The Garmin Forerunner 170 came remarkably close to the expected distance on a track, then disagreed with my reference devices on an ordinary run. Is it still a good buy? I tested it while running, cycling, swimming and hiking. The answer depends on what you actually need from a watch.
When I prepared the video review, the reference price for the standard Forerunner 170 was around PLN 1,300. The Music version costs more. That was the price point for the test, not a promise of today’s retail price. At that level, I expected a capable running watch, not a full replacement for a more expensive triathlon and navigation device.
Prefer to watch the test? See my full Garmin Forerunner 170 Music review on YouTube.
This article includes clearly marked partner banners with affiliate links.
What does the Forerunner 170 offer?
Garmin introduced the Forerunner 170 in May 2026. It has a 1.2-inch touchscreen AMOLED display and five physical buttons. The Music version lets you store music on the watch and listen with wireless headphones without carrying a phone. The watch in my photos is the Music version. Garmin Pay is also available on the standard Forerunner 170. Source: Garmin.
The feature list is generous: training readiness, training status, wrist-based running power and dynamics, sleep and HRV tracking, plus activities for running, cycling, swimming and strength training. The more useful question is how well these features worked during my sessions.
Battery life: frequent training meant frequent charging
Garmin quotes up to 10 days in smartwatch mode, up to 20 hours with GPS only and up to 14 hours with all satellite systems enabled. Those figures describe different modes. They cannot be compared directly with mixed everyday use involving training, heart-rate monitoring and an always-on screen. Source: Garmin owner’s manual.
For my first test I enabled the always-on display, which is how I normally use a watch. The battery went from 100% to 10% in just under 48 hours. During that period I logged six activities, including 1 hour 40 minutes of cycling, 2 hours of running, 2 hours of hiking, 1.5 hours of open-water swimming and 30 minutes on a SUP board. This was a heavy workload, so the result says more about my use than about what every buyer will get.
I ran a second test with the always-on display disabled. It included two GPS runs totaling 2 hours 30 minutes, two pool sessions totaling 1 hour 30 minutes, 30 minutes on a treadmill and two bike rides totaling 2 hours 30 minutes. I did not record the final battery percentage or the total duration of this cycle, so I cannot make a numerical comparison. My practical impression is that the battery is adequate, but far from impressive if you train a lot.
GPS: one strong result did not tell the whole story
The Forerunner 170 can use multiple satellite systems, but it does not have multi-band GPS. Garmin’s product comparison confirms the distinction. In open areas, my recordings were generally useful. In forests and built-up areas, I noticed its limitations more, and acquiring a signal sometimes took a while.
On one run of about 21 km, the difference compared with my Epix 2 and Stryd was roughly 200 m. On another, over about 13 km, it approached 300 m. These are my training comparisons, not a laboratory accuracy test or proof that either reference device is always correct.
Wrist heart rate: sometimes close to a chest strap, sometimes not
I compared the optical readings with a chest strap. On one run they were very close; on another, the difference was around 5–8%. The discrepancy was greater while swimming. Tightening the watch improved the readings, but made it a little less comfortable. If I were training to precise heart-rate targets, I would use a chest strap.
Running: the track and treadmill were the biggest surprises
Regular runs went reasonably well, especially in open terrain. Two specific tests were more interesting. At the athletics track I had to select the track-run profile and lane four manually. Twelve laps should have added up to about 5,076 m; the watch recorded 5,080 m. In this attempt, it was almost spot on.
I then ran 5 km on a treadmill, and the Forerunner showed 4.93 km. That is a very good result before calibration. After the workout, I could also correct the distance on the watch. It does not mean every treadmill run will be equally accurate, but my first test was better than I expected.
Step counting raised no major concerns either. While walking, its readings were similar to my Epix. I did not notice significant phantom steps while driving or cycling.
Cycling, pool swimming and open water
The Forerunner 170 worked well enough for me on both a gravel bike and a time-trial bike. Personally, I prefer a bike computer because I can read it without moving my hand from the bars. If you want one device for several sports, though, the cycling profiles are useful.
In the pool, I like Garmin’s drill log: after a technique set, I can enter the distance covered. The watch recognized my freestyle, breaststroke and backstroke. The problem was missed lengths, typically two to four in a session. Across an 80-length workout, that matters. It became more likely to lose count when I changed strokes frequently.
I was happier with it in open water. During a swim of nearly 1,500 m, the recorded distance differed from my reference by about 8 m. That is one test, so I would not expect the same precision every time. I would also treat wrist heart-rate readings in the water with caution.
Triathlon: the missing mode is decisive for me
Garmin provides separate swimming, cycling and running activities, but the official Forerunner 170 activity list does not include triathlon or multisport. As a triathlete, I consider that a decisive drawback. I can record the disciplines separately in training, but in a race I want one continuous recording that includes transitions.
Strength training and SUP: the details matter
Strength training feels familiar if you have used a Garmin before. The watch attempts to identify exercises, counts reps, and lets me edit the rep count and weight on my wrist. Recording the workout worked fairly well. However, my hardest strength sessions did not always seem to affect Body Battery as much as they felt physically demanding. That is my observation, not an independent measure of training load.
On a SUP board the watch recorded distance, but did not count my paddle strokes. My Epix 2 has provided stroke counts in similar use. I could not establish why it happened, so I treat it as the result of this test rather than a proven limitation of every unit.
Hiking and navigation: a route trace, not a detailed map
Following a route I had loaded in advance was useful on a hike. The watch does not show full topographic maps; the display gives you a simple route trace. In my test, navigating back was frustrating because the guidance was not always practical for the terrain. I am not saying TracBack is absent: Garmin documents the feature in its manual. My experience simply would not make me choose this as my primary navigation tool for a long mountain hike.
Forerunner 170 or 170 Music?
The Music model can store songs and podcasts and play them through wireless headphones without a phone. The standard Forerunner 170 does not offer onboard music storage. Before paying for Music, ask whether you actually run without your phone and want audio from the watch. I did not test battery life while playing music. Garmin quotes up to 7.5 hours with GPS and music, or up to 6.5 hours with all satellite systems and music. Source: Garmin.
Who should buy the Forerunner 170?
- Consider it if running is your main sport, you want to enter the Garmin ecosystem, and you need one watch for everyday training plus occasional cycling, swimming or strength work.
- Think carefully if you train heavily and need long battery life with the display always on, highly dependable wrist heart rate or serious mountain navigation.
- I would pass if you race triathlons and need a proper multisport mode.
The Forerunner 170 surprised me on the track and treadmill. It also has features that used to belong to more expensive models. At the same time, my GPS and heart-rate results were inconsistent, the pool profile missed lengths, and the lack of triathlon mode rules it out as my main race watch. As a first Garmin for a runner, it makes sense. As the only watch for my races, it does not.
If you own a Forerunner 170, I would love to know how its battery and navigation have worked for you. Leave your experience in the comments.