Garmin MK1 v MK2

[27Words]

I am in the market for a dive computer. I have narrowed down my Choices to the Garmin Mk1 or Mk2. I am an avid runner and biker and also in the market for a new running watch so it just makes sense to me to go with the Garmin as I can combine two watches in one.

My question therefore is in regards to the differences between the two Garmin and whether the mk2 is worth the almost $300 difference. Ultimately, I am not interested in air integration so the Mk2i is not necessary.

Any input from those who have used the running function of either watch would Be greatly appropriated.

 

[Domovoi]

If I were you, I would look for a good condition used Mk1 since I'm sure people will be offloading it for a Mk2.

 

[ATJ]

Let me provide my thinking which may help your decision.

I have an Mk1 and it works great for running. I have not complaints or issues at all.

It (and any other wrist based device) is not all that great for cycling. While it works with my speed/cadence sensor, it is difficult to read while wearing on my wrist while I'm cycling. I could mount it on my handlebars like I did with my Forerunner 310XT but a) I lose the HR and so would have to go back to wearing a chest one) and b) the display is a lot smaller (and my eyes of gotten older).

I have no plans to upgrade to the Mk2 as the new features it has don't really offer me anything of value or interest.

The O2 sensor is interesting but isn't something I really need.

I never listen to music while I run so being able to play music is of no value. For other activities where I might listen to music with headphones I almost always have my phone with me.

Garmin Pay is interesting but I almost always have my phone with me and I rarely even use Apple Pay on my phone so I don't think I'd get value from Garmin Pay.

Finally, while the Air Integration is of interest, the fact that Garmin went with a proprietary solution killed any interest. I already have a Perdix AI with three transmitters (one on each reg set) and to use AI on the Mk2i would mean buying three of the T1 transmitters which is just a waste.

I do agree that you may be able to pick up a used Mk1 in good condition for a song but I have to wonder how much longer Garmin will keep supporting them. Even before the Mk2 came out the support for the Mk1 (and basically any niche Garmin product) was pretty poor.

 

[Oldbear]

I too was weighting to pros & cons of the MK1 vs. MK2. For me the big selling point was GPS. We have quite a few WWII wrecks and we are charting DPV routes. We tow a float with a MK1 on it and scooter from wreck to wreck. I just could not bite the expense bullet. For me just too pricey.

One of my dive buddies is a Tech Head and has ordered my a MK2, even though he already has a MK1. I went with the Apple Watch for all of the non-diving features. If I wanted another Dive Computer I would have saved enough money for either the Perdix or Peregrine.

Good luck with your search...

 

[27Words]

Let me provide my thinking which may help your decision.

I have an Mk1 and it works great for running. I have not complaints or issues at all.

It (and any other wrist based device) is not all that great for cycling. While it works with my speed/cadence sensor, it is difficult to read while wearing on my wrist while I'm cycling. I could mount it on my handlebars like I did with my Forerunner 310XT but a) I lose the HR and so would have to go back to wearing a chest one) and b) the display is a lot smaller (and my eyes of gotten older).

I have no plans to upgrade to the Mk2 as the new features it has don't really offer me anything of value or interest.

The O2 sensor is interesting but isn't something I really need.

I never listen to music while I run so being able to play music is of no value. For other activities where I might listen to music with headphones I almost always have my phone with me.

Garmin Pay is interesting but I almost always have my phone with me and I rarely even use Apple Pay on my phone so I don't think I'd get value from Garmin Pay.

Finally, while the Air Integration is of interest, the fact that Garmin went with a proprietary solution killed any interest. I already have a Perdix AI with three transmitters (one on each reg set) and to use AI on the Mk2i would mean buying three of the T1 transmitters which is just a waste.

I do agree that you may be able to pick up a used Mk1 in good condition for a song but I have to wonder how much longer Garmin will keep supporting them. Even before the Mk2 came out the support for the Mk1 (and basically any niche Garmin product) was pretty poor.

thanks for the input this was great! I’m leaning towards the MK1 now. Like you I don’t need all of the upgrades that come with the mk2. However I am skittle hesitant about the lack of support.

 

[Will DURNING]

I have had the Mk 1 for over a year now, and really enjoy it.

It is a bit of a steep learning curve to FULLY use many of the features.

Having recently relocated to Kauai I am seriously considering the mk 2 with Ai.

During the move, I tossed the box though, before I read on the flight over about the Mk 2 !

~Will

 

[TuckerIdaho]

I see there's no actual runners who own a mk2i here so ill chime in. All those missing Fenix features are here. PacePro is pretty awesome while in a training cycle and also for self pacing races that are hilly. The fitness stuff on the mk2i/mk2 is a bit more robust than the Mk1. HR data seems a little better too.

If all you want is standard pace/hr data, either will do the job.

 

[ginti]

I have a Mk1 and I essentially do not like 2 things:
1) temperature sensor, which isn't very accurate (as far as I understand it is located in a way that body temperature affect its measurements)
2) when I run, it doesn't measure well distances; if I compare the mk1 records with google maps, I can have differences up to 30%. More specifically, the mk1 measures always less distance than what google says, but not in a consistent way (e.g. one time is 30% less, another 20% and another one 25% less). On the mk1 Facebook group, one guy told me that sometimes he wears another Garmin watch, and the distances of the two devices do not match. This problem obviously affects the pace that you see real-time on the watch.

I would buy it again, but only because there are no many other options at the same price (a sport watch + a trimix computer would far exceed the price of an Mk1). In fact, I have to admit that these 2 problems I described are annoying.

By the way, if anyone has a solution for these problems (@ATJ maybe?), please PM me

 

[scubaozy]

I am using mk2i since 2 weeks and been hiking with it daily during the holiday period. I really like that I can create my route in advance and navigate with it. One thing that surprised me was that,oximeter is slightly off, in best case it shows 95%, I found out that it shows 4 to 5 percent less than a stand-alone oximeter. All in all I am really liking it.

 

[TuckerIdaho]

1) temperature sensor, which isn't very accurate (as far as I understand it is located in a way that body temperature affect its measurements)

Its right against your arm lol. What do you expect?

2) when I run, it doesn't measure well distances; if I compare the mk1 records with google maps, I can have differences up to 30%. More specifically, the mk1 measures always less distance than what google says, but not in a consistent way (e.g. one time is 30% less, another 20% and another one 25% less). On the mk1 Facebook group, one guy told me that sometimes he wears another Garmin watch, and the distances of the two devices do not match. This problem obviously affects the pace that you see real-time on the watch.

Set the gps to 1sec update. I bet you have it on ultratrac.

You should probably spend some time on DC rainmaker's website. He's covered both these issues in the past.