p pol The Adventures of Carboman: First Impressions: Nike Speed Triax 100 vs Timex Sleek 50

Monday, June 19, 2006

First Impressions: Nike Speed Triax 100 vs Timex Sleek 50

Took delivery of the Nike yesterday. Was offered too good a discount to ignore. Having only toyed with it last night and this morning, here are my first impressions:
 
Design:
Nike's design has always been hip but Timex's is also functional. Both are 4+1 button design. Nike is typically skewed and it's dot-matrix display doesn't particularly improve the readout unless you have the large-sized version (yes Nike offers 2 sizes for the same model). The skewed design is a love-or-hate-it thing, though I don't mind it at all.
Verdict: Timex holds the slight edge, though they too have launched their Optimum Viewing Angle (OVA) series. See picture below.


Build:
The Nike weighs significantly more than the Timex. The resin used are somewhat similar. Both watches come with perforated straps which aids breathability but the Timex's strap is wider ensuring that the watch sits more securely on my wrist. The Nike is thicker, almost as thick as a HRM but this is no reason why it should weigh heavier.
Verdict: Timex wins

Features:
Alarms: Nike has 2 alarms but Timex has an amazing 3. You can set Timex's to any particular day. Verdict: Timex wins hand down
Time: Both have 2 time zones with optional chiming. Verdict: Draw
Chrono: Standard. Both will display split and lap times, though Nike allows the user to choose whether to display one or both. Verdict: Draw
Countdown Timer: Timex allows 2 options ie a once-only or looping timer but I don't see the Nike having this function at all. Verdict: Timex wins
Target Time: Nike allows the setting up to 50 target times. This means the user can track whether or not he is on target pace. Verdict: Advantage Nike
Interval Timer: Timex has 2 interval timers that can work hand in hand. This means the user can set repeated timers to handle run-walk sequence, handy for beginners as well as ultras where walking is a viable option. The Nike also caters to the run-walk programs and hard-easy workouts though I've yet to try it. Verdict: On paper, Nike holds a slight edge
Lap memory: Nike's 100 while the Timex is 50. Both are enough for long intervals and marathon but the Nike will be able to handle most ultras confortably. Furthermore Nike allows the storage of up to 30 runs. As with the Timex, this includes all the laps made, total time, average lap and best lap. Verdict: Because on top of the 100-lap memory it allows the storage of 30 runs, the Nike excels
Scratch-Proof: Yes for Nike, none for Timex, which explains the scratches I have on it. Verdict: This is a no-brainer. Nike wins
Night Light: Yes for both. Verdict: Draw
Power-save: Self explanatory, this feature allows the user to set the watch display off after 1 or 6 hours. In today's high-cost of living, this is a smart feature. Verdict: Nike wins
Contrast: This is another nice power saving feature. Verdict: Nike wins

Usability:
Readability: Both Nike and Timex deliver good readability. The only downside is Nike's poor representation of the secondary texts which are just too small. Verdict: Timex wins
Menu: The Timex menu is accessed using a single button whereas Nike's alarm menu is accessed via the View button, which is pretty odd. Verdict: Timex for simplicity
Time/Date Display format: Timex has a very good readout. The Day, Month, Date, Time, AM/PM are all clearly displayed while Nike offers Day or Month, Date, Time and AM/PM. Furthermore, the AM/PM words in the Nike is way too small, thus making the option of setting the time to the 24hr mode much more practical. But then again it's not often that you can't differentiate day from night. Verdict: Timex wins because there is additional info displayed
Function Button placement: As opposed to Timex's buttons, Nike's buttons are built nearly flushed with the body. And because of the shape of the Nike, pressing the lap button takes some getting used to. This is made worse with sweaty fingers, and when you're running fast. Nike designers should have adopted the Timex approach and made the View button the Start/Lap button. Verdict: Timex wins
Function Button response: Both Timex and Nike score low on this count. Button response is not consistent - sometimes you have to press harder for response Verdict: Draw

Bottomline: On plain countback, Timex wins but the Nike is feature laden and running specific. One expects Nike to excel in the Usability but somehow they complicated things slightly. It will, nevertheless, be the watch of my choice from now till next month's Bridge Run. Need to familiarize myself with it before the July 30th big race.

4 Comments:

  • How come no price comparision?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:11 PM  

  • nowadays the watch are so complex n i think no one will use all the functions made available. comparing the price i wud think the Timex will cost less although i think both will b in the RM200+ range at least. Style wise the Timex looks far more better. Verdict: I will go for the Timex knowing I will not use all the functions, price is a factor and it looks too

    By Blogger C-CUBE, at 4:35 PM  

  • Anon: RM220 for the Timex (after 10% discount) bought 4-5 years ago. RM204 (after discount) for the Nike)

    CCube: U r rite. Functions are only useful if you use it. I use 100% of the Timex functionality and I think I'll be using the Nike's as well as the target pacing will be handy when running a fixed route such as KLCC or the track. For races, it will only work if there are distance markers.

    By Blogger Carboman, at 4:54 PM  

  • i think the most economical and fun way is still asking the volunteer or the St John "WHAT"S THE TIME???!!! WHAT'S THE TIME???!!!"

    By Blogger lifemou, at 11:07 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home