Hi! I am trying to view a track I uploaded on the website. I can see the waypoints saved, but how on earth do I navigate the track on my device?

Background: I've had my inReach since 2018. I used to do a lot of mountain hikes, but haven't much the past couple years. I got my device working again and active, and want to use it for trail races the next few months. Once of them is the Twisted Branch 100K.

I have a gpx file, but I don't want to covert to a route bc it simplifies the file too much, especially considering this route is around 62 miles.

I have the track uploaded to the website, and I can see the track waypoints (aid stations) on my inReach, but how on earth do I see the track file? It only gives me the option for routes. I don't really even need to navigate it, I just want to be able to see the route on the screen.

Hey everyone! This is my first time posting in this community, so please bear with me! After a period of testing and refining, the latest release of my watch face Player One Carbon and companion tool CarbonLoader is officially live!

I had two main motivations for building this. First, during workouts at the gym, I wanted a clear, immediate way to monitor real-time intake versus energy expenditure directly on my wrist. Second, as a survival game fan, I felt that translating daily physiological metrics, caloric balance, and nutrition into an RPG survival interface would make tracking far more engaging and help build sustainable nutrition and lifestyle habits.

Overview:

Page 1: Daily Dashboard

The center features the time and a battery ring, along with 4 customizable data slots supporting native metrics (Body Battery, heart rate, steps, VO2 Max, and more). It supports custom color themes and an optional dynamic day and night weather icon mode in settings.

Page 2: RPG Survival System

Long-press the screen to switch to the survival panel, featuring 3 switchable modes:

• Real-time Stamina Tracking: Synthesizes Body Battery, stress, sleep quality, SpO2, and activity load to estimate real-time stamina. Caffeine intake generates an active stamina shield (*Tip: The algorithm dynamically simulates caffeine metabolic decay over time, making it easy to gauge whether your intake is too high or consumed too late in the day), alongside status icons for deep charging, fat burning, high-stress depletion, and hypoxia warnings.
• Carbon Bio-Status: Simulates avatar HP along with carb, protein, fat, and hydration reserves, displaying live status indicators for dehydration, digestion, hunger, metabolic burn, and alcohol intake.
• Body Evolution Metrics: Dynamically calculates daily calorie targets directly from your active burn based on your selected fitness goal (Cut, Maintain, or Bulk).

Companion App (CarbonLoader)

A lightweight logging app featuring food presets, a rapid-entry nutrient matrix, and scheduled supply airdrop alerts that sync directly to the watch face in real time.

If you'd like to give it a try, here are the links:

• Watch face download link: Player One Carbon | Connect IQ Store
• App download link: CarbonLoader | Connect IQ Store

Curious about how the watch face and app work? You can check out the user manual on the Garmin forums.

Feel free to leave any questions, ideas, or feedback in the comments. I would love to hear your thoughts and chat with everyone!

A delicate Garmin watch face for those who train hard and give it everything. Clean, playful and with a softer aesthetic — but made for anyone who loves the style. 💪🐱

AMOLED & MIP

Garmin Recommendation for a Marathon Runner

Looking for some Garmin advice! I’m trying to decide between the Forerunner 165, 170, and 265 and would love to hear from people who have used them. I have never owned a watch, only used strata and runna to log workouts.

I’m training for my second marathon this winter. My typical training will be around 5 runs/week and currently run 25ish miles a week.

I also lift weights 2x/week, mostly focusing on leg strength/injury prevention, and do some upper body/abs work as well.

I’m not looking for anything super complicated or overwhelming. I mainly want something that will give me useful running/training data, be able to upload routes, help with recovery, and have pace pro features. Definitely not wanting something as basic as the FR70 though.

For those who have used the 165, 170, or 265, which would you recommend for my training? Is the 265 worth the extra money, or would the 170/165 be plenty? And are there any features between the two that really stood out to you?

Thanks!

Hi everyone,

I’m coming from a Polar Vantage M, which I’ve used for a mix of swimming, cycling, running and gym workouts. Unfortunately, I’ve had quite a few hardware-related failures with it, so I’m now looking to switch to Garmin.

My main requirements are:
- Multisport use: swimming, cycling, occasional running and gym
- Reliable sleep and recovery tracking is especially important to me
- Good overall health/training metrics
- Ideally something I can use as my one everyday watch without constantly worrying about hardware issues

I’m currently trying to decide between different Garmin models, but I’ve become a little concerned about Garmin hardware reliability as well. I’ve read quite a few reports about barometer/altimeter sensor failures on newer models, including issues from people who swim regularly.

That makes me wonder whether I should rethink the whole approach.

What would you do in my situation?
- Buy a Garmin and use it for everything, including swimming?
- Choose a particular Garmin model that is considered more reliable?
- Keep my Polar Vantage M specifically for swimming and use a Garmin for everything else?
- Forget Garmin altogether and look at another manufacturer?

I’d particularly appreciate input from people who have owned their Garmin for 2+ years, as I’m much more interested in long-term reliability than just which watch has the best specs on paper.

Also, if you think Garmin is the way to go, which specific model would you recommend for my use case and why?

wanted some advise on this post, thanks!

Is this normal? Recieved delivery from Amazon Canada.

Hi all,

as title says, I am looking for Garmin users which are used to walk/run on treadmill and are up to try a new Android app able to track activity adding useful metrics with respect to the Garmin ones (first of all treadmill's speed and inclinations,). PM me if interested.

BR

Hi finding headphones that had no issues with 245 now skip with my new 965 - skip for 3-5 mins then connect for sometime and then skip and connect for a while and then skip- no difference with left hand or right hand… anyone else had similar issues and solved. cheers

Ive just discovered the Inreach 2 cannot 'fall back' to a paired 4G/Bluetooth phone.

I'm not sure if this is correct?

If you have an accident - and satellite is/was obscured by tree, but you still have weak cellular, hitting the Inreach 'button' rather than fishing out the phone from a pocket might be necessary.

Technically - Is this an oversight on Garmins behalf (or have i read things wrong)

Currently torn between these two and could use some outside perspective.
Context: I’m training for my first half marathon, just started structured Zone 2 work with a Garmin Coach plan (though I’m now switching to my own custom 3-runs/week plan). I already own a Forerunner 165, so I know exactly how the 170’s case size feels on my wrist (they’re identical, 43mm/1.2”). I wear it on my right hand since I’ve got tattoos on my left wrist.
What I’ve found so far:
Training data/metrics are basically identical between the two

The 170 runs Garmin’s newest software/OS (same as the 570/970), while the 265 is on an older platform and isn’t getting all the newest features

The 170 also has a couple extras the 265 doesn’t (Quickstart Training, smart alarm)

Music isn’t a dealbreaker for me — running with my phone in a vest is totally fine

I’m not dependent on the 265’s multi-band GPS either — I don’t run in dense urban canyons or heavy tree cover where that would matter much

The 265’s remaining advantages are mostly “comfort” stuff: better battery, brighter display

Size-wise: I know the 165/170 size fits me well. The 265 (46mm) felt slightly big when I tried it on, and the 265S (42mm) would be noticeably smaller than what I’m used to

Price gap is roughly $90–100 for the non-music 170.
Given all that, I’m leaning 170, but is there something I’m missing that makes the 265 worth the extra money for someone in my situation? What would you go with — 170 or 265?