The Garmin Forerunner 55 and 165 are two solid entry-level Garmin watches. Find out which is best for you.
Garmin’s release of the Forerunner 165 in early 2024 added a much-needed budget option to its lineup, yet the Forerunner 55 is still the cheapest way to get a running watch from the brand.
The problem? The latter was released in 2021 and is now outdated in most areas. We expected it to be refreshed last year, but there are still no indications that a new model will even arrive in 2025.
That means those operating with a budget of around $150-300 now have a tough decision when choosing their next Garmin running watch.
In this comparison guide, we’ll cross-examine all the key areas you should consider before buying one of these two running watches. Let’s dive in.
Price and versions
- Garmin Forerunner 165: $249 / £249 (standard) | $299 / £289 (Music)
- Garmin Forerunner 55: £199 (standard)
While the FR55 has just one version, there are two to choose from if you begin looking at the FR165: the standard model and a slightly pricier FR165 Music.
There are no differences between the FR165 pair other than support for music storage and offline playback for services like Spotify, Amazon Music, and Deezer.
At present, we think the standard FR165 offers the best value. It’s definitely worth upgrading by $50/£40 for the screen tech alone – and it also has plenty more features than the FR55.
However, if you choose the Music edition, things start to get a little pricey, so you might consider upgrading to the Forerunner 265.
Design and display
- Forerunner 165: Plastic case, 1.2-inch AMOLED display
- Forerunner 55: Plastic case, 1.04-inch transflective MIP display
Both of these running watch models are lightweight and designed to feel unobtrusive on the wrist, and they feel quite similar during daily wear and runs.
The FR55 weighs 37g, while the FR165 is slightly heavier at 39g. This difference is hardly noticeable, and you really can’t go wrong with the slightly larger FR165 (43 x 43 x 11.6mm) or the FR55 (42 x 42 x 11.6 mm) in terms of size.
Garmin does offer different case sizes for some of its pricier watches—like the Fenix 7 Pro, Epix Pro, or Fenix 8—but that’s not an option you have with either of these lines.
Thankfully, the 42mm/43mm case size is quite unisex, although it tends to fit small and average wrists better. Ultimately, the main difference between the two is not in the design shell; rather, it lies in the display technology.
The FR165 features a larger, vibrant AMOLED display that delivers exceptional clarity even in sunlight, while the FR55 has a smaller, monochrome transflective memory-in-pixel (MIP) display, which is more efficient.
As we just mentioned, we believe the AMOLED display is far superior to MIP screens and deserves an upgrade in itself. It isn’t as battery efficient (more on that below), but it’s worthwhile.
Running features
- Forerunner 165: GPS, HR monitoring, Garmin Coach, PacePro, Race Widget, Daily Suggested Workouts, Running Dynamics, VO2 Max, Training Effect, HRV Status
- Forerunner 55: GPS, HR monitoring, Garmin Coach, PacePro, Race Predictor, Daily Suggested Workouts
Garmin takes great care in spacing out the features available on its running watches. Overall, everything comes together to ensure you always receive a bit more functionality for your money, while maintaining value across the various Forerunner models.
Since these two models are at the bottom of the chain, you can expect them to have the most basic feature sets, with the FR165 having a slight edge in features for runners.
We would say, though, that these are two very run-focused watches. Unlike pricier models such as the Forerunner 965, these two aren’t designed to be full-time training companions for triathletes—and that means tools like Training Status, Training Readiness, Endurance Score, and Hill Score aren’t available.
Instead, both the FR165 and FR55 concentrate on the fundamentals. They feature single-frequency GPS tracking, which provides excellent accuracy, even though it isn’t top-tier, and heart rate tracking from Garmin’s Elevate V4 sensor.
This sensor is last-gen technology, but it’s still as effective as most optical heart rate sensors on the market, including those featured in the FR265 and FR965.
This is where things split off, however. While the FR165 has room for Training Effect (the measurement of which cardiovascular system your workout developed), the Race Widget (and its adaptive training suggestions), and Garmin’s Running Dynamics analysis, the FR55 instead sticks to support for Garmin Coach plans and fundamental post-run analysis.
Again, we think the upgrades are worth it for most people. However, those who just want a very basic start-stop tracker that accurately logs distance and HR will find it with the FR55.
Health, sleep and smart features
- Forerunner 165: Sleep tracking (advanced), nap detection, stress monitoring, Body Battery (advanced), smartphone notifications, music support, Pulse Ox
- Forerunner 55: Sleep tracking (basic), stress monitoring, Body Battery (basic), smartphone notifications
Although these two appear quite similar in this regard, there are a few subtle differences, and the advantage naturally goes to the newer FR165 in this respect.
This is particularly prevalent in areas like sleep tracking and Body Battery energy monitoring, as they’ve been given a bit of an update in presentation (both on-watch and in Garmin Connect) and what’s tracked.
While the FR165 provides sleep scores and detects naps, the FR55 only logs your hours and evaluates your sleep stages. The more expensive model gives you that extra feature.
Both watches feature Body Battery, but the FR165 now displays a breakdown of how specific activities, rest periods, and sleep tracking have impacted your score, complete with a neat little graph.
Neither is particularly comprehensive regarding smart features or health tracking, which is to be expected from two devices primarily designed for running.
Again, the FR165 is slightly more advanced. It boasts Garmin’s SpO2 Pulse Ox tech, allowing you to take spot readings or set up background monitoring during sleep (or throughout the whole day if you don’t mind the battery drain this causes), but this is about the extent of its health features.
As we’ve mentioned, it also offers music storage for a premium, whereas the FR55 is limited to media control only when connected to an iOS or Android device.
Battery life
- Forerunner 165: 11 days (watch mode), 19 hours (GPS)
- Forerunner 55: 14 days (watch mode), 20 hours (GPS)
The FR55’s only victory is in the battery life department. However, this is merely a win on paper.
It might last a few more days than the FR165, but the trade-offs—primarily the AMOLED display and the onboard features—aren’t worth it.
The 11 days is still more than enough for a running watch – and there’s also a negligible difference when it comes to efficiency when tracking via GPS.
We should say that having the FR165 in ‘watch mode’ will ensure the always-on display is off, however. And, in our testing, we’ve found that turning this display mode on (alongside max brightness) will see the battery life dip down to around a week.
Still very respectable, even at half of the FR55’s capacity in AOD mode.
Verdict: Which is best?
Knowing which is the best option for you is all about understanding your budget and needs. With that in mind, we recommend the following.
Choose the Forerunner 165 if:
- You want a colorful and detailed display
- You need slightly more running metrics
- You value music storage and offline playback
- Your budget can stretch closer to $300/£300
Choose the Forerunner 55 if:
- You want better battery life
- You don’t value run-tracking insights
- You want the most budget-friendly Garmin running watch
Ultimately, both of these watches are very capable and reliable running companions. The FR165 offers a bit more for intermediates or advanced beginners, while the FR55 provides excellent value for those just starting. Choose the watch that aligns best with your priorities and budget.
