks like Ray had a picture showing it on the 130. Really interested to see how it works either way. 🙂
Hey are you sure about internal temp sensor? I have scanned edge 130 manual from Garmin site and there is no word about temp readings.
Yup, you can see the temp data on the Garmin Connect activity file/link, that’s linked in the review.
I got my Edge 130 and I am little bit disappointed. Is there a way to put temperature on the ‘main’ screen? I can see it only on the ‘weather page’ which is pretty useless.
Riding in Arizona, the Temperature on the main screen was critical in judging the rest of my ride when it got well into the triple digits. The Edge 130 has no option to show temperature while riding, so I’m now in the dark compared to my Edge 500. Also disappointed in setting a lap based on a GPS position which I used constantly on the 500, especially for comparing laps in a criterium; what good is a lap preset at 5 miles? Thinking I’ll need to go back to the 500.
i’m also disappointed with the 130, and prefer my old 500
I recently purchased the Garmin Vector 3 and paired it with my 920xt. Will my “watch” or even other Garmin computers “smooth out” the power display? For instance 3-5 second smoothing/averaging.
You can display 3s Power. Or even 10s I think.
Anyone have any ideas why my Edge 130 doesn’t have the extended display??? I’m pretty confused..
Thanks for also testing in harder GPS scenarios. As some mountain bikers have problems with the Wahoo Bolt in the woods it would be very interesting to se a comparison of gps accuracy between popular devices (Bolt/520/130 ?) in harder conditions. Maybe you can do that when you test Gallileo for the 130?
I can confirm the Bolt have issues in the woods. Futher issues for Mountainbiker that are going to ride a bit more difficult trails. The noses of the Bolt mount break of very easily the plastic used seems to less strong then the Garmin. I ran into the issue and the experience fairly the same as for Garmin. No repair, just crash replacement discount. That is why I went back to Garmin.
Love my 500, but Bluetooth on my 810 was a revolution. Sadly the absence of activity profile will be annoying and here is why I have separate displays for training and racing, road and TT. No big deal because 8 custom pages is plenty.
But…. I use different auto lapping criteria depending on activity. Start and position for road and circuit races, then distances for different TT distances (2.5 miles for a 10, 5 miles for a 25 and 50, 10 miles for a 100 and 1 hour for a 12hr) have to set those manually now if this option is still available. Charging in use is also absolutely vital. I recharged my 810 during a 12hr, my friend’s died at 11:36.
Wahoo still does not lap on GPS position, which is a big failing.
Does the Edge 130 sync with Wahoo KickR’s?
It connects via the power side of the Wahoo KICKR, so it’ll get power+speed.
Looking for a recommendation for an admittedly niche use. I need the longest battery life possible, easily read display, and the ability to load courses to whatever unit I use for long race route navigation, and it needs to be standalone, so no bt or wifi connection to a phone needed for nav. Currently using an Edge 520, and while it’s generally ok the battery life is pretty awful.
Of these 3 units – Garmin Edge 130, Lezyne super gps, Wahoo Elemnt Bolt – which is best suited for what I need? Or is there another option I should look at?
Edge 500. If you can live with breadcrumb trails and no Bluetooth. I charge mine on the go with a belkin mini charger.
For really long battery life, look at the Garmin Foretrex 601. Claims 48 hours battery with GPS. Uses 2AAA batteries, so you can carry spares if necessary.
Its designed to worn on the wrist, but its easy to get a handlebar mount if you want.
Most people in the bikepacking community use the Etrex 20 or 30. Battery on mine lasts for more than the stated 25 hours of riding on 2xAA batteries. No power meter support though, but cadence and HR are supported on ANT+ on the Etrex 30 only.
Ray, I have a Fenix5x that I am very happy with. What do I get from a Garmin Edge 130 the I won’t get from my Fenix 5x? I am thinking of getting a handlebar mount kit for my Fenix5x so I can see it more easily and using my HRM strap for heart rate. WDYT?
Well, you get less than the 5x, since this can’t do real navigation with maps like the 5x can. What you get is a much better form factor for cycling. Watches, even mounted on the handlebars, can’t match the visibility of even the small screen of the 130, not to mention units like the 1030 with its larger color screen. If you’re satisfied with the visibility of the 5x (I’m not with my Epix, which is why I have a 1000), then just stick with it.
David,
What Paul said is generally correct. I have ordered a 130 but have been using a
Fenix 3HR on the handlebars linked to a heart rate monitor, usually a Mio Link but sometimes a Garmin chest strap. Like the 3HR, with the 5X you can use connect IQ data fields that allow to see all or more of the info on once screen than the 130 probably will but, as Paul suggests, it is a small font. Since my eyes, post 45, aren’t as sharp as the used to be, I use bifocal sunglassess with reading glass magnification in the lower half, available cheap on Amazon. With this solution, there is nothing the 130 would do that your 5x doesn’t. For me, the 130 does, however, offer some benefits over the 3HR. Hope that helps.
Thanks Paul
hi did you manage to add your fenix 3 as an extended screen? so data can be recorded on the fenix and shown on the edge?
130 first ride tonight. Screen visibility is awesome. At first, I was not seeing phone notifications or Strava Segments. However, further into the ride it all started showing up. Looks like it just took some downloading from the phone or something. I did notice the cycling dynamics/power balance missing which is included with my Fenix 3hr. Not a big deal to me. Only one complaint, it doesn’t allow you to name the paired sensors. Wish you had pointed this out in the review. Not a deal breaker but annoying if you are testing different power meters or other sensors. Nonetheless, love the small size and believe I will be happy with it.
I discovered a strange bug when I analyzed my data from the first ride. During the ride the 130 asked to update the software. When this screen came up, it shut down the ride recording and lost all sensors for 6 minutes. Something Garmin certainly needs to look into.
Interesting that it asked you mid-ride. There was a beta bug with this issue, but that was solved a while back. I wonder if perhaps the unit had stale firmware on it (sometimes they manufacturer with older firmware and then ‘force’ a firmware update mid-ride).
Out of curiosity, what firmware version was on it to begin the ride (it may actually have recorded that in the ride file, if you look at GC on the right side, but I’m not sure if it gets wiped by an update later in the ride).
Looks like it was 2.00 and now updated to 2.20. Did another ride this morning and it froze and went to a “ride in progress” screen that I was unable to get out of then shut down. Obviously, I’m having some issues. I reset it and will try again tomorrow hopefully.
Third ride turned out better after I reset and turned off notifications. Looks like potential issues with notifications turned on. I’ll keep using and call Garmin if I have issues. Love the screen brightness and very simple.
I just picked one up for my son. My local tri shop got these just after the announcement as they had a spring kick off event that included a Garmin sales rep showing off the lineup. it seems to be a good device, with setup and install just as simple as any other Garmin I have purchased. It did take 5 minutes to find GPS sync, which is longer than I have seen in other devices. The track followed my 510 closely. Other than taking a while to find GPS the first time, it has worked as advertised.
My question for the group: In my edge 510, I could edit the startup.txt for a splash to post a “if found, contact number.” I do not see a start up file in the 130 directory. I tried to use the same startup.txt the main directory, the Garmin directory, and the new files directory. Can this device support this feature?
Bill
If I buy it in North America then move to Europe, can I reset the GPS ? Is there anything to do or it does switch automatically?
No issues there, it works equally on both continents. Nothing to do except let it find satellites as normal (should take under 60 seconds when moving continents).
So no street names on navigation, just a turn indicator?
I can find “power 3s avg” but not “power”. This means 130 can’t display instantaneous power? Why?
Yeah, not sure why not instant power. On the flip side, I’ve never found a situation where instant power was honestly useful (because of the natural fluctuations of power meters). I’ve long used 3s/10s/30s power instead.
I’ve been using instant power on Fenix 3HR. Guess what I miss now with Edge 130 is the faster response time. The 3s avg power really feel like lagging behind by 2-3s. Oh well I’ll try to live with 3s avg power and see if I could get used to this more stable but slower power reading.
Thanks,
Wade
Ray,
Did you verify this as I was almost certain you could chose power, 3s power, 10s, or 30s? I chose 3s because trying to watch instant power will drive you crazy and isnt useful.
OK. I stand corrected. Wade is right.
Power related fields on the Edge 130 are:
Power -3s Avg
Power – Avg
Power – Lap
Power – kJ
Power – Max
Power Zone
That’s it!
I’ve been using instant power on Fenix 3HR. Guess what I miss now with Edge 130 is the faster response time. The 3s avg power really feel like lagging behind by 2-3s. Oh well I’ll try to live with 3s avg power and see if I could get used to this more stable but slower power reading.
Thanks,
Wade
Few more questions. Seems power is a hot topic here.
Has anyone come up with an IQ app for normalized power yet?
In extended display mode, as either device shown less battery life? Thinking about the watch here, if you use a Fenix 5 or 935 for extended display in an Ironman length event are you going to see a decrease in battery life of that device?
Can’t find any clear statement if it is heart-rate variation (r-r) capable or not. Anyone seen anything on this?
Picked up the 130 last week and used it for a 8 hr Mtn bike relay yesterday. Here are some thoughts:
1) GPS sync was very fast. Typically just a couple seconds. There was no loss of signal riding in the bush, however in Ontario there are still no leaves on the trees.
2) Screen is high quality and easy to read.
3) Rode over some very rough terrain, at high speed, on a hard tail (no rear suspension) bike. There were no issues with the mount – not that I was expecting any.
One MAJOR hiccup though – I had fully charged the unit the day before the race. Even had it hooked up to a USB volt/amp meter and was able to visualize that the current draw was at 0 before pulling it off the charge. When I got up for the race, the unit was displaying one bar from the top, even though it had not been on. By the time I had completed approx 2.5 hours of GPS connected use, the unit was showing low battery and I had to charge it in order to finish the event. The 130 was turned off between each riding session. It was connected to my cell phone via Bluetooth, but the phone was not with me during the approx 30 minute laps. It would instantly connect to the phone when returning within range, and upload of data was seamless each time.
Other than the Bluetooth radio being on, it was connected to a HR ANT strap, but not to any other devices. The are profiles on the unit for Speed/Cadence and Power, but I don’t have those on my MTN bike.
I am going to run another test today, with the unit just sitting in my yard. I’ll report back on if the poor battery life was an anomaly, hopefully by end of day today or tomorrow.
Interested in battery life reports from users. Anyone else got updates?
After fully charging the unit again, I had it running on my deck stationary for three and a half hours. There were no ant modules connected to it, and it still shows about 50 percent battery remaining. So the verdict is still out. As it stands now I don’t see this getting anywhere close to ten hours, let alone the claimed time. It is set to GPS and Galileo, so there could be some testing there to do. I would love a actual battery percentage display, but all I can see is the battery bar.
Thanks Nick. Any future updates are greatly appreciated. Hope the 130 works out well for you.
Just got my 130 yesterday, updated to 2.4 software. Charged it up fully (although it doesn’t show a percentage like my 500 did). Had GPS on with Glonass, no external sensors, cellphone in my pocket with no activity via bluetooth. 50 minutes into the first ride I got a low battery alert.
Am i right to think that Strava Premium users will see the Normalized Power numbers on their ride analysis under “Weighted Average Power” anyways? Since it is simply a calculation based on numbers that the 130 can and will produce.
Correct.
Same experience here. From day one my 130 never shows full battery, even after overnight or one full day of charging. And it usually shows about 50% battery after one hour of riding. Today I have the first long ride- 6 hours. At the end, it showed only about 10% battery. This is very appointing for something that claims 15hr of battery life. Btw for fear of battery drain, I’ve been using GPS only without GLONASS or Galileo.
I’ve ordered one and I’m really hoping these battery issues can be solved (by a software update). I was on the fence between Wahoo Element Bolt (240 euro) en the Edge 130 (199 euro), chose the Garmin since I’ve been in their eco-system for a very long time, it’s nice small size and the slightly lower price.
Ray, you encountered no issues with battery life during your in-depth review?
No issues with battery life for me, and I suck at recharging.
That said, in seeing the threads overnight I’ve got my three Edge 130’s charging up fully as we speak, and then I’ll go and and do a battery run-down test here this afternoon on the deck. One unit each for: GPS, GPS+GLONASS, GPS+Galileo.
I’ll turn on an ANT+ generator to stream in some ANT+ data too. Obviously, it’s not a perfect battery test, but at least outlines a best case scenario.
Thanks Ray. As I do some 8 hour events, I’m concerned about my initial impression. Very much look forward to your results.
Great! I’ll be looking forward to your findings Ray!
Did 1.5 hours more today, without going up before hand. After 6 hours of use since last charge, I’m showing a small battery bar, maybe 15 percent remaining. Hopefully they don’t have the battery display calibrated properly.
“without charging up beforehand”
It could be that the battery indicator is functioning poorly. During my 1.5 hours today, the battery bar was longer after riding for 1/2 an hour than it was when I started. By the end of the 1.5 hours it was back to where it was before the ride. I’ve got 6.5 hours on this charge now. Hopefully a software update will clear some things up!
Fully recharged the unit before today’s ride. Attached is a picture of the battery level after 4 hours of usage. I’m not impressed by the far less than advertised battery life.
For the record, I managed 9 hours on my last charge before the low battery indicator came on.
So the battery monitor on my device is officially screwed.The battery bar was higher on waking the device when then when I turned it after the last ride. I took photos one minute apart, with vastly different readings, including a blank bar and a bar that far extends the normal battery icon. There is some work to do here on the firmware.
Not sure if it will work, but here is a link to a google photos shared album of four photos, taken one minute apart with vastly different battery indications: link to photos.app.goo.gl
Still happy about your choice? I am having the same choice issue. Thanks in advance for any help!
Can you charge while using it? It looks like the cable would be able to fit when mounted in an out front mount. So I guess the question is more around if the software allows it. I only do a few long rides a year and could live with an external battery on those.
I think so… Just played with mine with USB connected and charging. Everything seemed to work properly.
Hey Ray, I was just wondering why I am not able to use extended display on my 130? My unit does not seem to have it even as an option. Is this feature simply not activated on this unit yet?
Correct, Garmin had confirmed on their forums too that the feature will be rolled out in upcoming software update. No specific release date was mentioned.
Matt is correct – it was pulled at the last minute due to a few last minute bugs to be ironed out. It sounds like they’re talking more like a couple weeks, not months.
Hi Ray, I know you’ve mentioned before (multiple times) that the extended display feature will be available on Fenix 5 models and FR 935. Have you heard anything indicating if it will, or won’t be available on the FR 735XT?
The lack of workouts is my only worry about this unit (which I purchased this week), however extended display functionality could solve this issue.
Keep up the great work!
Wonder if anyone has this issue with Edge 130… But for me this has happened 2 times in the last 4 rides (one 6hrs, rest three sub 1hr). The unit would stop recording without warning. After this happened, the display (I always left it with the the 8 field with HR and power on top) looked normal, as if it’s still recording because both total time and distance were advancing. But the unit was actually not recording (proven by Strava record). The first moment something looked wrong was when a screen popped up to ask if shut down is preferred due to inactivity. I lost big chunk of data as a result. First time I also lost PR on a key climb that I pushed for.
I’ve arranged exchange with the good seller but want to check with owners out there. Hope most units out so far are good.
Wade
Today in a 90min ride, 130 reset itself at around 15min again. But the startup screen showed up so I was aware of it and pressed start button twice to get it back to recording. Still lost about 40sec of the ride though. Not sure I want to give it another shot… may just replace it with 520. Oh well…
Thanks for another great review! I have the 130 and taken it out for two rides now. There should be a battery live of 12-15 hours. In fact after 85 km – 2:50 hours – it shows half the battery used. (Just connected to a speed sensor and without navigation. GPS and GLONASS on, backlight out) In the battery datafield which is just an icon, the icon shows erratic values. Can’t say if it is a problem with the indicator – and the unit has in fact 12-15 hours runtime – or with the battery life. Read a post in a forum where a guy was reporting that his 130 is running 3 hours.
What was your experience? Have you tested the runtime?
Hi John, if you scroll up a little there is an ongoing discussion about battery life.
Thank you Nick. I have seen it after my posting. Sorry!
Was out for a 3 hour ride today and using a datafield showing percentage. After full charging on 100% it was showing 58% after the ride. When I was charging it via PC it shows three segments which should mean that the battery is somewhere around 75%. During the ride percentage sometimes get up a few digits. It seems more that it’s a software problem and the battery probably last the promised time. Also the loading segments are only shown if the charging is made via PC and not if using a charger.
Best I’ve done on a full charge is 9 hours. In my book that’s no where close to 15. Maybe my concern is misplaced, but I always worry about battery life down the road a couple years. If it came reliably get me through 8 hours, then it’s value to me drops dramatically.
Sorry about the typo….”can’t reliably get me through 8 hours”
Would be interesting to hear about Rays findings. Also wondering why nobody in the official Garmin forum is reporting this issue, because it seems to be a general problem.
Agreed!
Hi Nick
The overlong bar looks familiar. Had this too, seconds after it showed a near blank bar. It is a firmware problem. I mean, also after all the experience with Garmin, they would not advertise 12-15 hours of runtime and delivering, from the hardware point of view, 3-4 hours. Saw a video of a german Garmin dealer testing the 130 on a long ride. It left him after 3,5 hours. But again: No remarks about this issue in the official forum. Anybody here facing the same problem? I hope Garmin is aware of the poor battery performance. And: Ray, anything about your test?
Yeah the battery issue (either display or actual drop in charge) is concerning. Today after 4.5hrs ride, there looked to be only one bar left (from fully overnight charged at beginning) as shown in the pic. Hope Garmin well fix it quickly.
Agreed. If it’s a display issue than not a big deal, but with my experience of max 9 hours of life is very disappointed. (9 is being generous)
Okey doke. Test complete. Pic of test from last night: link to twitter.com
And the results for three fully charged Edge 130’s run concurrently, with the latest production firmware:
Regular GPS: 8:11:47 (total distance .40mi)
GPS + GLONASS: 8:43:41 (total distance .61mi)
GPS + GALILEO: 9:05:55 (total distance .45mi)
Note, I had an ANT+ Simulator transmitting power and HR sensor data…except, when I turned off the porch light about 1-2 hours later, that apparently also turned off the power outlet for that…so…no more ANT+ data after 1-2 hours. That would (in theory) I believe cause a minor increase in power required as I believe they raise the power level to ANT+ to try and find the dropped sensors. But I believe there’s also a timeout. In both cases, consider those statements iffy at best.
On GPS conditions, there were no tall buildings within 15 meters of it, and only a single short tree nearby with not much leaves. As you probably know, GPS blockage increases power requirements (like heavy forests). I think this was reasonably low blockage, and thus fair.
No phones were paired to any of the units. Backlight was off. And aside from one check mid-way through, there were no button presses. All were left on default data pages with basic data. All tree of which would be considered ‘best case’ type test scenarios.
Given these are below the specs in a ‘best possible’ scenario (no phone), I’ll shoot the files/test data over to the Garmin Edge team and see what they think.
Since I don’t generally test battery life in a formal test pre-review release (as I usually don’t have the time to leave a unit alone that long), the battery life here seemed within the ‘not crazy’ ballpark (being 9 hours). Obviously if I was only getting 3-4 hours I’d have noticed, but 9 hours is enough that for 1-3 hours rides, a few times a week you end up charging once every week or so, and with frequent beta firmware updates/etc, I’m plugged in more often than not (I only had one device then).
I’ll make a note in the review somewhere on battery life here in a few minutes.
Cheers!
That fits right in line with my results. Have to say I’m somewhat disappointed. 9 hours is only 60 percent of the advertised life span. We wouldn’t accept a screen that was 40 percent smaller than advertised but it’s ‘acceptable’ for battery life. ?
Hi Ray
Thank you very much for doing this test for us and for forwarding the results to Garmin!!!
Today I made a 4 hour tour and had 57 % battery left at the end of it.(If the indicator is working right). GPS, connected to a speed sensor and no phone connection. This seems to confirm the results of your test.(8-9 hours runtime). For me it is enough, because I am doing tours up to 6 hours. What is striking is, that even after charging it full overnight the 130 is indicating 87 – 90 % battery at the start of the tour and sometimes is counting up a few percent. So something is not working properly here. Also the four segments on the loading screen of the device are only shown if charged via PC and not appearing if loaded via charger. But, and Nick is absolutely right here, it is far from the 12-15 hours advertised by Garmin. Hope this will be solved by upcoming firmware updates. Apart from that issue, I also have the Edge 820 (terrible touchscreen) and Edge 1000, I really like this tiny little device and it is working fine for me so far.
Another topic: Will you also do a test of the new See.Sence ACE light?
Regards, Volker
🙂
Maybe 15 hours is without gps . It is possibile in the ege 130 to train indoor. Extract from the manual:
“You can turn off GPS when you are training indoors or to save battery life.
1
Hold …
2
Select
Ride Settings > GPS > Off .
When GPS is turned off, speed and distance are not available unless you have a compatible sensor or indoor trainer that sends speed and distance data to the device.”
Hi MicroSurf&Run
That might be the solution! We all should have read the manual carefully! 😉
Another thing that bothers me concerning the battery issue, is that due to the erratic behavior of the indicator I ask myself how reliable this indicator is. When it shows 48 % for example, is it 48 % or could it be that the unit shuts down a few kilometers down the road.
John
Garmin came back and said that what I’m (and thus you) are seeing isn’t consistent with what their internal testing and expectations are. They’re going to do some more digging and will follow-up shortly.
I do agree with others in that I also saw some oddity in terms of battery bar state, wondering if perhaps something is prematurely shutting the unit down.
Ray, thank you so much for conducting the test and informing Garmin about the results! I’m sure it’s much more convincing to them than what we can offer. 😉
As for me, I’ve decided to move on with 520, because besides battery, my unit also has reset issue that I reported above. They are a bit too much for me to deal with although I love how small, light, and clear 130 is. Good thing that recent sales of 520 made this an easy decision.
Good luck all!
Listed below is our expectation for battery life on the Edge 130:
1: GPS / no sensors – up to 15 hours
2.GPS / GLONASS or GALILEO / 2 sensors – 10 -12 hours
3.GPS / GLONASS / 2 sensors / following a course – 10 hours
4. High: GPS / GLONASS + 4 sensors (incl. power) + following a course – 10 hours
Running the backlight always on will significantly reduce battery life on the device. The display on the 130 should not require the backlight for normal daytime operation.
Hi Shawn
Yes these runtimes was, what I expected too. And it is probably not a problem of the hardware but of the firmware. It shows erratic numbers (using a percentage datafield) and battery bar icons. I have seen both over 100 %, counting up during a ride before going back. Also it is fully charged the evening before the unit is at 87% or something like that the morning after. I don’t know that from my 1000 or 820.
So please check your firmware. Looking at the web, it is a common problem. Firmware is 2.20.
Thank you for the information Shawn. I have attached photos on another post of the erratic battery bar indication mentioned by John (searching for my name should get you there fairly quickly). Minute by minute the bar changes, even going above full and down to nothing. I have also experienced the charge for a full day but the next morning indicate less than a full charge. Please have the firmware looked at for the issues. I’m very impressed that you have taken the time to directly address the forum!
Hi Shawn
Thank you for being here to discuss the battery issue with us!
If you compare your expectations with Ray´s findings you will see the discrepancy: For GPS+GLONASS and two sensors paired (and that for just 2 hours) Ray gets a runtime of 8:43, while GARMIN is expecting 10-12 hours. Following your statement he should have been near to 13-14 hours because of the sensors switched off after 1or 2 hours. So There is a big gap apart from the backlight scenario, isn’t it?
Maybe…
As I noted in my findings, the ANT+ simulator laptop crapped out after a few hours, which meant that the Edge 130 would have actually worked harder (increased power) to try and find those sensors. That would have impacted battery life, but we don’t know exactly how much.
In the meantime, I started a new single-unit GPS-only battery test outside (no backlight, no sensors, no phone, as vanilla as it gets). It’s about 6 hours into that. Will report back in the morning when it dies.
Thanks for all the feedback. We do have the erratic battery gauge issue reported as well. We are looking into the battery reports and investigating the issue.
Just as another battery update – my test from yesterday actually surpassed the specifications (to be fair, Garmin earlier this week hinted it probably would). I clocked in over 17 hours with just GPS and no sensors enabled (and no backlight).
Pic attached.
Pointless testing without multiple sensors?
Wade,
This is my concern as well. Most of my rides are less than two hours so the battery issue is not that disturbing. But, the reset issue is huge. I’ve got only two of six rides that the unit didn’t reset or shut down. One of those had no Strava segments as segments or notifications may or may not have anything to do with it. Nonetheless, the Garmin forums confirm this reset/shut down issue is affecting numerous 130 owners. This thing is starting to remind me of the problems I had with the original Garmin Fenix. I hate being a beta tester for Garmin. The 130 is having issues that certainly should have been addressed before release. How do you not do enough testing with enough units to see the battery issue for instance? Not to mention they claim the screen mirroring in release info and then have to pull it. I’m going to give it another ride or two but it’s going back if Garmin doesn’t fix it in the next few days.
Garmin answered my support request. Here’s the response that may be worth trying if you are having reset/shut down issues.
Start by syncing that device with Garmin Express on your home computer. This will ensure you’re up to date with the latest software and it will check the drive for memory issues. If you don’t yet have Garmin Express you’ll want to get that here – garmin.com/express.
Once that’s done we need to purge some files. You can copy the folders below to your desktop to save the data if you wish, but it should be safely uploaded to your account. In any case, don’t put them back on the device.
Connect your device to the computer using the Garmin data cable:
Access the device drive (Windows Key + E for Windows, Finder > Devices for Mac)
Enter the Garmin folder
Locate and delete the following folders – Activities, Courses, New Files, RemoteSW, Workouts
Note that we are deleting the folders themselves, not just the contents – some folders may not appear, but remove the ones that do from the list above
Once that’s done, empty the trash on your computer
Eject the device before disconnecting from the computer
Test performance – the device should now perform as expected.
I’ll try this tomorrow and check the results.
How come GPS alone resulted the least amount of time?
I would have expected just GPS to consume less power -> more running time of device.
Also Garmin doc states “Using GPS and another satellite together reduces battery life more quickly than using only GPS.” (link to www8.garmin.com)
Can you give some thoughts to this?
Ok maybe I just didn’t get it the point with TrainingPeaks (TP) properly.
Is it possible to download a planned training from TP to the 130 and start/complete the Training (as I am used from the edge 500 for example)?
Thanks and BR
No, there isn’t any support for structured workouts (those would be workouts from Garmin Connect or Training Peaks).
For that you’d need the Edge 520, which, is actually on sale for the same price as the Edge 130 right now – $199.
Hello All,
So with the 520 on sale at the same price as this little gem, what’s a guy to do? Looking to replace my 500. Can’t figure out if this is it, or the evenly priced 520, or just go all out and get the 520+ when it’s actually released.
That’s tough. From a features standpoint, there’s very few reasons to get the Edge 130 over the Edge 520. Off the top of my head, the only feature I can think of that the Edge 130 has that the Edge 520 (base) doesn’t is the new Extended Display piece, which is basically for triathletes to mirror their watches to the unit.
Of course, the Edge 130 is smaller than the Edge 520…though, for most people they won’t care. Obviously, the Edge 520 has a boatload more features than the 130, especially around structured workouts, Connect IQ, and even mapping if you want to put it on their via 3rd parties.
Personally, size aside, I’d choose the Edge 520 if someone made me just have one.
“Personally, size aside, I’d choose the Edge 520 if someone made me just have one.”
Just anybody should be aware it is still the same “old” hardware, they just increase memory.
So i.e. no Galileo, no BLE and maybe futher limitations.
That is why I choose the 130 and refreshed my old 1000 (fixing power button issue and replaced battery).
If they would have launched a 530 I would go for it.
It actually does have BLE. It does the (slightly odd) dual Bluetooth and Bluetooth Smart dual pairing to the phone.
Unless you’re talking BLE sensors, which is true, it doesn’t have. But unless you’re buying the Polar OH-1 HR sensor, every other sensor on the market is dual ANT+/BLE anyway. But, what it makes up for in lack of BLE sensors the Edge 520 has in better sensor support – for example full power meter metrics that the Edge 130 cuts down on.
To each their own of course, but wanted to clarify there.
I am sorry not to be precise. I was talking about the sensors. BLE for phone communication is implemented on a number of Garmins for a while.
Ray,
I find a reason to choose 130 over 520… Info for Strava live segments. 130 displays more info like times to two riders (such as KOM and PR) and elevation profile. I don’t find a way to do so with 520.
-Wade
Now finally the battery issue has reached the Garmin forum!!
link to forums.garmin.com
They made a reference there to Rays test.
I can confirm the massive battery drain with backlight. Did my first ride on Sunday with backlight permanently on as it makes the Display perfectly readable. I started with around 80% (so far the battery bar could be trusted) and ended up close to 0% after just a 2,5 h ride. Didn’t experienced that with any other Garmin monochrome display.
Why compare this unit with Galileo switched off ?. It’s probably the most impressive thing about this unit
For the battery issue – Shawn repsonded in the support thread:
====
hulster we had a look at your ride data and it looks like the device had 3 sensors paired and was running GPS+Galileo plus the backlight set to always on. The 130 display should not be required in normal daytime operation. This was likely the cause of your battery drain.
Listed below is our expectation for battery life on the Edge 130:
1: GPS / no sensors – up to 15 hours
2.GPS / GLONASS or GALILEO / 2 sensors – 10 -12 hours
3.GPS / GLONASS / 2 sensors / following a course – 10 hours
4. High: GPS / GLONASS + 4 sensors (incl. power) + following a course – 10 hours
===
To be honest – this is not acceptable. I have responded I am doing rides all the year which would mean fairly for 1/3 year night rides. This will need to keep backlight permanently on. I owned a 500 and 510 keeping backlight permanently on for such rides and were far away from running into full drain even after 2-3 rides so 6-8 hours. Keeping backlight on 1000 permanently on with navigation, always on the map page, as well with 3 sensors keep me running 5-6 hours.
And Garmin will tell the 130 not even 3??? Sorry….
Head lamp? Always on backlight (500 or 520) would’ve sucked for me at night. I run my primary light on my helmet, and glancing down for a second to check cues or the map works fine. If I need a longer run time than 6-8 hours I’d do what I do now, carry a small battery pack. The Biolite Charge 10 is perfect, I can strap it under my stem if I want to runba charger while I ride.
What about screen resolution/readability. This is becoming one of my priorities, damn aging.
It’s excellent – the contrast and readability is the best i’ve ever seen on a GPS or bike computer.
My 130 MTB bundle just arrived. Can’t really see the point in the remote so that’s going on eBay, the bracket is incredibly well built (and remarkably heavy) but not great. On a really short mtb stem it sits the unit over the top of the stem cap which means it sits very high (and prone to getting knocked). The K-edge products – either the gravity cap (with mounts on the steerer) or even better the adjustable stem mount sit the unit lower.
Advice wanted – I’d like to link a cheap wrist based HRM to the unit (can’t be done with wearing a chest strap). Your reviews of the VivoSmart units seem to suggest they really don’t work well for cycling. Is there a low cost write based HRM device that will link to the Edge 130 that is actually any good?
My 130 MTB bundle just arrived. Can’t really see the point in the remote so that’s going on eBay, the bracket is incredibly well built (and remarkably heavy) but not great. On a really short mtb stem it sits the unit over the top of the stem cap which means it sits very high (and prone to getting knocked). The K-edge products – either the gravity cap (with mounts on the steerer) or even better the adjustable stem mount sit the unit lower.
Advice wanted – I’d like to link a cheap wrist based HRM to the unit (can’t be done with wearing a chest strap). Your reviews of the VivoSmart units seem to suggest they really don’t work well for cycling. Is there a low cost write based HRM device that will link to the Edge 130 that is actually any good?
Hi Ray,
I would really appreciate you could add to your future Garmin InDepth reviews realistic battery life, incl. BACKLIGHT.
When you have a look for my last post what Shawn came out with for point 1. – So GPS only NO sensors 15 hours(WITHOUT backlight) this is something totally unrealistic. This is sports device and not an outdoor. Who will use it with no sensors? Which SPORTS guy will not do any rides in Winter?
So despite any bug and limitation discussion this would help people not waste money for the wrong gadgets.
Yeah, it’s always tough to cover every possible scenario – especially ones that you have to basically block-out a day of usage for. If I look at all the scenarios I could think of:
1) GPS: No Sensors + No Backlight
2) GPS + GLONASS: No Sensors + No Backlight
3) GPS + Galileo: No Sensors + No Backlight
4) GPS: With Sensors + No Backlight
5) GPS + GLONASS: With Sensors + No Backlight
6) GPS + Galileo: With Sensors + No Backlight
7) GPS: With Sensors + With Backlight
8) GPS + GLONASS: With Sensors + With Backlight
9) GPS + Galileo:With Sensors + With Backlight
That’s roughly 9 days of testing (since I have to assume it’ll take the full duration specified initially of 15 hours), inclusive of re-charging time, working around the rest of life, etc….
And that also ignores the variants of that test too – like does ANT+ sensors burn less than BLE sensors? What about navigation (I can’t easily test that for 15 hour blocks 9 times over), and so on.
To be fair – in all the years of reviews (more than a decade now) – nobody as ever actually asked for backlight-on max battery times. Never once.
Now that could be for a few reasons. Perhaps folks didn’t tend to use devices with backlight at full beyond what was a common duration. Meaning, for a commute or such, that’s less than an hour or two. Or perhaps the battery being bigger on larger devices meant it wasn’t as much a concern. I’m not sure.
I try and cover the battery life aspects that I think most people care about. I do think it’s relatively rare that people are riding at night for even more than a couple hours at a time. Obviously, people do it. But I’d wager that’s under 2-3% of the population of road cyclists buying a unit like this. Mountain bikers, but again, just a couple hours in most cases. Same goes for road cyclists. I don’t know many people doing 5-6hr rides in the dark for training in the winter.
Just my two cents.
Furthermore, why would you need to run the backlight constantly? What information do you need to see at all times? On my Edge Touring when navigating the backlight wakes when there is a turn instruction (and you can set the backlight delay from a few seconds up to i think 30).
If you want to be able to trigger the backlight when you need data from the device how about getting the packages with the remote – i think you can set one of the buttons on there to switch backlight. That would mean you could trigger it without removing your hands from the bars.
Hi Ray, ok agreed. Missed the effort for the different scenarios.
And agreed nightrides will not be that long.
Just in this case it seems to be an issue, as the backlight – assuming not issue with battery or software – only last 2,5 hours. But specific to Edge 130. I hope a tech(bad battery quality) or software issue may caused this.
cheers
Don’t agree. For navigation you will need permanent backlight as it would be a mess to just press the power button every time. For nightride the same.
I ran my old Edge 500 and Edge 510 without any issue with backligth permanently on and still do for Edge 1000, but dimmned to 4 dots.
We are discussing primarly it is massively bad for the Edge 130 in comparism to the other Garmin devices. That it is limited is not the discussion here.
If you have prompts the backlight automatically wakes (on the edge touring) when there is a turn approaching – i’m guessing this is the same. no need to press the button.
Whatever. I don’t understand why we’re still scrabbling around for battery life on these devices. It would have been no issue at all to make the 130 a few mm bigger/maybe 10g heavier and have a battery life of 30+ hours.
I agree with Simon. The never ending desire of devices manufacturers to make their devices as small as possible is nonsensical to me. I’m 6’2″ and weigh 200 pounds. If the devices is a little thicker, a little taller, but has double or triple the battery life – well that would make me very happy. I don’t buy a device because it is small, I buy it for the feature set, of which a significant feature is the length of usage between charges. Give us a decent battery and you’ll sell more devices than giving us a tiny device.
I would agree to both of you. Just for the Edge it is really unusual in comparism to the other devices. That is why we spot for a tech issue here.
Well, in the absent of updates to improve this device, my two units will be returned this week. After two days of charging mine showed 85 percent charge, and then was dead after 3.5 hours. Attached is a photo of the battery life at the 3.5 hour mark, which was taken just minutes before the low battery warning sounded.
What have you got connected to it? Mine recorded a 7.5 hour ride yesterday (including lunch breaks) while connected to my phone (but with no other sensors) and is still showing about 50% battery.
I would consider it a pretty standard workload. I believe I have it set to GPS only for this ride, with a HR and Speed/Cadence sensor, as well as paired to my phone with Live Track enabled. Live track is shared with one person, who checked in perhaps two to three times over the duration of the ride (not sure if that matters). There are a couple other ANT device profiles attached to the device, but they are set to disabled (Tacx Neo – power, speed, cadence sensors).
Ray – its says it all that this is the first time anyone has asked you about backlight battery testing – it proves that the 130 is TERRIBLE in this regard! I do night rides for 6 months a year – with backlight on. First time i used the 130 for a night ride, battery died. For the previous 5 years, i used a 500 – battery NEVER died!
Performance like this is definitely worth calling out in your review.
But after how many hours did it die, and was it fully charged to begin with?
(Also, sensors, navigating, phone connected, etc…?)
To check this out I have ,even not needed, backlight permanently on. But lowest level – which should be fine to ensure everything readable in dark. 3 sensors, Galileo, no navigation.
A 2 -2,5 hours ride will need 30 – 40 %.
I think I’m gonna buy this unit for my dumb turbo trainer. I was happy with watching cycling races on my TV while I runned my workouts. Then I sold my 810 and moved to the Wahoo ELEMNT and lost all the tools I had on the Garmin Connect to tailor my workouts (time, speed, cadence, watts). The one provided by Wahoo is a joke to say the least “go to training peaks and help yourself” is so basic that is infuriating.
Ray, you list the recording interval as “1-second and smart”. As a keen mountain biker in the woods recording interval is really all I care about when getting a new unit, so it was the first thing I searched for when I came to this page. I duly bought one, and now that it’s arrived I can’t find any way to set the recording interval, unlike my old (now lost in the mud somewhere!) 520. Can you shed any light, or do you think you need to make a correction to the review?
Thanks
Same here, can’t find the setting anywhere.. A little bummed, since Ray’s review mentions it should have it. If it turns out it doesn’t, I just might send it back… 🙁
If the setting is not present then I would expect they default to 1-second recording (“smart” recording is kind of obsolete I think). Or does someone actually want “smart” recording?
I’ll dig around into the settings.
I just pulled up a file though, and it’s clearly recording 1s data wit ha power meter. I’ll double-check when i get back Monday on where the option went since when I wrote that. Just don’t have a unit with me at the moment travelling.
FYI, my 520 (set to smart recording) records 1s data when a power meter is connected, if I disable the power meter on the very same ride it will no longer record 1s. Re-enable the power meter and it goes back to 1s.
Thanks – so are you suggesting that WITH a power meter it will save a GPS data point every second (not just a power reading), but WITHOUT a power meter it might not? So if I got a power meter it’d force it to per-second recording, but without one I might be out of luck?
Thanks Ray!
That is what happens with my 520 correct. I cannot say what happens with the 130 as I do not have one. I feel like it would be silly for Garmin to put out a device that only had smart recording and not 1s recording.
On the Edge 520 you can manually specify smart or 1-second recording.
However, on all Garmin devices anytime a power meter is attached, it forces 1-second recording.
I’ll dig through and see where I saw the smart recording bit (or what conversation it may have come out of).
That’d be great Ray, thanks. I’m reluctant to use it myself to find out because then it becomes harder to send it back… although I suppose I’ve already set it up so doing a test recording walking around the garden isn’t much different – I just wont get it muddy out on the bike.
So I’ve just done a couple of tests in the garden – one running around and one with the unit sat stationary for a few minutes. I can confirm (exporting the .gpx files from Strava) that in both cases it recorded a data point every second. That’s without any power meter (or anything for that matter) connected to it.
I think it’s a keeper.
Sorry for the delay. I can confirm the Edge 130 uses every second recording all the time.
Thanks Shawn. I’d love your input on my other comment (#342) regarding galileo vs glonass as well please! 🙂
Ray,
Do you have any idea what bike computer I can buy without GPS but with ANT+ support ?
I mean device which will be running on batteries few months instead of few hours ?
I found Bontrager Node 2.1, but it’s deprecated.
link to trekbikes.com
Any other ideas?
Hmm, any of the Cateye ones perhaps?
Otherwise, it’s slim pickens these days.
Great Review…..Thanks for all the details!
Question…..why no support for ANT+ Gear Shifting (i.e. SRAM ETAP) like the 520 and 520+….especially since MTB eTAP is due to be released this year sometime. Is this something that will be in a future release?
This is a great little computer for road and mountain biking!
I suspect the reason is that they see ANT+ gear shifting as a higher product class thing, similiar to how while there is power meter support on the Edge 130, it’s limited (i.e. no left/right balance, no Cycling Dynamics, etc…).
I think what may be Garmin’s challenge here is that people are seeing the Edge 130 in terms of size first, and not actually price point. So they’re mentally equating the size to that of the more feature-rich Edge 500, when in reality it sits below that, even if it’s the same size (just like the Edge 20/25 sat below everything and were smaller).
In some ways this gets to the core challenge Garmin has in terms of how to solve the challenge of people wanting a certain form factor with certain features. Ideally they’d get to the point of you being able to unlock whatever features you wanted on whatever hardware you wanted (excluding hardware-specific limitations of course). Perhaps based on a subscription (i.e. Premium, Basic, whatever), or perhaps just one-time. Either way…I suspect that’s all a long-long-long time from now.
The lack of LR balance is a cynical move to intentionally reduce value on what would otherwise be a prime option for weight weenie racer/strava types. It would cost them nothing to provide it. This could just mean I hang onto my reliable 500 longer.
I have a further query if I may, Ray.
The unit lets me select
1) GPS
2) GPS + GLONASS
3) GPS + Galileo
Is there a technological reason why there wouldn’t be 4) “GPS + GLONASS + Galileo”, or is that something we’ll likely see on the more flagship models in time?
Given that I live in the UK, and I do lots of mountain biking in very tight (and often very steep) wooded terrain, what is likely to be the best setting for accuracy for me? I don’t care about battery life (well, I do, but accuracy is much more important!)
Thanks!
+1
I’m also more interested in accuracy than battery life.
Best option for mtb would be great to know. Haven’t had mine long enough to test the combos.
Glonass is Russian. Galileo isn’t fully rolled out yet. Seems to be some reports around that using additional can result in worse accuracy rather than better. I think best looked at as future proofing at this moment in time and use GPS only
Question – my other Garmin Edges (200, Touring) have had a ‘movement alert’. Start a ride and forget to hit start and it beeps at you to remind you. The 130 doesn’t seem to – is this a setting somewhere or a feature that’s been dropped?
Nice size and price point – been wondering about getting my wife/stoker a unit for the back of the tandem that would monitor her heart rate primarily and some other basics. We have a cadence sensor – would that link to two Garmin units – so to my edge 1000 at the front and her 130 at the back at the same time?
As long as it uses ANT+ (which it will do if it connects to your Edge 1000) it should be fine. ANT+ allows multiple simultaneous connections, Bluetooth doesn’t.
Great – thanks. Perhaps one day we can have his n her’s power meters!
Hi Ray — Do you know if the 130 support Garmin Power Courses (e.g. Best Bike Split) — also, the review says it supports data fields, but when I check the BBS data field download on the garmin app store, it doesn’t list the 130 as a compatable device.
Thanks
It looks as if the developer/Garmin needs to specifically list a plugin as compatible for it to be downloadable and that hasn’t been done for many things yet, even if they would logically work.
BBS told me over Twitter that apparently the 130 does not support them…
link to twitter.com
I just saw this on the Garmin forum:
Firmware Version 2.30 Now Available
Firmware version 2.30 for the Edge 130 is now available. This update can be downloaded through Garmin Express or Garmin Connect Mobile when available.
Incremental roll out 20% Change Log Support Extended Display mode. This special mode allows selected watches to display their data fields on the Edge 130.
Support Physio TrueUp. Physio TrueUp syncs activities to and from other Garmin devices, allowing all of your devices to more accurately reflect your training history and fitness.
Fix issue with software update not applying when a CIQ field is present
Improve file download speeds
Fix various bugs
Attempted to update to 2.3, hoping it will ‘cure’ come of the ongoing battery issues I’ve been having. The update was uploaded from my phone with no issues, but it refused to install. The unit would notify that there was a software update to install when booting, and that it would take 2 minutes. After selecting the install option, it would bring up the install bar, but would then immediately reboot without installing. This occurred about half a dozen times, even after an extended off period. This morning I attached to the PC and synced via the Windows app. It said the device was at 2.3, even though the device itself still said 2.2. After syncing to Windows the next device reboot was successful in installing 2.3. Hopefully it has some battery fixes, I’m getting frustrated with this device. 🙁
Follow up with my initial 2.3 firmware results. Following a seven hour charge, the device was reading 95% charge. It was 75% charged when put on the charger. For some reason it does not want to fully charge, or the percentage is messed. Unit was connected to HR strap and a speed/cadence sensor, as well as a phone. No live track, no other ANT or Bluetooth device profiles active. After 1.5 hours, the device is showing only 55% charge remaining. Can I trust that is accurate – nope, but I also can’t say it is not accurate when the low battery indication last came on after 3.5 hours. Initial impression is that the 2.3 update has not done anything to help with the ‘seemingly’ poor battery life of my unit.
Hi Nick
Was the update to 2.30 without issues? There are comments in the official Garmin forum of people who seem to have “bricked” their device when performing the update process. So I am reluctant to do the update to FW 2.30.
Has anyone other here made the update and was it trouble-free?
Regards, John
Update information is in post number 355.
Mine prompted me this morning so I let it update. Saw the install progress bar move normally, and it finished without a hitch. There was a message about Physio Trueup once it had finished, which is one of the new features. Seems fine so far, but I haven’t taken it for a ride yet.
No issues for me after the update. FWIW mine has never had random restarts. GPS was a little iffy at first, but once I’d used it a few times it seems to improve, and now gets a lock pretty quickly.
The only complaint I have about it is that there’s a slight lag after you pause a ride, so the resume/save/discard menu takes a second or two to appear.
I really like the screen – Considering I thought the Wahoo Bolt was too small, I was a little concerned, but it’s super clear outside. Much better than the disappointing 1030 experience, especially with a matte screen protector applied. For a small, cheap device I think it really punches above its weight!
I have two units, ran them side by side during today’s ride. They were set up identically. Can you guess which one is going back to Garmin?
(Not sure why the calorie counts are so different)
If calories are different, it almost undoubtedly means some aspect of the user profile are different (age/weight/gender…or, one was paired to a power meter and the other not, which is unlikely).
Hi Nick
What IQ data field do you use for the battery percentage? I have “Battery” from the IQ Shop and haven`t found a way to make the numbers as bold as the other characters. The percentage numbers are thinner and not as good to read than the other fields on the device. It seems you are using a data field that replaces the normal Garmin screen, because it looks different.
Thank you!!
Hi John.
It is called ‘Flexifield’
Went through the settings and I did find a significant problem with my test. The unit that is virtually dead after the ride was set to GPS and Galileo, while the longer life unit was set to GPS only. All user data (age, height, weight) was the same, as per the attached picture. No power meter connected to either unit, at least not until I convince Ray to send me one for a ‘Lessons from a Rookie Power Meter User’ feature on dcrainmaker. ?
Sorry, forgot the picture.
Different heart rate data would affect calories?
Hi Nick
Thanks a lot! I will give it a try!
That’s really interesting.
In theory btw, you can copy the Settings.fit file between the units to triple-check that they are running the same settings. I say ‘in theory’ because sometimes that just craps itself and you end up having to setup everything from scratch. 🙂
I’ll try that and see what happens. Any other tests anyone would like to have run on them while I have them side by side??
Hi There, great review. One question does it have the virtual trainer option like the 520, where you can pace against an average speed?
My Edge 130 experience.
1. Live segments caused the device to restart while in the segment ( long segments )
2. Restarts after saving a ride.
3. Avg power goes blank for a period of time after the PM sensor is dropped.
4. After the latest 2.3 update the device worked OK then on a restart the Garmin screen was displayed (blinking on and off). Nothing could fix this. The device would not connect to a PC either.
I have now got a refund !
Paul,
I’m having similar problems. On this mornings ride the 130 went blank and tried to do the 2.40 update. I had tried this morning for 10 minutes to get it to update as I knew Garmin had pushed the update but it wouldn’t work then mid-ride it shuts down. This happened when I first bought it and now again. I’ve had it a little over a month and had only two completely successful rides with it. Going back to Clever Training or calling Garmin today.
Ray – with Eurobike approaching, can we expect any new releases on the cycling computer front from Garmin, Wahoo, Lezyne, or others?
Hi, do you know if you can switch off the auto shut down ? This to keep my unit on in T1 waiting for me to get done with the swim ?
Tx,
Ced
I really enjoyed this review, and was going to purchase the Garmin Edge 130 to upgrade from my Edge 25. However, I now have the possibility of getting the Edge 520 for the same price.
Which would you recommend if price isn’t a factor?
Ray answered this further up the comments. Basically the 520 has more features like training plans. Get the 130 if you want the form factor. The only other advantage that could be major is that the 130 supports Bluetooth sensors which may matter more if you have a bunch of Bluetooth only sensors (not too common).
The 130 has Galileo support which the 520 doesn’t have, which may lead to better accuracy once the constellation is fully operational in a year or two. Does it even work at the moment, I’ve no idea really!
Yup, that summarizes it in a nutshell!
For me personally, I’ll take the Edge 520 any day (not even the Plus model).
I was looking at both at a similar price. The B&W screen on the 130 swung it for me – i’ve found Garmins colour screens completely wash out in bright sunlight, whilst the 130 is stunningly clear.
Am I correct in saying that if you want a non-wrist unit to display power from vector pedals this is currently your cheapest option?
Correct, this would be the cheapest MSRP bike gps that supports power from Garmin. However, the 520 has now been offered at $200 as well
Do keep in mind however that the Edge 130 doesn’t support Vector Cycling Dynamics, nor power balance (left/right split). All you’ll get is total power and cadence.
So far my experience with the 130 has been hit and miss. The screen is GREAT, and performs much better than the 520/820 in sunlight. The battery life has been… poor, I guess? Coming from a 520 that drove me insane with its poor mapping, incessant issues and consistently buggy firmware I was hoping for better battery life (especially since it’s been a sticking point in many reviews). But it’s been disappointing– I’ll finish our usual group training ride, about 40 miles door to door, with the 130 nearly dead (GPS/GLONASS, speed/cadence/power, BT off, backlight always on but toggled off until darkness falls). Under the same settings, the 520 would have 70% remaining at ride-end. Going to consider a refund.
Hi Darren,
Sorry to hear you are disappointed with the device. We would like to get some more information from you about your concerns. Please reach out to us at social@garmin.com, mention your post and that I asked you to reach out to us. We would like to get the activity file from your ride and find out what was going on.
Does anyone know if the Edge 130 can be used to control the Bontrager Flare RT rear light? I don’t own a 130 yet but I’m likely to get one in the future. I’m about to purchase the Flare R or RT. It looks like higher end Garmins can fully control the light through a Connect IQ app but some models only let you turn the light on or off, which isn’t really work the extra cost.
Ray, you write in the review that in the future you want to write a separate post about the difference in tracking accuracy in difficult environments with the Edge 130 using the option GPS alone or GPS+Galileo (both single frequency, because you specified in a previous post that the Edge 130 doesn’t support dual frequency).
Is this post still in your “to do” list or do you thing that this should not be treated as a priority and you are not interested any more?
I notice that there are now circa 400 comments about the Edge 130, but it seems that users are not interested so much about the accuracy they experimented with the option GPS+Galileo, because no one commented about that .
Or are you waiting that the 4 Galileo satellites launched in december 2017 become operational? Now they are in testing phase, I think that they will be ready in July.
It would be nice to have a comparison between:
1- garmin edge 130 with single frequency GPS
2- garmin edge 130 with single frequency GPS+Galileo
3- smartphone Xiaomi MI8 with dual frequency GPS+Galileo (chipset Broadcom BCM47755)
Still definitely on the to-do list.
Autolap functions on Edge 130, help please! On my Edge 500 (“old bluey” one of the best Garmin devices ever) I could set autolap for any distance. On Edge 130 seems only the default 5km is available, is that true?
Also with autolap enabled, at each 5km it simply displays “5km” for a few seconds, not very helpful without some other metrics e.g. lap speed, lap power. Is it possible to display other metrics with autolap/
Thanks
yep, it is true. Garmin knows about the limitation (naturally), and will discuss it internally, if they can make it more useful
So when using navigation can you set the screen up to show you speed and distance at same time?
Ray,
Tried looking but cannot find if you can charge the unit while riding for those longish rides or you just forgot to charge it kind of days.
First thanks for your DC R, appreciated.
Interesting to follow the battery debate. Haven’t done enough riding yet to test life but did immediately notice that after hours of charging the bar would not show 100% charge (only about 80 or so going off the icon). Look forward to Garmin’s response.
My question though related to weather:
– is it possible to view the weather widget while riding? couldn’t work this out.
– secondly, is it possible to show live temperature while riding? I assume this is what the sensor underneath is for?
Cheers
Meant to say thanks for the review!
1. I am not near my Edge130 but IRC you can add it as one of the data screens. Just be sure your unit is connected to the phone. It is inaccurate as hell, it is weather widget after all.
2. This is the biggest bummer for me. No, you cannot, because… I do not know why, reasons?!, buy a more expensive unit? From viewing ‘after-ride-reports’ I have noticed this sensor is very inaccurate as well (24°C when it was 30°C) – my 6x cheaper sigma 16.12 gave better readings.
Just to confirm the battery issue with firmware 2.40
I did a longer ride Saturday. 6:12 hours. Backlight 10s, GPS+Galileo, GC app NOT connected, no navigation 3 sensors. Only 23% remaining. My Edge 1000 last longer.
Reading through reviews of the 520 Plus most people are supriced how long battery last.
For me there is definitely something wrong on the 130 and Garmin still not able to discover it.
No idea why they are showing like not able to reproduce the issue, even every other user is to.
And targeting the issue should be not that difficult. One is backlight, the seems to be connected sensors. If user do a test ride with NOTHING connected and just GPS running it last around the 15 announce hours.
But that for me is like “It last 15 hours, if you don’t use it”.
Another mistake being an early adaptor of a new Garmin. Don’t understand why I am not able to learn from pat.
Re Garmin connect: Is there a way to turn off the ads sent via notifications? These show up on my Edge 130. I refer to the messages that say “get the weather app” or “stay connected with livetrack”? Also I noticed that even when it’s sitting on my desk, if I push the start button it says I’m going 2.5 kph and logs distance! What’s up with that?
.
have had the unit for 2 weeks now, all my ant+ sensors paired with no issues instantly, tried my BLE/ ant+ Hrm, paired right away with no issues. my 4iiii paired via ant+ only, any thing i can do to make it pair via bluetooth? have tried disabling all sensors, iq apps and the phone itself and just look for sensors, cannot find the ble signal of my 4iii precision.
Buy a 520 plus. I had the 130 for almost two months and sent it back to Clever Training. It never worked correctly the entire time. Either it would shutdown and restart during a ride or after update 2.40 the Strava Segments would not work. Got my 520 plus today and after set up it worked perfect on the first ride. There is a reason Ray originally indicated he might prefer the 130 over the 520 then backtracked on that. Besides, the 520 plus is $79 more but includes a $30 outfront mount not included with the 130, making the difference only $50. What’s more, if you use the Clever Training VIP 10% credit, you get an extra $8 worth of credit, bringing the real difference to about $42. Trust me, the 130 sucks compared to the bigger color screen of the 520 plus. For $42, it’s a no brainer. Skip a couple beers or coffees and get the 520 plus. Don’t buy the 130.
I am finding some peoples experiences of the 130 to be very odd as i’m Getting no issues with mine (tho i think garmin underspecced the battery and sub 10 hours is likely if you have lots of sensors attached)
I’ve done a good few all day mtb rides with mine now (with no sensors except phone attached) and short (2hour) road rides with HR, Cadence and speed sensors and using Strava segments.
Battery life is about 50% after an 8 hour day with no sensors. Looks like it might not be so great with loads of sensors but not tried.
The unit has yet to crash on me or give any strange behaivior (which for me is a first with a Garmin. My Edge touring, despite numerous firmware upgrades, still crashes sometimes when navigating and, every so often, a load of settings reset to factory for no reason i can work out).
So, odd that some are getting issues and others are not.
Simon,
I get what your are saying. But, there are far more complaints on here and the Garmin forums on the 130 than there are on the 520 plus. I learned long ago with the Fenix 1 not to be a beta tester for Garmin. If it does not work out of the box get rid of it.
But, my other point is this, you screwed yourself cause you could have had a far better computer for really only $42 more, even if the 130 worked correctly.
One minor thing to remember is that people had the Edge 130 from basically day 1 (mid-April), whereas the Edge 520 Plus was held back till mid-late May. Thus, more people and more time and all that.
Not at all, despite the aspect Ray told, you need to keep in mind – if it goes down to navigation – the 520 has not been originally designed to work with maps. Especially if you ride MTB map orientation is far too slow.
So if you are only keen on the sports function I may agree, but really using navigation regularly and not only for emergency would be a pain.
When using the Back to start Via same Route feature, the arrow pointing my position in relation to the course navigates outside of the window and does not automatically recenter. I have to switch data page to get a refreshed view of the map and arrow. Anyone else experiencing this? (This was with firmware 2.3, have updated this morning and I have not yet tested this on the 2.4 release.)
I have the same problem, and there seem to be quite a lot of people complaining about it on the Garmin support forums too, as there are several threads with a lot of views. I am using a bike computer mainly for navigating breadcrumb routes, so this renders the device mostly useless for me.
On the Garmin support forums, a Garmin employee (Shawn-Garmin) has stated this was a known problem and that it would be fixed, without giving any specifics. After waiting for several days, I called the German support hotline today. The staff there gave no indication he had heard of the problem at all and told me the device had to be returned to Garmin for at least 10 days.
I decided to wait for a firmware update for a couple of days and then send the unit in.
Yes, same experience here. I tried using the 130 to navigate a route i’d previously ridden and it was unusable because of this. (i’ve got an Edge Touring i use for navigation so was only doing it as an experiment)
Thaks @Fabian, for letting me know about your similar problem and contact with Garmin… I will monitor the formum threads that deal with this issue.
I don’t know if it’s because of me being german and all, but the way this is handled by Garmin customer support seems totally ridiculous to me.
From what I can gather from my personal experience and the Garmin support forums, a bug was introduced in software version 2.3 or 2.4 which renders a main feature (GPS navigation while riding a bike) of a 200€ bike computer mostly unusable for a substantial part (all?) of customers who bought it.
If this was a washing machine, I would expect customer support to contact the owners of the faulty product, explain the problem, apologize for the inconvenience caused by it and to explain how and when the problem will be fixed. And if it cannot be fixed, offer a quick and convient way to return it for a refund.
As it is, all I’ve got is a post in the support forum (essentially “we have heard about this problem and will fix it eventually, good luck in the meantime”) and phone customer support saying the unit must be sent in for “repair”.
Sorry for the rant, but this just bugs me.
Sorry for the confusion Fabian. We are working on getting this resolved with a software update. You should not need to replace the device for this issue. I will reach out to the team for an update on the timeframe. We do apologize for the inconvenience.
My experience as well. The german support is rubbish. Seems to be just a callcenter to handle RMA.
1. The first answer sit always “The problem is not known” even people are discussing for week in the german and US forums
2. First solution is always RMA
3. If in rare cases they know the problem the statement is always “we have forwarded the issue to the developers, we will neither get a response nor be able to give any statement when the issue will be solved
The german forum does not get ANY attendance by Garmin. So in the US forum we are quite lucky to have Shawn. But overall not that much better. You will see on the battery thread, no further response by him. No statement if it is a technical issue or just something like:
“We are sorry we have far overestimated the capacity and didn’t respect the expected usual usage of the device. If you are disappointed, please get back to – worldwide – and you can claim your money back”
Sorry if the following issue has already been stated. This thread is meanwhile REALLY long.Just take then as confirmation.
Today I tried to follow a quite short track. Less then 15km just to get to a point I didn’t know exactly. I was gong to depart for a little dirt spot right beside the track. No need to integrate it. So the 130 recognises and gave notice. So far, so good
After the map won’t any longer change its orientation. Purely north. It neither helped to stop and start it, nor to power down the Edge. As reminder to people not familiar with the 130s, Garmin decided to reduce massively for some reasons configuration options (and other stuff). Means the option to change map orientation is missing.
I there anything else this device could do properly then showing speed….
….without any sensor connected
…. without backlight
…. etc.
I usually can by a 10 bucks device to get the same result
Apologies for the frustration hulster. I will send you a PM through our forums. Thank you for the details and feedback.
Shawn,
1) Have you seen my post a few days ago about the map not centering issue when navigating back to starting point?
2) Any update from « the team » about a timeframe for a definitive fix (ref: one of your previous messages)?
3) Is the Product Owner aware of this situation? What does he or she have to say?
I really like the suggestion from another user about an official email to all registered owners of the Edge 130 but I seriously doubt Garmin will follow it.
Eagerly awaiting a resolution on this ridiculous limitation.
“I will reach out to the team for an update on the timeframe.”
Dear Shawn, are you aware that people are actually waiting for this update for 5 days now?
This thing is GARBAGE. Created a route recently for an unfamiliar location (that’s what GPS is for right?) and the navigation missed like 5 turns for some reason. The road clearly turns like 90 degrees and the name of the road changes but no turn notification from unit. Told me I was off course multiple times—and this is with GPS and GLONASS enabled. 2 hours into the ride and I was at 50% power so i turned off all sensors and GLONASS. Started heading back and unit tells me that my next turn is in 42 miles????? I can literally see the turn 50 feet away! Had to use my phone to find my way back. later in the ride—got a flat. that sucks—but wait, i’m using live track so i can be found right? nope—-contacted my friend who was tracking me, told them my location and according to live track I was 15 miles away from my actual location. GREAT!!! Finally got home after getting quite lost and went to upload the ride and BOOM—battery dead, 8 hours later. This is with no sensors or navigation. CRAP CRAP CRAP. So I contacted Garmin—have heard nothing. Probably because I’m ranting to them as I am here. Posted on the edge 130 Forum–the moderator pretty much told me that I dont know how to use my unit and thats why its acting up—he then decided to shut down my comments. Contacted Jenson USA for a refund and was basically told that since I mounted the thing I may have to pay a restocking fee of 15%!!!!! Terrible customer service from all parties. Will never buy anything GARMIN again
Ignoring whatever was going on routing wise for a moment, I’m confused on the battery comment though.
You said you were navigating, but then said it died after 8 riding hours of battery life?
Hi Ray, he stated earlier in his post battery went down to 50% after 2 hours and disabled all sensors and set to GPS only.
Apologies for the frustration and experience you have had with the device Steven. I have sent you a PM through the Garmin Forum.
I started my ride with GPS & GLONASS enabled (GLONASS enabled thinking all turns would be accounted for!) Also had HR, cadence and speed sensors enabled so I understand that battery life may suffer but 2 hours in and 50% left seems excessive. Disbaled all sensors and GLONASS leaving only GPS and navigation (which an hour later bit the dust anyway) and ended up with maybe 8 hours of battery. I purchased the unit before our first century ride so I needed something with good battery life but this was not it…..
shawn@garmin tried to PM you but for some reason i cannot send any PM’s in the forum—even after enabling PM
The other item to triple-check would be if backlight was set to ‘Stays on’. It’s a topic I talked with Garmin on at Eurobike, in making it super clear on Garmin Connect what backlight status was, as well as if during daylight hours backlight is on permanently, to perhaps give a warning (since it can be impossible so spot in the sun).
Sounds like they’re already working on that.
Steven – If the PM bit isn’t working, I can forward your e-mail to Shawn with your permission.
Still the issue is with the overall drain the backlight causes is to high. Did you own an Edge 500? Did you ever experience that power drain while using backlight permanently? And there was no dim option as well.
During winter season I am doing nightrides almost 2-3 times a week. 2,5 – 3 hours. Makes it nearly unusable to me.
With my Edge 1000 dimmed to 4 dots (which is still quite bright in the dark) I can do minimum 2 rides.
What I like to say – a warning for backlight on is even not a workaround. The Problem is not you are not aware it is on. The issue is the unusual massive power drain by it.
Yeah that’s fine—you can send my email
So I basically had no choice but to send this thing back to Jenson USA. I reluctantly spent $16 on shipping and I’m not even guaranteed a refund. The day I sent it back I got an email from garmin finally (probably after I posted my thoughts here) telling me that I could upgrade my device to the edge 520 plus at a discounted rate but apparently that offer only stood after I returned the item to garmin myself. offer now gone apparently. now i have no device, no guarantee on a full refund and the experience of poor customer service everywhere. Fabulous!
Steven, I have asked one of our team members to reach back out to you to help with your concerns.
Hi, Ray.
How would rate the 130 vs the 520+? I’m really on the fence here oscillating between wanting the 130, the 520+, or the Bolt. I ride with power (PT G3 hub) and am currently using a Garmin 705 (which is having connection issues with my computer. Are the issues on the 520+ sorted enough to place above the 130?
Do you think Lezynes Mega XL or Mega C are going challenge the 520+ and Bolt?
I bought two 130s (one for the wife) and have had mixed results. My unit had significant battery issues, and would only charge to 95 percent with an overnight charge. I was lucky to get five to six hours out of it in use. I’ve replaced it with the 520 plus, and have to say the whole unit is much better. Better battery life, more robust features etc etc. I’m glad I returned the 130 for the 520 plus. The wife’s 130 has ok battery life, gets a full charge and does what she needs it to do.
Robin,
My experience with the 130 was terrible. It would only finish about 1/4 of the rides without shutting down or rebooting and after the 2.40 firmware update, live segments never worked again. I sent it back and purchased the 520+. The 520+ has been mostly rock solid. I had one initial pairing issue with a power meter but haven’t had it again. Live segments work great. It has never once shut down or rebooted. I mentioned this earlier, but the 520+ is a no brainer over the 130. It’s in a different category. For $279 you get the Garmin outfront mount with it that sells separately for $30. That doesn’t come with the 130. Effectively, for $50 you have color screen nearly twice as big, much better battery life, more power data, etc. etc. etc. Get the 520+.
Completely agree!
I was thinking about the 130 when the 520 was on sale for the same $199. Ray suggested (Thanks!) just going with the 520. I bit the bullet and went all out for the 520+. No regrets. Works great, good battery life, navigation is more helpful and I use it more often than I thought I would. If anyone needs a nudge that direction, here’s another vote for the 520+!
Really glad I dropped by to check the recent owner/user comments before placing my order. Sadly, it seems the Edge 130 is not yet the replacement for the dependable Edge 500 it promised to be.
Poor battery life, no temperature display, navigation issues, live segment problems, fixed autolap, etc, etc.
Seems my venerable 500 will stay on my bikes until the Edge 130 user feedback improves or the Wahoo Bolt price drops here in Oz……
If you can wait, wait. As you see by Shawns and Rays they are working on it. You need to be a bit more straight if you already own a device to get your issues solved.
From hardware perspective – if the got the battery issues solved – the 130 is great device, because there was no stand-in for the 500 before. Edge 20/25 are a different category.
To date, the pair we have are doing okay. Some issues but holding out for additional firmware updates.
Meanwhile, put a new battery in my dependable vintage Edge 800 and it took care of routing duties on an extended trip.
Thanks @hulster and @SpeedyChix. I’ll await the release of firmware version 2.50 and see what everyone’s feedback is then.
I know that there are no advanced power datafields available. But after uploading a training to Garmin Connect or Trainingpeaks, are these numbers like TSS shown there or are they completely missing and aren’t calculated at all?
Hey folks…
I’ve had an Edge 130 for a month now in active use (maybe 1,000 kms) so thought I would post and add my own thoughts on this device.
I’ve been a happy user of the trusty Edge 500 for several years. I thought the 130 was the perfect answer to get better connectivity and an updated device.
Overall, my impression is entirely mixed. The form, size and weight (verified weenie) is great, but the functionality lacks.
LIKES:
– the display is such a good upgrade from the 500. Crystal clear in all light conditions. Good sized, readable fonts and decent screen size to show all the fields and metrics you might want (or ask Garmin to give you…)
– connectivity is what I expected. With live tracking, live segments, Bluetooth BLE and Ant+, auto updates, BT route uploads, etc. This has been seamless for me and so beats the old version whereby you have to tether to your PC. When traveling, I always had to surf around to see who had a PC I connect to. Now its just the mobile. This was among the key reasons for the upgrade for me. LOVE getting a text message displayed on the device.
– as stated above, the compact form and minimal weight is near perfect – buttons are placed well and no issues managing the device during the ride. To my minimalist mind, nothing is worse than a big old brick dangling off the front bars. The 130 ticks the box so well.
– ability to add Connect IQ data fields is good – indeed critical as it has become necessary for me to make up for other shortcomings of the functionality of the device. BUT… I believe there’s a limit of only two CIQ fields you can deploy contemporaneously (does anybody know if you can do more than that?) and why that’s a limit is a mystery.
ON THE FENCE:
– battery life is reported to be an issue for some here and in the Garmin 130 forum. This hasn’t been too bad for me. I experience about 9-10 hours (certainly short of their optimal 15 hours claimed) with GPS+Glonass, 1 HRM sensor, backlight set to 10s minimum, live tracking on, route on, live segments on. A 4 hour ride under these conditions ran it down to 55% while paired with my phone. Wish it was more like 15 but not a killer issue.
– Mapping. I am used to and fine with the old breadcrumb style mapping of routes on the 500. This is about the same experience (but with a known display problem in current 2.4 software version). Display rendering appears quicker than the old 500 which took more time to think about things I suppose.
DISLIKES
– field limitations are just dumb and pointless. If the info is there, please let me have it. Examples of the shortcomings from the 500 are:
– Vertical Speed (VS30) – not available at all. Love this field as a proxy for power. Surprised no-one has commented on it not being there. I have band-aided/hacked a solution to this using the AppBuilder app in CIQ. It works OK but is far from ideal. Getting a good readable font size from CIQ datafield apps is not easy or possible I think.
– Temperature – not available at all. The device has it (shows up in Strava file) but no live readout. There is the Garmin weather app on the device (through phone) but many like the recorded metric shown live.
– auto pause custom speed setting – device has auto pause but sometimes I will sit a light for 10s before it goes into pause. I used to have a setting to manage that better in the 500. Not available in the 130. Dumb limitation.
– auto lap fixed distance (5km) – pointless utility and limitation. The 500 could be custom set for distance and/or a fixed location on a lap. Not so on the 130.
– battery % is not shown. Just the teeeeny weeeny little status bar. Hard to know what’s left in the tank. Again, there’s an app for that in CIQ but you have to rig the field display to max to make it show up properly. It’s really dumb.
– 2.4 Firmware – known and huge issue on route display. North is ALWAYS up and the chevron rider (you) simply rides on and goes off the page. This renders the route feature completely useless. I have some faith but diminishing patience that the next version will correct this in a timely fashion.
So where does this leave me personally? I want to like the device – really. But I want and expect to Garmin to open it up better and offer it as a solid unit (without advanced mapping and nav and that’s totally OK. It is that feature that drives others to the 520 or better) and not to slot in their lineup as a lower-end device. It’s all there but intentionally dropped from the unit – please let your faithful Garmin users have the info they like!!
If Firmware 2.5 does not make a material advance in route display (fix) and additional features being “un-locked”, this unit is going back and I will drape the 520 brick (or maybe a Bolt) off my bars for essentially the same price.
Hopefully the foregoing bits help others make their decisions or inspire existing users to sound off and get the unlock codes for better functionality.
Lastly (for Shawn), I would post in the 130 community blog on Garmin too but can’t for the life of me figure out how to post. Must be a permission thing. I am a registered user but there are no “reply” or “post” buttons anywhere. Any suggestions on this would be appreciated. Thanks to Ray and DC here to allow me to sound off. Cheers.
Thanks for that full review @Breton Smith. It confirms my decision to wait or shop elsewhere.
The thing that should concern Shawn and all at Garmin, is not just that the seemingly inability to resolve these issues will impact on sales of the new 130 but it also gives the potential buyers cause for concern over purchasing other Garmin units instead. They’ll quickly determine it’s probably look elsewhere for reliability and a responsive support structure.
Meanwhile, the Edge 500 powers on and on….
PS Ray, maybe you could add a ‘user feedback’ indicator after the summary of each review such that products such as this (the Fly 6CE and 12CE come to mind too) with real world multi-user issues would have those issues noted? A buyer could currently read through your review and its summary and believe it to be their ideal product only to discover after reading through 400+ end user comments that it maybe isn’t.
Thank you for the detailed feedback Breton. You should be all set to post on the Garmin Forums. We will have the north up issue resolved in our next firmware update. I will reach out to the Edge team with the concerns you and others have posted.
Nobody seems to mention it. The screen of the Edge 130 has a Memory-in-Pixel (MIP) technology.
My experience with the Edge 130 was getting slightly better (in the sense I was learning to live with the device’s limitations and poor battery life), but then it went right off a cliff. When I updated to 2.4, the update seems to have wiped my GPS firmware entirely. I can’t connect to GPS at all, no matter how long I wait, and when I finally checked System/About, it shows the software version as 2.40, the sensor hub as 5.80, and the GPS as 0.00… which I assume means the device has somehow deleted the GPS software (it used to have the current software number). I’m getting kind of fed up with Garmin’s inability to fix issues without causing more issues. So frustrating.
Sorry for the frustration you are having with the device Darren. Please reach out to our support team and we will help.
I just want to state again that due to a software bug (navigation map doesn’t refresh and always points north), GPS navigation has been unusable on the Edge 130 for 6 weeks now unless you constantly press a button on the computer (while riding a road bike fast).
Despite repeated claims by Garmin customer support, a bug fix has still not been released. Also, despite repeated requests by multiple Edge 130 users, Garmin still has given no information whatsoever on when a bug fix can be expected.
With navigational capacities lacking, the Edge 130 is as powerful as a bike computer costing ten times less.
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE Garmin, fix the computer we bought and that you broke by a faulty software update (in my case, just outside the german 14 day return window) 6 weeks ago.
Also, if the bug is so major a team of programmers have not been able to fix it for 6 weeks, just allow the user to revert to software version 2.2.
At least for me, the unit worked fine using this older version. I could then use the computer for riding my bike and had all the time in the world to wait for another update which fixes other issues (Strava segments? Battery life?).
If a reversal isn’t feasible through Garmin connect, I would be happy to download it from somewhere and follow instructions to put in on the unit myself.
This site normally has firmware that you can revert to: link to gawisp.com
But I don’t see the Edge 130 listed there yet.
I’d call back Garmin support, they can (and have a long history of), providing the older firmware versions to revert back to. It’s a trivial exercise that takes only a few seconds to do. It’s also something Garmin does in every beta firmware update (including the previous version to revert back to).
You can also consider posting on the Garmin Forums and asking for the older firmware. While Garmin themselves is unlikely to post there, but perhaps someone else has it handy somehow.
First, thanks for a great review! Very helpful.
After reading the review I had decided the 130 was for me. I currently have a 520 and use it purely to collect data and every once in a while I upload a map to it. The simplicity of the 130 and live Strava was all I was looking for. What that means, is I don’t use the GPS mapping like it seems many folks do.
So here is my question. After reading the comments it seems there is a real battery issue with these computers. Does anyone know if Garmin has fixed this issue? Is there a “born on” date I should look for to make sure I get an updated computer when I buy? Thanks for the help!
While there may be an issue with certain folks that are getting crazy low 2-hour bits, I think the main battery issue is actually an expectations alignment problem.
Meaning, Garmin advertised battery life of X – but didn’t qualify that in terms of which sensors/features are enabled at that time. Supposedly they are doing so soon (perhaps they already have), which will help clarify things a bit.
The other issue I think we’re seeing is actually people leaving backlight on. It’s so easy to do and with the Edge 130 in particular you’ve got almost no idea in daylight that it’s on.
Garmin’s looking at two solutions here:
A) Making a reminder to users after perhaps a few minutes that the backlight is on
B) Enumerating backlight status in Garmin Connect when looking at a completed activity – thus, people like me (and the internet and support) can quickly help diagnose this.
In the actual .FIT file itself the backlight status is listed.
In my case the battery wouldn’t get a full charge after a all night charging, so definately something defective. I do agree on the expectation issue… Don’t claim 15 hours when in real use you are going to get less than half that. Give us bigger devices with significant battery life and real/ honest battery life advertising!
Yup, if after charging all night long and it doesn’t hold a charge – then without question it’s broke (or, I suppose, your cable or upstream device could technically be broken or rate-limited, but that’s unlikely).
I think the problem Garmin’s learning with the Edge 130 isn’t so much the actual battery numbers (because frankly only a handful of people are riding more than 8 hours at a time). Rather, it’s just setting expectations. If the 15hr figure is only achieved in a non-sensor/non–map/non-whatever situation, just be clear about that with a simple table with what each device gets.
And to be fair – they committed somewhere up above they’d be doing that from here on out. Previous to this, I think most people looked at these smaller devices as non-viable. So they’d look at the bigger units you noted, and in those situations kinda knew that if you had maps and a pile of sensors and what-not, it might not get the max battery life. Just like if you watch YouTube on your phone it’ll die quicker than plain text messages.
But again…all about expectation settings.
hi .. i am a 130 user in the asia pacific region
when i first got the 130 it had firmware 2.20 in it
everything worked well .. navigation etc
battery life was shocking if it tried to meet the claim of 15 hours … total time of about 5 hours would take over 70% of battery capacity with 2 sensors and only GPS
connect then prompted me there was an update for firmware (only 2.30 available as latest update for my region)
fine .. went ahead with the update (2.30) which i hoped will solve some battery issues
firmware 2.30 .. battery life did not improve .. navigation missed a turn on a short 5 km course .. elevation gained synched to strava was virtually doubled (if it was 400m in connect it tells strava 800m) .. this elevation issue really kicks me ..
would be great if someone had the 2.20 firmware that i can roll back to
to battle the battery issue .. i even got myself a small powerbank that i can use to charge up the device when i do go for real long rides .. until a solution comes up
downloaded a CIQ to show me the battery % in numbers
charged the device up full (shows full black bar and 100% in CIQ)
switched it off .. left it on the table for an hour … switched it back on
CID app shows 86% battery available .. whats going on ??
based on my experience with battery % … the numbers are based on voltage of the battery .. so if there is a 14% drop with ZERO USAGE 1 hour immediately after full charge .. there is something very wrong .. poor battery quality that does not hold its charge IMO
ok … enough of my ranting
please please … someone .. a copy of firmware 2.20 please
ps .. i too could not reply or post anything in garmin forums despite being a registered user
Which is usually for any forum. Only for blogs owners can allow by their own decision.
A couple of questions come to mind after reading the response. Does the new 520+ not have the same issue? Is there a reason this seems to be isolated to the 130?
Finally, would you agree with my assessment that if all I’m looking for is consistent/accurate tracking of my rides with live strava segments and periodic route guidance when I travel out of town with my bike, the 130 is plenty of computer for my needs?
The 520+ may has different issues. The 520+ is the same hardware as the old 520. Primarily adding a bit of memory to keep maps of usual size on the device. The issue here is, it is quite slow, because of the old hardware. And due to not a touch device you can currently not scroll the map, just zoom.
So if you are not looking for the map navigation it could be currently an alternative to the 130.
Garmin has decided, even the software basics are fairly the same, to keep firmware of each device separately. Which we all do not understand, because the hardware defers the devices already a lot.
But as example the Edge 1000 can’t do Geocaching, even all hardware and a big touch screen is there. And they are really believing people will buy a device out of the other ranges to get it.
We all know software quality would improve a lot if the would change their mind to have a single basic firmware for all devices.
But currently it is more looking to get worse. And you see how long it takes to get just the biggest bugs fixed. I got the impression the developers get slots for each device.
In the past years the speed getting out new devices increases a lot. So much more to support every separatly.
They are focussing on getting new customers….
I’ve found what seems to be an odd glitch with the GPS on my 130. I’ve had an 820 for quite some time now, never seen this glitch with that unit, but my last two rides I have had the exact same glitch with my 130.
The 130 seems to glitch on out-and-back efforts. The first time this happened was on a July 4 ride here in SoCal. The heart of the ride is a climb up Mandeville Canyon Road. Phil Gaimon made a video when he took the KOM (link to youtube.com). It was then taken by pro Corentin Ermenault on his TT bike (link to youtube.com). The climb dead-ends at the top, you ride out-and back. I did this climb on July 4, but the 130 basically erased the climb from my GPS file. It knows I was at the base of the climb, then it ignores my ride up and down the hill, then it continues my ride when I returned to the base. The 130 essentially crops out the out-and-back effort. Here is the file:
link to connect.garmin.com
I was pretty bummed the 130 lost that effort, as it was a PR for me, so I put the 130 away until yesterday. This time, I tested it by running my 820 in its normal spot (Cycliq duo mount) and I ran the 130 in my middle jersey pocket. At this point, I had no idea of the out-and-back glitch, I thought it was just a freak GPS drop, but I just so happened to do another out-and-back effort on this ride, this time on a road called Westchester Parkway. What do you know, the 130 again decided to crop this section of my ride from my file!
Here is the 820 file, showing a total distance of 25.73 miles: link to connect.garmin.com
And here is the 130 file from the same ride, showing a total distance of 20.73 miles, due to it cropping out my out-and-back effort: link to connect.garmin.com
In the 130 file, it shows me stationary at about 1:04:10 and then seems to teleport me home at the end.
Really can’t see using the 130 for any ride at this point.
I just found a glitch or bug that is most likely responsible for the battery drainage?
So what I have done is gone and turn off GPS/GLONASS/GALILLEO, turned off all prompts and navigation, unpaired and turned off all sensors, disable phone connection, disable CIQ and basically just about everything.
From there I hit start and start recording without any GPS or sensors, doing a stationary recording. The only data field I have shown is a battery indicator and a time elapsed timer. There is a peculiar thing that happens at 00:04:58 (4minutes 58 seconds) into the elapsed recording session. The battery indicator drops a bar at that exact time. I let it run a few more seconds and then stop recording. The battery indicator remains in the same position.
I then power off the device and turn it back on. The battery indicator is back up to full charge! So thinking this might be a once off, I hit start and record another session with no GPS or sensors and everything is turned off like the first test. Low and behold at 4 minute 58 seconds, the battery indicator drops a bar at that exact time!
Determined to see if this is glitch or bug, I turn off the device again and turn it back on. After the screen lights up, the battery indicator is shown back at full charge. I renable just only GPS for a new recording but also staying stationary whilst recording like the previous tests. Just like clockwork the battery indicator drops a bar at 4 minutes 58 seconds.
So perhaps this isn’t a drainage issue? The firmware is faulty in reading the charge and subsequently shows the device to be draining more than it should be. If Garmin will allow a proper percentage battery indicator level, and not just a bar indicator, we can possibly find out if it’s an actual drainage issue.
Firmware update no 3.00 is now out on Garmin’s site. (Dear Garmin Support Personnel, why don’t you inform your registered users when you push an update!!!)
link to www8.garmin.com
It wanted to update my 130 as soon as I started it yesterday. I’d consider that a pretty automated notice.
We have not typically sent out emails to registered users in the past for software updates. We do post the update to our forums. I will post the change history below:
Changes made from version 2.40 to 3.00:
• Add additional backlight settings
• Fix map zoom not working in certain scenarios
• Allow eight CIQ data fields to be installed (still allow only 2 active at once)
• Fix issue with BLE power meter cadence
• Scale battery reporting of CIQ data fields to reflect device capabilities
• Support CIQ 3.0
Thanks Shawn,
I’m holding off on purchase while awaiting user feedback on this update.
Seems the backlight issue got fairly sorted. I did a quick test at home just start a ride with brightness “Low” and display permanently on, GPS on, connected to phone. Shutdown after 6 hours. But no sensors connected. Will do a real ride today just keeping backlight on, but with all sensors connected.
As usual the developers did make things worse. Realising CIQ developers can use battery percentage they now changed the content of that field to show only the same as the bars.
Means 100%->80%.->….->20%->1%
So any estimate will no be less accurate. Especially when it got fairly empty. So it will show 20% until real 10% are reached and then switch to 1%. So you really no idea when the device will shutdown. 🙁
Hi Shawn,
For some reason I cannot post on the Garmin forum hence I’ll communicate with you here. On 3.0 firmware the engineer added an annoying backlight/battery prompt after you power on the device. The prompt comes up if you have the backlight set to ‘stay on’. I’ve now set the backlight’s new ‘keys and alert’ to come on only after sunset and before sunrise. However I do wish the backlight to stay on at night until I manuallty turn it off, hence I’ve set the backlight to ‘stay on’. With the combination of backlight settings I currently have the backlight would never come on during the day unless I manually turn it on. So there’s no reason to get the backlight/warning prompt after every power up. Please talk to the engineer to have them either add a new setting to disable the annoying backlight/battery prompt or just add a new backlight setting ‘off’. With the new backlight setting of ‘off’, I can manually turn on the backlight at night and have it stay on, and not get the backlight/battery warning prompt after power up. Thank you for your time.
Confirmed. I have already contacted the developer of “GPS and battery info”, the datafield that I am using, but haven`t received an answer yet. Probalbly it could be solved without waiting for a new update from Garmin, which will take weeks as we know. I have also noticed a strange behavior with the new firmware 3.0. After the percentage dropped down to 40 % (after 6:10 hours with GPS, speed and cadence sensors paired and backlight on low) the percentage jumped to up 60 % a few times and went down to 40 % again. Showing the percentage in 20 % steps is nearly useless. Apart from that: What kind of silly policy of restriction is it not to have a datafield that shows the percentage in the Garmin OS if you can load it over the IQ Store?
Also: My language is german and after the update, the datafields are just shown in english. Language in GC and device is set to german and the system language is german, but not the datafield. This is not a big deal – chinese would be a problem 😉 – but do they perform any kind of tests at Garmin after releasing a new update? (It is a rhetorical question.)
It would be nice if Shawn could give us an answer concerning this matters. And it should be more than: “We are working on it”. If there is a bug in an IOS update, Apple normally fixes it within a few days.
The 130 doesn’t seem to have a ‘movement detected’ warning (which my 200 and Touring both have). I’ve missed the start of a few rides forgetting to switch on but also lost the middle of a few after accidentally knocking the start/stop button.
Is there a setting for this? Any clue as to why this feature is missing from this device? Did other people find it annoying (why would anyone ride with a gps *without* recording the ride?)
Anyone else getting a flashing Garmin screen when they try to add a GPX course (copy into NewFiles)?
Do you think they will add Shimano Di2 Shifting support?
Anyone has issues on elevation? A known position of 600m the garmin edge 130 shows 2278m!!! I have tried GPS+CLONAS and GALILEO
Yeah.. When I bought the device it was on firmware 2.20 which had elevation working properly
Updated to 2.30 as prompted then elevation went crazy.. Nearly doubled known elevations or more
Had a new update released to APAC users namely me.. So I updated again to 2.40
Havemt tried the 2m40 on elevation yet.. Will be going for a ride later.. See how that goes
For me running V3.00 elevation seems to be practically the same to the same rides with earlier version. Did now already a number of rides on V3.00
With Garmin’s Extended Display feature, do you imagine this will come to an eventual successor to the Garmin Edge 20/25? For active folk that already wear an expensive Vivoactive or a Fenix, offering a cheap “slave” display on the bike would be a great way to sell another Garmin device for an extremely competitive price.
I suspect not, but then again, sometimes they do things I don’t expect.
Can we connect the Di2 9150 to the egde 130 in order to change pages on the unit using the buttons up on the shimano shifters?
No Di2 support.
Normalized Power can be added by using the Connect IQ app called “appbuilder 4”. See the NP formula in the app’s description. Works flawlessy and is exactly the same as the NP seen post ride in garmin connect – so looks accurate. Pic of mine here: link to instagram.com
Very nice find! Here’s the specific link for those interested: link to apps.garmin.com
I see now that Appbuilder4 is the identical quadruplet-app of Appbuilder along with ab2 and ab3. So installing all four enables programming of four separate custom data-fields! 🙂 The formula for NP was in the Appbuilder4 description though – see below.
NP formula:
AVG0(IFS(Timer GTE 30 and (Timer – MAX(IFS (PREV(timer) eq null, timer)) plus 1) gte 30, TIMEAVG0(Power,30)^4))^0.25
I maybe got aware about a further issue. As transfer of log files seems to be quite slow and the time extend by every single ride more stored on the 130 I was going to delete either a bunch or all. But I did not find any option. Only to go into every single log file and delete.
Did I overlook something? Would be great if somebody could check.
Anyone having trouble with the elevation readings in the latest version? I’m getting all sorts of weird readings that i’ve never noticed on any other edge device. It was convinced I was below sea level by up to 30m riding in London yesterday.
Like showing -10 or -20 meters when I am on the beach watching the sea? Yuuuup!
and it didn’t do this before did it? This seems new in the last few weeks to me.
It started after the last update, as you wrote. In addition, GPS shows lines 300m apart from each other, when I am going by the same road (sunny weather, clear sky).
I have advice for the comment readers, maybe it will save you some money – DO NOT BUY GARMIN PRODUCTS. I have bought Edge 130 with the set of sensors (cadence + speed) + additional heartbeat sensor. From all of this only speed sensor works fine. Edge 130 is fubar’d as you can read in comments here, I have lost two from three straps for cadence sensor, only by a miracle I didn’t lose the sensor itself, I had to design and 3d print separate mount. Heartbeat sensor strap parts are peeling off (hand washed every week in the warm water).
Yes, agreed. Since the last update I am off starting at -20 to -30 metres.. probably about 50m out.
Any response from Garmin?
Not that I got.
I’m wondering how the barometric altimeter in the 130 works – how does it calibrate?
Two of us were riding at the weekend on the same loop with 130’s running the same software. We got the same distance and nearly the same total climb (ie within error margins and messing around on mtbs) but our units were showing massive difference in ‘current’ elevation – a few 100m different.
It does calibrate by GPS. As earlier you start, as less precise it is. Determination of elevation by GPS needs more satellites than Postion and as more receive as more precise it is.
But still the manual calibration (entering known elevation) is usually the best, but 130 does not allow
Any barometer can only measure the atmospheric pressure at its location. Devices like the 130 will use a standard mapping to represent that as an altitude, but as is commonly known the atmospheric pressure will vary at a location as the weather changes, by as much as 10%. The barometer cannot know what correction to apply for these changes, so cannot be relied upon to give accurate elevation readings on its own.
Devices with GPS can deduce a correction from the GPS’s elevation reading, but that can also be off by +- 25m, and also the WGS84 geodetic that GPS uses can differ from local sea level too, so total deviations of up to 50m can easily be experienced. (e.g. see link to gpsinformation.net for more details)
My Edge520 supports using a waypoint (with an accurate elevation set) at your start location (i.e. when you press ‘start’) to calibrate the elevation for that ride. I do not know if the 130 has that feature.
Normally the ascent/descent cumulatives are very accurate and on a circular route will be pretty close to being equal, but if the atmospheric pressure is changing during your ride – which can happen quite rapidly if a storm is approaching, for example – then there will be a drift.
It is just the nature of the beast.
Sure, I get that, but it’s consistently and reliably reporting my home as being between 40 and 60m below sea level and has been for some time. I’d always found GPS altitudes to be ‘good enough’ but this is useless for ‘actual’ altitude.
Total climb for a ride – fine. How much to the top of the hill of known altitude from half way up? no use at all as ‘current elevation’ is just wrong with no way of correcting.
It has no way of calibrating, which is just crap.
the pure GPS elevation of my 200 and touring worked. this doesn’t
Could you control the light setting of the Fly12 via the Garmin 130 Edge? That is move from high beam to low beam or constant to flash?
Could you control the Fly 12 light setting from the Edge 130? That is could you move between high/low beam and constant/flashing modes?
Hi, first time reader. I’m struggling to figure out if this is a good upgrade from the edge 500 in combination with the vivosmart hr. I broadcast the hr reading to my 500, and can’t seem to confirm if the 130 can receive this broadcast.
Also, would the 130 use the same stem mount as the 500? I’m new into MTB and worry that if the mount sticks the 130 out from the bike it’s not going to last long with my occasional stacks.
Cheers for the awesome write up!
I can’t confirm the heart rate question, but as for the MTN bike …if you turn the mount ‘around’ you can have it sit right over your stem. The 130 will use the same mount as the 500.
The 130 connects to any bluetooth or ANT+ HR devices, so there’s no reason why it wouldn’t connect to the VSHR, which broadcasts over ANT+
It comes with the standard rubber band stem mount, not the out front one, so there’s no issue with MTB use. There is a specific MTB bundle that includes a handlebar mount that goes backwards, so the unit is over the stem. I’m not really sure what benefit that has over the standard mount, although it also includes the remote if that’s important to you.
Hello, miserable Garmin users. I have found another bug in edge 130, yay… After about 96-99 recorded activities in the device’s internal memory, history screen stops showing the newest activities! They are synchronized though if you will delete old activities newer one will show, but you will not be able to see more than 96-99 starting from the oldest.
I would report this on Garmin forum, but it keeps logging me off, I have tried various browser. I will not bother anymore. Keep up good job Garmin.
Is there a limit to the number of Connect IQ fields you can add like on the Edge 520 (which limits to 4)?
Yep – just 2. And only datafields – no apps.
Is anyone using a BLE speed/cadence sensor with the 130? It fails to receive data from my no-name sensor which otherwise works fine with an old TomTom Multisport.
I have posted on the Garmin forum and emailed their local support without response.
Hello – me again.
I was just wondering if there is, or has anyone found, a quick way to adjust the setting for a flare RT rear light with the 130.. the current process, where you need to to the main menu -> sensors -> select light, etc.. seems really cumbersome.
This seems to defeat the purpose of being easily able to adjust the light on the fly from the bars? Any ideas?
Garmin, do you read this?
Seems there are some alternatives on the market.
I will gave
Lezyne Micro color and Mega color
and
Bryton new 4xx series
a look
In the specs of the 130 on Garmins website (e.g. link to buy.garmin.com) an accelerometer is listed as a sensor. Does anyone know what this is used for in the device?
I just bought a 130 and I do not see how to select one second recording. Is one second recording available on the 130?
Thank you.
Comment 364 on this page is from Garmin and they say it uses one second recording all the time.
Ive had 130 for two months now. It works fine. My one gripe is not having Last Lap data fields. The 130 is for people who want to train and race. It is not for ramblers, long distance adveturers, they all should get the 520 or 1030. For the racers, Last Lap for power, HR, avg speed, is really critical. Garmin designed a powerful, light computer perfect for racing, but left off three data fields we really need. 48 data field options is plenty, we just need those three more, drop the 10(!) goofy navigation data fields.
Not having last lap data while you train or race is a serious shortcoming.
Two major issues here (many comments on the matter on garmin forum, many people impacted, also opened an incident at garmin support – there are at least 8 people with same issues, but IMO there are far more).
After 3.0 update, the data field elevation (altitude) is always 0 as if i would live at sea level. My Fenix 3 shows elevation 93M (correct data, cross checked with multiple sources) but EDGE 130 shows 0. If i go up a hill it goes to 3,4,5 m or if I descent it goes with – (minus). sensor works but initial value is not read from gps.
ps. I really wait minutes for gps fix, out in the clear blue sky, no buildings, and so on. no matter how long i would wait there is always a huge difference, in my case always 0 (elevation). but the sensor works because it shows ascent or descent if I do that).
2nd issue. the actual speed data field shows erratic readings . i can check with 2 other gps (fenix 3, polar m430) that i run at a constant speed of (eg.) 21km/h, i try to run as smoothly and as constant as possible. the edge 130 shows in 5 seconds (21.4, 23,1, 20,9, 21,2, 22,4 etc) while the other 2 barely change from 21.2km/h
last fw update was 2.5 months ago.
Today, after powering on the device (EDGE 130) I waited for GPS FIX, stood still, but elevation is -10m (see photo). My city has lowest elevation (altitude) 83m and highest 96m. Garmin support says it`s normal to be off to about 100 feet, but from -11m (shown) to 96m (real) there are 351 feet.
Also me (seeing elevation – 10m) 😀
On the Garmin Edge 500 you can set altitude reference points.
Hi there
Maybe I am to stupid to find out, but in opposite to my Edge 1000 there seems to be no possibility with the Edge 130 to establish a Light Network where the ANT+ light, in case a Bontrager Flare RT, starts only when the timer starts and not when the unit is switched on. Or do I miss something?
Regards, John
Great review. Just p/u a Varia RTL510 to go with my 130 and I can’t figure out how to put the car the radar displays on the left side instead of the right. Can’t find any 130 specific instructions. Tried following instructions for other Edgemodels but doesn’t give me same options on 130.
I see in one of your pictures you have radar displayed on left. How did you do it?
Thanks!
John.
Will this read a .TCX file directly? I have the Edge 20, generally quite happy, but one local ride uses RidewithGPS, and the typical offered download is a .TCX file. I have an older Edge Touring which can handle .TCX, so I grab the file, upload it to my Touring, unplug-(convert)-replug, and then I can grab the .FIT and move it > PC > Edge 20. Pain in the butt.
I might have missed it in all the highjacking worrying about whether the gps would be a few inches or cm off target…
Did you (or can you) test / does the “extended display” feature work with the 920xt or 910xt watches? Also, when in “extended display” mode, do you retain the tracking and advanced power metrics that a watch like the 920xt would be recording (such as cycling dynamics from dual sided vectors)?
Looking for that sweet spot to see bike metrics during the bike split of a triathlon without having to sit up from an aero tuck to view the watch and not crash!
Hi Ray, thanks for the great reviews; It’s prompted me to go and get a shiny new Edge 130. On the whole, it’s awesome; straightforward, clear, and easily adaptable. But I’ve just emailed garmin about a couple of user interface oversights:
The minor one – when you add a sensor, e.g. power or heart rate, it prompts you to add a data screen to your ride setup to show relevant data. For example when I paired an ANT HR belt, I set up a screen with heart rate, average HR and calories burned. This is super useful if I’m actively training. However when I’m just going for a general ride, I won’t use the HR belt. So I disable the sensor to save battery… but the screen stays in my ride set. That means I have to scroll past a blank set of data fields. It’d be much better if disabling the sensor also temporarily removed that data screen.
Second, and much more important – using elevation profiles. One of the standout features of the unit is that it shows, graphically, the elevation profile of a ride. So I can load a course, and when I preview the elevation, it shows me the overall profile – I can see where the major climbs are and when they occur. BUT – when I’m actually riding the course, instead of being able to see the whole course profile and where I am on it, I get whatever bit of it the device wants to show me; for example on a 50km course, the X axis is showing just four, 0.75km increments. This is pretty useless. I already know I’m going up hill – I can feel that. What I want to be able to see is how much more of that hill there is, and how many more hills there are on the rest of the ride. This is basic pacing information – otherwise what’s the point of it? As so often with Garmin, the device is 95% of the way there – a riding screen showing the elevation preview that already exists when you preview the course profile, with a dot on it to show where the rider is, and it’s done.
Just posting here in case anyone knows of a fix!
Hi Dominic,
have you found a way to display the full route? I’m looking for a new device, but I think (strangely) Wahoo are the only ones who care about this issue.
I just don’t get why not everyone in the market is doing this as standard…
Thanks!
I would need a little help here:
Wanted to Pair a Polar H7 Heart Rate Strap with the Edge, Pairing went without issues but doesnt show any numbers. Did I miss something in the settings.
Previously the Sensor has been used with a Polar V800 for Running and works fine.
When I am totally wrong, no chance. Polar still working with ANT and Garmin ANT+. At least nearly every Monitor should work with Garmin, except Polar and pure BLE devices.
Can you drag and drop routes created in Strava onto the 130 or do you need make and send routes from garmin connect to the unit? I noticed this issue with a friends edge 25, where on my old edge 500 I can drop route files into the new files folder.
This device looks great to act as remote display, still expensive for such basic thing but at least cost much less then other garmin devices. I have really two questions where I didn’t find answer. If I run workouts on my 935 does extended display show it ? What is battery life when I use it only for remote display ?
R
JD
Hello again,
I didn’t get relly answer to my questions but I decided to go with 130, need something really small that I can use on aerobars. I didn’t ride with it yet but few thoughts after I play with it:
– to answer to my previous question extended display will not display workouts that I started on my 935 🙁
– I didn’t check this earlier but this device do not support DI2, relly don’t get this why
– I do not see really big value from using extended display, as it only support 4 fields from my watch and do not support workouts, if I use device in triatlon I can start new ride on it, if I want to check overall time I can do it alwys on my watch, this is not something that you need to see all the time
– extended display allow to use stuff not avalible on device like di2 and transmit it from 935 but you are limited to only 4 fields so I’m afraid that this will help only partly as basic stuff that you want too see can be handled by 130 (without extended display) and for other fields you need to go to separate screen
– once again dont get why garmin limiting data fields and sensors, now I’m thinking whether this was good choice and maybe insted I should pay liitle bit more and buy wahoo elemnt bolt
Few additional comments after first ride:
– device was fully charged
– software version 3.30
– I setup screens and turn it off (I use it for max 20 min), ride was 2 days later
– backlight: 10s
– GPS+GLONASS
– sensors: heart rate + power, both ANT+
– temperature outside around 10C
Things that I like:
– screen contrast very good
– size of device, and controls
– GPS recording/elevation no problems, it was matching exactly my forerunner 935
Additional things that I notice:
– battery indicator it’s still bar type with 5 levels even it I add it as data field (prefer to have %)
– when I connect device to charger and turn it off there is no information about charging progress,
very very strange
– autopause – there is no options for this (both edge 1000 and forerunner 935 you can setup minimal speed
here you can only turn it on or off)
– power data fields, there is only 3s avg power, there is no Power field, why ????
Generally I was happy till device reached 3h and 54 minutes elapsed time and suddenly turn off. I was able to turn it on again to see that battery is empty, I didn’t notice any warning. My complete ride with one break was about 4h and during that time battery on my forerunner 935 (the same sensors connected, the same GPS settings) went to 70% (not sure starting point but it was for sure less then 100%). Even if I assume that battery is not formatted yet as I charged it only once, this is some kind of joke for this type of device. I will try once again and if I see the same problem this device go back to shop or to Garmin for replacement.
R
Two more tests:
a) device fully charged, GPS+GALILEGO, backlight 10s, no sensors connected
– device was located under roof windows with GPS fix
– recorded ~7h 30min and turn off
– not possible to sync that activity using garmin connect, need to copy it manually
b) device full charged , the same settings as above with 2 ANT+ sensors heart rate and power
– after about 3h, battery on 1 bar
Not sure what is going on here,but as I see forums a lot of people have those issues and Garmin didn’t release new firmware from 2 months. I returned it back, was thinking to buy 520 plus, but as I need it only for TRI bike I decided to go with Elemnt Bolt.
Just did my first ride with the Edge 130 this morning.. used my Forerunner 35 to broadcast heart rate to the Edge 130. It was showing up on the Edge’s date field too. After the ride, realised no intensity minutes recorded for the ride.. over 5h worth of minutes.. bot recorded 🙁
Altitude/Barometer
This device is still broken for altitude and the way the barometer is being used, which should increase accuracy, means in most situations the information it gives is garbage. In a recent update the ability to manually set the current altitude was added. That adds another fiddly process to go through at the start of most rides.
There’s a really simple solution to altitude – Take the altitude reading it gets from the first gps fix. It might not be 100% (if you care you can manually alter) but it will be close enough for 99% of users ((% of the time). Then use the barometer to give climb/ascent figures.
at the moment altitude is unusable. It was absolutely fine on my 10 year old 200. Why did they mess with it?
The Edge 500 behaves the same. I don’t think your proposed fix is a good idea because GPS altitude errors can be worse than barometric calibration errors. The original Edge 500 tried to calibrate the barometer from GPS as it proceeded, but this introduces all sorts of difficulties (and the attempt introduced bugs – if you switch the device off and on, some recalibration code gets invoked which introduces anomolous readings). I wish the device recorded GPS and barometric altitudes separately: at least then it would be easy to calibrate the latter from the former.
Try this. It may not work on the 130, but it will certainly work on the 500. Since most of us start from home most of the time, create a POI for home, and edit it and give it the correct altitude. Since the Edge 705, Edges will recognize that it’s very close to that POI when you hit start and use the altitude to calibrate; you’ll get a little message “Elevation calibrated from location” when that happens.
Using GPS to calibrate elevation simply doesn’t work well enough, although Garmin does that with the cameras and some watches. I don’t think the 500 ever used GPS to calibrate elevation as you proceeded, but some of the watches do. The only Garmin watch I’ve owned where that actually worked was the Fenix 1; it didn’t on the Epix, and I haven’t used my new Fenix 5+ enough to come to a conclusion. GPS altitude is mostly useless, although you can be sure that it’s within about 100 ft of being correct. Barometric altimeters are much more accurate provided you keep them calibrated.
Within 100ft is good enough most of the time. Bottom of valley/top of ridge. Climb remaining to summit. 30m accuracybisnt terrible. Whereas uncalibrated barometric is useless. Often 150m or more wrong.
Which is it that you care about, accuracy or precision? A barometric altimeter will always be more precise no matter how accurate it is. If a climb is 1000ft then you’ll be close to that every time (unless you take hours doing it and a front moves through). GPS altitude errors will be bounded, but one time you go up a climb it might be 100ft high at the bottom and 100ft low at the top, the next time the reverse, and occasionally it will even be right. I wouldn’t trust GPS for climb remaining. The best accuracy and precision will obtain with a calibrated barometric altimeter, and Edges (high end ones at least) give you a way to do that automatically and a way (all the ones I’ve owned at least) to do that manually if you have to.
+1 to the instant power, I miss it a lot!
I get it that instant power is “too nervous” but 3s power is too laggy!
Hello,
great review of the Edge 130. Thanks!
What I am wondering, is it possible to use the Edge 130 for running?
Thanks.
Ray!
I looked for the follow up article that was more Edge 130 + Triathlon related and am unable to find it. Long story short my 3rd Forerunner 935 in less than 2 years has a bad barometer (same as the previous 2) and Garmin has offered to replace it with a Fenix 5 (not plus) and an Edge 130 because the quick release I have is not compatible with the Fenix and it doesn’t have one. I’m concerned about a couple of things…. The most important is all the faffing about I’d have to do with the 130 in transition and the other is the power meter data. I love the 935 but not it’s craptastic barometer…..
Ta!
Dawn
Does the 130 support Di2 connectivity?
I note that it does not support shifting. Am just looking whether it allows the unit to show which gear I am in, and battery life remaining
I think I know the answer, given I haven’t been able to find anything. I got my wife a 130 and was trying to pair it to the kinetic inride (older version, not latest gen if that makes a difference). Don’t see that this is possible. Am I missing something else?
If you’re considering buying this device, please be aware that it is unlikely to achieve the advertised battery life. Most real-world tests suggest 9 hours max (not 15) with 2 sensors and Bluetooth off, and the battery level reported by the firmware will be random and nonsense during this period. See link to forums.garmin.com for details on the pain.
There’s also no way to tell when the unit’s fully charged.
Oh, and there have been no firmware updates since around January 2019, for a unit that way less than a year old by that point. Judge for yourself how much Garmin care about their customers.
I bought this unit for my wife, and I’m seriously regretting not spending a few pounds more to buy a Wahoo or Lezyne unit.
Never again, Garmin. Too many bugs. I’ve had enough. I’m out.
Will be very interested to see DCR’s real-world tests on battery life on his homebrew rig that’s just been built!
Does the edge 130 show the percentage grade as you are climbing?
Thanks to Ray and to all who have posted here for the valuable information. I’d been thinking of buying a 130 to replace my old Edge 500 purely in the hope that it would have fewer bugs. Evidently I’d have been disappointed. Since the bugginess of the firmware seems to be a major aspect, it’s hard for reviewers to assess the devices in limited time.
It’s interesting that Ray says that to ‘pull Strava routes onto it… you’ll need to plug it in via USB and transfer the file over’ while the Cycling Weekly reviewer said that he was unable to upload a TCX file from Strava, which was his preferred method (link to cyclingweekly.com). This says something about the quality of Garmin’s documentation.
Yep, the 130 is a dog. It was a bad, and unnecessary, attempt at Garmin to compete with Lezyne. It’s a shame Garmin can’t even produce a cheap no-frills computer without bugs. This is definitely a “do not buy.” Sent mine back and got a 520 plus that’s full of bugs but at least the basics kinda work.
Is it possible to make 30sec average power a custom data field?
Hey Ray, have you come to a conclusion about which combination is the most precise?
Say, GPS + Glonass or GPS + Galileo?
Any other point worth commenting on? Say how much each one increases battery consumption?
Cheers
Does it show % gradient ?
Great review thanks!
When using multiple bikes do you just turn on or go or do you set up different bike profiles. And piggybacking on that how does the 130 handle different wheel sizes.
I’ve got a cross and a road bike bothe with power meter hubs. The road is running 25 mm and the cross is a knobby 38mm. Does the 130 just use gps for speed and distance or do you set a tire size?
Thanks again!
Do you need hackers for hire? Do you need to keep an eye on your spouse by gaining access to their emails? As a parent do you want to know what your kids do on a daily basis on social networks ( This includes facebook, twitter , instagram, whatsapp, WeChat and others to make sure they’re not getting into trouble? Whatever it is, Ranging from Bank Jobs, Flipping cash, Criminal records, DMV, Taxes, Name it, We can get the job done. We’re a group of professional hackers with 10 Years+ experience. ( Contact at wisetechhacker @ gmail com ) … Send an email and Its done. Its that easy, try us out today.
I’m looking at the Garmin rear view sonar, how does the 130 display that device’s output – just a text description will be fine, don’t need a photo or anything. Love your site – was recommended by a bicycle custom builder earlier this week. I’ll buy no bike accessories without looking at your input!
DC included a picture of the E130 display with a radar contact in this review. Search for the text “Here’s what a few of those look like mid-ride” and then examine the pictures immediately following that text.
The picture listing an “ance” of 19.03 is the E130 temporarily rendering a black border on the left side of the screen where the single white dot represents the radar’s estimation of distance to the rider which is the white triangle at the top.
Hi! This is probably a bit overdue but my Edge 510 is about to go kaput & I’m considering the Edge 130 as a replacement … from what I’ve read, it does just about everything the 510 does & probably more.
I’ve set up 2 profiles on my 510 for my roadbike & my MTB – will i be able to do this on the 130?
Thanks
Edge 130 does not support ‘profiles’. You can only pick type of the ride when you are saving your trip.
Garmin was lying from the beginning about specification, features, run time, etc, it is still bug-ridden. To be honest, do not buy any Garmin product. Their response to any issues was poor and lacking.
Maybe look for Wahoo.
Thx for the heads-up!
Garmin have upgraded their integration with Strava routes recently. Did this device get this new simple sync feature or was it left out?
Just revisited this thread since yeah… Ray is the “go-to” source fro anything related to geeking out on sport stuff. I’ve recently upgraded from an AW5 towards a Fenix 6S PRO in order to get a life less depend on a relationship with the charger but als to get a deeper level of running and cycling performance metrics.
With that I’m looking to add an Edge 130 to the collection in order to have the date in line of sight while riding. Although this unit lacks the real navigation features I do feel this answers all my needs in a slim and budget package… HOWEVER… I’ve noticed rumors on the approaching Edge 130 Plus version which might introduce some additional features… Not expecting any pre-releases here but would be interesting to see if there would be an advice to hold for a couple more days/weeks with a purchase. (Edge 130 prices are dropping currently)
Dear Ray –
Thanks for sharing great thing as always; your web indeed is one of the most comprehensive library for tracker information. I need some help, been trying to find some information without getting any definite answer.
Currently am using Fitbit Inspire HR and start using it for my cycling; I love the how Fitbit able to connect with Strava (this is the two trackers app that am using for my cycling); it does have all necessary information that I need.
Am thinking to get some cycle computer to make my activity easier (as Fitbit Inspire HR would still require my phone to tap the GPS information), however am still want to use my Fitbit as the main tracker for my HR (am not fancy to buy another tools especially the strap for HR). So my question is, would it be possible for me to use this Garmin Edge 130 to kick off my activity and utilising the GPS (thus I won’t activate my activity on my Fitbit), but at the same time sync my HR data when it’s uploaded into Strava? Am sorry if this topic has been discussed previously.
As an alternative I was thinking to upgrade my Fitbit into Charge 4 (which thanks to you again for providing detail thorough information), and buy normal cycle computer just to show my speed etc; but again some fancier cycle computer will still be better, if there’s a way to sync this together 😉 I tried to find some info on google but again no definite answer it just said there’s possibility to use 3rd party app which those app was not updated for some time.
Would need some expert input 😉
Thanks again Ray, really appreciate it!
Cheers,
Cam
I just purchased the Edge 130 with sensors. I have a Lemond Revmaster spinner with a solid weighted wheel and am wondering if there is an ant+ speed sensor that will work with the Edge 130 and a solid wheel – as there is no hub on which to attach the Garmin speed sensor?
In speaking with Garmin they tell me there is no way to send waypoints to the Edge 130 using a computer. So there’s memory for 100 waypoints/favorites but the only way to get them on the device is adding them on the device? Is this correct? This would seem like a MAJOR miss? Any hacks/work arounds?
To answer my own question, I had a Garmin support person tell me how to hack in the waypoints from another Garmin device, in my case a Fenix 6. Simply copy the locations directory contents from the Fenix into the newfiles directory on the 130 (using a computer). All of the locations and names will transfer perfectly! The Edge 130 is not supported as a device to send to in Basecamp.
Aging Lezyne super GPS…about time for a replacement ( USB cable connection going bad )
I’m looking for a computer that will let me load segments and show them on screen – giving +/- time etc ( like live segments ) but without paying for Strava premium. It seems that you can do this with Garmin Segments/Garmin connect. ( I don’t care about competing against the full strava leader board, just my own PR ) On the Lezyne, I could sign up for one month, sync the segments I wanted then stop the subscription – the segments don’t go away 😉
Does the 130 do this? Any other computers?
Finally – a few different comments on 130 vs. 520. Anyone have more feelings there. ( DCR? )
I just bought one of these, which Garmin has on sale, “refurbished,” for $99. I was leaning toward a Wahoo for the better UI and real buttons. But I only use basic info anyway, so this is more than I need, and I couldn’t pass up the price.
The main downside is downloading/uploading courses and rides is cumbersome, having to go through the web app, then the phone app, etc. For me, this doesn’t matter much: most of the time is in the planning and creating, if I’m bothering to do it at all.
A glitch I don’t understand is auto-shutoff during a ride. I’d get a prompt saying it would shut down in 30 seconds, which it would, unless I hit the enter/go button. It’s easy to miss this, so I had several shutdowns and missed parts of rides. I don’t get why it would do this while still reading movement from GPS, and getting input from speed and cadence sensors. So I disabled auto-shutoff. Now I have to start/stop manually, but no big deal.
Anyway, great little unit, and great value at $99. I’m very happy with it.
auto shutoff can be suppressed in setting I believe.
I got a refurb and the battery capacity was clearly low. I tried to contact support and allO got was that the capacity was within the specified range. ai tried to explain the range applied to different settings (pairing, navigation) not quality control in the lowest power setting. Eventually it just completely died and they told me it was now out of warranty. I complained that I had initially contacted them within the warranty period and they sent me a new one.
I just did the Redbull Bay Climb race and up 21% grades I don’t want big screens and fancy maps: I just want simple data. This is the perfect computer for that and for most race situations. Unfortunately my legs weren’t enough to make the finals but at least I can’t blame my bike computer for weighing me down.