We may earn a commission from links on this page.
Garmin has unveiled two new entry-level running watches: the Forerunner 70 and Forerunner 170. Both are available starting May 15, 2026, priced at $249.99 and $299.99 respectively, with a Forerunner 170 Music edition coming in at $349.99. Right off the bat, the big selling points are the AMOLED touchscreen displays, along with a suite of training tools that go beyond what I’d call “entry-level.” On paper, these watches are positioned as upgrades to the Forerunner 55 and Forerunner 165—but whether they actually deliver on that promise is more complicated. Here’s what we know so far.
What we know about the Garmin Forerunner 70
To quote Lifehacker senior health editor Beth Skwarecki, “It’s about time Garmin offered a modern-looking watch under $250.” The Forerunner 70 is certainly a glow-up over the Forerunner 55 (originally $199.99), adding a touchscreen AMOLED display, Garmin Run Coach, advanced training features, acute load and load ratio tracking, sleep score, morning and evening reports, and a quick workout option. The run/walk workout feature is a particularly nice touch for beginners easing into a running routine.
That said, context matters. At $249.99, is the Forerunner 70 really competitive with other brands in this price range? The Coros Pace 4 is also $249 and includes dual-band GPS and 4 GB of offline music storage. The Suunto Run is even more affordable at $199, and it, too, manages to offer dual-band GPS and 4 GB of music storage. The Forerunner 70, by comparison, has single-band GPS and just 0.5 GB of storage.
Now, where the 70 does make a name for itself is with Garmin’s software ecosystem. Some features that neither Suunto nor Coros typically offer include glances with battery data, sleep coaching with suggested bedtimes, lifestyle logging, weight tracking, sports scores, and a fitness coach that blends strength training with cardio without requiring you to commit to a specific sport. Like with all things Garmin, this is for people looking for more than just to track runs. (Even though watches that “just track runs” are exactly what the London Marathon winners wear.)
One small note here: Garmin’s website currently lists the 70 and 170 as a single product, which is a little odd. Whether that’s a placeholder or something more intentional, I’ll keep an eye on it.
What we know about the Garmin Forerunner 170
Like the 70 is an upgrade of the 55, the Forerunner 170 is positioned as an upgrade to the Forerunner 165 (originally $249.99 at launch in April 2024, with the Music edition at $299.99). However, it might be more accurate to compare this watch to the fan-favorite Forerunner 265, which was $449 originally, but now regularly goes on sale for $349.99 (which is the current MSRP of the 170 Music).
The 170 actually has shorter battery life than the 165: It has 10 days versus 11-13. It’s not a crazy trade-off, considering all the software updates. As Garmin puts it, the Forerunner 170’s advantage is the expanded feature set.
However, the 170 is missing a few features that the 265 had. It doesn’t have dual-band GPS, supports fewer GPS networks overall, doesn’t have cycling workouts or multisport support, and it’s unclear whether it can connect to a power meter (the 265 could; the 165 could not). These are more complicated trade-offs to weigh for anyone who was hoping for a straightforward upgrade.
Now, what the 170 does bring to the table are the kind of software features the Forerunner 570 has been receiving, which the -65 series missed out on. That means things like the Garmin Run Coach (a newer, more capable version), advanced training features, quick workout functionality, a calculator, and lifestyle logging. Advanced training features, for context, include Training Readiness (which scores your recovery), Training Status (which monitors training load), HRV Status (heart rate variability tracking), and Daily Suggested Workouts.
The heart rate sensor is the same as the 165, which is perfectly solid and on par with its competitors. Still, the Forerunner 570 and 970 have a noticeably better optical HR sensor than the 165/265 generation.
The bottom line (for now)
On paper, both watches have their merits, particularly for true beginners who want a trustworthy GPS smartwatch with solid Garmin software support. But for runners upgrading from previous Garmin models, or for anyone considering Coros or Suunto, the value proposition isn’t ideal. To quote a Google Chat from Beth to me: “I’m unimpressed.”
Luckily, we’ll be putting both to the test soon. Beth will be comparing the Forerunner 70 with other low-priced running watches to see how it stacks up. And I have the Forerunner 165 Music, so I’ll be able to see how the 170 Music fares as a direct successor. Stay tuned for our in-depth verdicts.
