Garmin Forerunner 265S Review: The Optimal Running Watch
In a rare convergence, the Garmin Forerunner 265S manages to offer an always-on OLED display without compromising on extended battery life. It’s like the Goldilocks of running watches, striking the perfect balance.
My reservations about OLED smartwatches are not rooted in their inefficacy. Rather, when I envision running watches, I visualize memory-in-pixel displays that coexist harmoniously with extended battery life and lightweight design. Think of the Forerunner 255S, a midrange multiband running watch that I appraised a mere nine months ago.
Thus, unboxing the Garmin Forerunner 265S priced at $449.99, essentially an iteration of the same watch but furnished with an OLED display, evoked a reflection on a prevalent adage among runners: “nothing new on race day.” This principle advocates against introducing novelties such as footwear, attire, energy drinks, or strategies on the day of a race. The notion is to adhere to tried-and-tested elements. Hence, considering the well-established reputation of the Forerunner, fiddling with its formula seemed questionable.
By incorporating an OLED display—solely an OLED display—Garmin ventures into the territory of a running watch that, some argue, didn’t require enhancements. To certain runners, an OLED screen represents an expendable drain on battery life. Conversely, for others, it marks a long-anticipated enhancement bridging the gap with smartwatches. Strangely, I found myself not firmly situated in either camp. Consequently, as I embarked on this review, my aim was to delineate my standpoint.
Comparing OLED and MIP Displays
Having evaluated numerous smartwatches equipped with both OLED and memory-in-pixel (MIP) displays, I’ve observed distinctive advantages and drawbacks for each. OLED displays exude more vibrancy and thrive in indoor lighting conditions, contributing to a modern aesthetic. I’ll readily admit my affinity for animated screens; I’m drawn to their dynamic nature. An example would be Garmin watches featuring the Morning Report feature. This feature delivers a concise overview of your sleep, recovery, schedule, weather, and recommended daily workout. The functionality remains consistent irrespective of whether the watch employs an OLED or MIP display. However, the experience feels more engaging on Garmin watches with OLED screens. Even in my morning grogginess, I derive enjoyment from scrolling through my Morning Report on the Forerunner 265S. The animated steam rising from a virtual cup of coffee adds a whimsical touch, rendering otherwise routine features more special.
Conversely, MIP displays excel under direct sunlight, and concerns about battery life are virtually non-existent. The Forerunner 255S featured a MIP display, and during my review last year, I only needed to charge it once over a span of about 25 days, despite approximately 30 minutes of daily GPS activity.
When recommending watches, my approach tends to lean toward MIP displays for individuals who prioritize extended battery life. Conversely, I suggest OLED displays for those who prioritize enhanced readability, a contemporary user experience, and don’t mind more frequent charging. It’s worth noting that employing an always-on OLED display can substantially deplete battery life. Take Fitbit, for example. While their older trackers and smartwatches boasted estimated battery life ranging from five to ten days, enabling the always-on display on recent OLED Fitbit devices shortened battery life to a mere two to three days at most.
This general pattern spans multiple brands and closely aligned with my expectations for the Forerunner 265S. Consequently, I was pleasantly surprised to observe that the watch endured for six and a half days on a single charge even with the always-on display activated. During this period, I engaged in four hours of multiband GPS workouts, which typically demand greater power consumption than standard GPS. This exceeded Garmin’s projected five-day battery life estimate.
While a single charge lasting five to six days might not suffice for certain athletes, the 265S boasts a 15-day battery life without the always-on display. My testing corroborated this estimation. Over the week I wore the 265S without the always-on display, the battery drained to only 63 percent, even with an average of 30 to 60 minutes of multiband GPS workouts daily.
The Perfect Blend of Features
Allow me to express this sentiment affectionately: in cases where there’s a decision to be made between offering fewer or more features, Garmin tends to lean heavily towards more. It’s safe to say that hardly any other fitness tracking platform provides as many metrics or training features as Garmin does, often presented within the most intricately designed app settings and menus imaginable. For those transitioning from Fitbit, Apple Watch, or Samsung smartwatches, the initial experience can certainly be dizzying.
Notwithstanding the labyrinthine nature of the Garmin Connect app, the Forerunner 265S strikes a harmonious balance between features suitable for intermediate-level runners. By “intermediate,” I refer to individuals already well-acquainted with metrics like VO2 max, concepts such as acute training load, and a discerning understanding of distinctions between tempo and interval runs. However, it’s crucial to note that the 265S isn’t exclusively tailored to beginners or advanced runners; it accommodates a broad spectrum of running proficiencies. Its optimal fit lies within the realm of those who find their stride somewhere between a 10K and a marathon.
My experience with the 265S during my half-marathon training was genuinely rewarding. Take the Morning Report, for instance; it served as a convenient daily snapshot of my recovery status, weather updates, and recommended workouts. The inclusion of Garmin Coach was a standout feature, offering training plans tailored to various skill levels for distances like 5Ks, 10Ks, and half marathons. For those concerned about injury prevention, the Training Readiness function was a valuable tool in assessing the balance between high- and low-intensity workouts. (Though it did sting my pride a bit when I was labeled as engaging in “unproductive” training after a successful 10-mile run.) The HRV status, which requires around three weeks to generate, offered insights into how training influenced my overall recovery, although as a reviewer, I faced challenges in thoroughly testing this feature.
Of course, the watch doesn’t skimp on running metrics. It encompasses an extensive array of data, including form-related insights such as vertical oscillation, stride length, running power, and cadence. Personally, I found the PacePro and Race Predictor functionalities to be exceptionally beneficial. PacePro lets you establish a pacing strategy for races or long runs, which you can subsequently download to your watch. This is particularly useful for achieving negative splits or managing energy expenditure at the start of a race. On the other hand, Race Predictor estimates your potential times for 5Ks, 10Ks, half marathons, and marathons based on your long-term running data. This is a valuable tool for setting realistic time goals for upcoming races. (I’ll admit, it’s quite the confidence booster that the 265S has faith in my ability to achieve my target half-marathon time.)
Pricey, but worth it for runners
While the price tag of $450 for the Forerunner 265S might initially appear steep compared to flagship smartwatches like the $349.99 Pixel Watch, the $279.99 Samsung Galaxy Watch 5, and the $249 second-gen Apple Watch SE, there are several reasons why it could be a worthwhile investment for runners.
Firstly, Garmin’s platform-agnostic approach means that your choice of smartphone doesn’t affect its compatibility, unlike many flagship smartwatches. Additionally, if you’re seeking an alternative to Fitbit, Garmin’s community features remain intact. The enhanced durability and weeklong battery life, even with the always-on display, further contribute to the 265S’s appeal. What’s more, the $450 price tag is relatively affordable for a multiband GPS watch, as many comparable options are priced well above $600.
Another advantage lies in the fact that Garmin doesn’t restrict its features behind subscriptions. The built-in training and coaching features are robust, requiring no additional fees. In contrast, maximizing the health features of a Pixel Watch might necessitate a Fitbit Premium subscription, which costs $80 per year. Additionally, if you’re considering LTE for a smartwatch, it’s important to note that this can add an extra $50 upfront, along with ongoing monthly carrier charges. In this regard, Garmin’s omission of LTE simplifies the equation by not offering it at all.
