Garmin Forerunner 165 – My review from testing as a Marathoner and Triathlete (2026)

Bought by RunningGearLab: I paid for this Forerunner 165 myself. Garmin did not send it to me or review this article before publication.

I bought the Forerunner 165 after using more expensive Garmin watches, including the 920XT and Forerunner 955. I expected it to feel like a clear downgrade. For the way I actually run, it has not.

Why I ended up with the Forerunner 165

My first serious Garmin was the 920XT. Later I moved to the Forerunner 955, which added a lot more training and recovery data.

I liked the 955, but when it broke I had to decide how many of those features I was actually using. The answer was not all of them.

I still wanted a proper running watch with Garmin workouts, race tools and recovery data. I just did not want to pay for another high-end model if my training did not require it. That is what pushed me toward the 165.

The biggest surprise has been how little I miss from the more expensive watch on a normal training week.

The smaller size has been one of the best parts

The Forerunner 165 is 43 mm and weighs 39 g. Coming from the 955, I noticed the difference right away.

It is easier to forget about on a long run, and it is more comfortable to leave on overnight for sleep and recovery tracking. I do not want a watch to feel like outdoor equipment all day. The 165 feels more like a normal watch that happens to be very good at running.

The AMOLED screen is much nicer than I expected to care about

Older Garmins gave me the information I needed, and I never thought much about the display. The AMOLED screen on the 165 changed that.

Messages, menus and the morning report are easier to read, and the whole watch feels less utilitarian. I still prefer buttons during workouts, especially with sweaty hands or gloves, but the touchscreen is handy when I am moving through menus.

The screen does use more battery than an older MIP display, especially with always-on mode. I leave the settings fairly conservative and have not found charging to be a problem for normal training.

What I actually use

The 165 has more features than I need to list one by one. These are the ones that matter in my own training:

• GPS pace and distance for normal runs and long runs.
• Daily Suggested Workouts and Garmin Coach when I want some structure.
• PacePro and Race Widget when I am training toward a race.
• HRV Status, resting heart rate and Recovery Time for general fatigue trends.
• Body Battery and Sleep Score as background information, not rules I blindly follow.
• Track Run, treadmill and trail modes for the different places I train.

For marathon training, that has been enough most of the time. I want to know my pace, distance, heart rate and how the last few days of training are adding up. The 165 does that without turning every run into a data project.

What you give up compared with the more expensive Garmins

The missing features matter more than the long list of features it does have. These are the reasons I would move up the Garmin range:

• No multiband GPS. I have been happy with the GPS on normal road routes, but harder city and trail environments are where a higher model has an advantage.
• No true triathlon mode. It can record running, cycling and swimming separately, but not one continuous multisport race.
• No full maps. I would choose a different Garmin if navigation was a regular part of my training.
• No Training Readiness or full Training Load/Status package. Those matter if you like digging deeper into Garmin’s training data.
• No offline music on the standard model. You need the Forerunner 165 Music for that.

I do not miss those things on most days. A triathlete, trail runner or someone who uses Garmin’s advanced training metrics heavily may feel very differently.

Forerunner 165 vs 165 Music

This choice is simple. The normal 165 does not store offline music. The 165 Music does.

I usually have my phone nearby, so music storage was not important enough for me to pay more.

GPS has been good enough for where I run

The 165 supports multiple satellite systems, but not multiband GPS. On my normal road runs and neighbourhood routes, I have not found that to be a real problem.

It locks on quickly and the recorded routes have been close enough that I do not think about GPS accuracy during normal training.

I would be more cautious if I ran most of my miles under dense trees, between tall buildings or on technical trails. Those are the situations where I would rather have one of Garmin’s multiband models.

Wrist heart rate is useful, but I still use a chest strap when it matters

For easy runs, long runs and daily tracking, the wrist heart rate has been good enough for me.

Intervals are different. Fast pace changes, cold weather and changes in arm movement can make wrist sensors less reliable. When I care about the heart-rate number for a hard workout or test, I use a chest strap.

That is how I treat wrist heart rate on most watches, not a problem I would single out as unique to the 165.

Battery life has not been a problem for normal training

Garmin lists up to 11 days in smartwatch mode and up to 19 hours in GPS-only mode.

Real battery life depends heavily on the display settings. Always-on mode drains it faster. With more conservative settings, I do not have to think about charging every day and it handles normal training weeks comfortably.

I would not buy this for a 24-hour ultra or a multi-day adventure. For road races, marathon training and regular long runs, the battery has been more than enough for me.

The 165 makes the most sense when it is clearly discounted

This is the most important buying point in 2026.

The Forerunner 165 is still a good watch. The newer 170 just means the price has to make sense.

For more current Garmin choices, see the best Garmin running watches guide.

One reason I have stayed with Garmin has nothing to do with the spec sheet

When my Forerunner 955 broke outside warranty, I expected an expensive repair or replacement.

Garmin sent me a refurbished replacement from its stock instead.

I cannot say everyone will have the same support experience, but it mattered to me. When a watch costs hundreds of dollars and gets worn every day, the company behind it becomes part of the buying decision too.

Who I would recommend it to

• Road runners training for 5K through marathon distances.
• Runners who want a smaller, lighter Garmin for all-day wear.
• People moving up from an older basic running watch.
• Runners who use recovery trends but do not need Garmin’s full advanced training package.
• Anyone who finds the 165 at a worthwhile discount.

Who should skip it

• Triathletes who want one continuous multisport race mode.
• Trail runners who regularly need maps or multiband GPS.
• Ultra runners who need much longer GPS battery.
• People who want Training Readiness and Garmin’s deeper training-load tools.
• Anyone paying almost the same price as a newer Forerunner 170.

Final verdict

I still like the Forerunner 165 because it showed me how few premium watch features I actually need on an ordinary week.

It is light, comfortable, easy to read and gives me the run tracking, workouts, race tools and recovery data I use most. I do not feel like I am training with a cheap watch.

In 2026, I would not buy it at any price. I would buy it when the discount is good enough to make the missing features easy to accept.

For a road runner who wants a smaller Garmin and does not need maps, triathlon mode or the deepest training metrics, the Forerunner 165 is still a very good watch.

Forerunner 165 FAQ