@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos yeah, @sky-runner always provides valuable input. The problem is no time to read all feedback

@freeheeler nope I mean climb guidance

@Egika those running metrics are far superior in something like the head than in very moving one arm. It is explained in that video. That is also a reason with PODs exist in other brands or chest straps with POD features. And pod features could also be improved in a future firmware update. An analogy is running with an HR chest strap. It’s better than the wrist sensor and if you are running with the strap, is because you do want the metrics of the strap. It has no sense to have 2 activities in that scenario. Watch’s metrics should be avoided when running with the Spark paired (in my opinion the contrary is clearly a bug once you have both products in the same workout)

@suzzlo said in Downloading map takes a very long time: @muurain said in Downloading map takes a very long time: Suunto’s cloud service that throttles the downloads but… you can download maps for the mobile phone that are much faster… so… if we think, same server is delivering them… this should not be the problem… Anyway, I can live with it You’re right! I didn’t even realize that, even though I did download mobile maps too And yeah this does seem like an understandable constraint of small smart devices. I too am happy to have the convenience of WiFi downloads, even if they are pretty slow compared to bigger devices. My old Garmin Fenix maps downloaded way faster, but it was via USB cable and a PC. But given the analysis here, the original post does now sound like a WiFi issue or a bug. Maybe try downloading maps on some other place or WiFi…? If the download speed is considerably less than 1GB / hour (or ~2Mbps), it should work faster and there are not many broadbands this slow.

@gkaempfer Same here

@Nikolai-Simonov I have intense jungle training this weekend; I’ll be testing both Vertical 2 and the update.

@Egika Yes, different colours make no difference unfortunately

@Highlands These are great! Thanks

@Egika this was exactly the bug I referred to in my post. Anyway my point is that there is a difference between fixing watch breaking busy and niggles, so it would be good to know what to expect…

@Egika So unless I’m reading this wrong, Suunto either know that it measures distance a little short, but it was designed to do so…( I can’t understand why this would be the case!) or it’s not significant enough to address in an update. Personally I think it’s disappointing that it won’t be addressed.

@maszop it’s still there in the last public version (6.8.13). Do you have another one?

@Egika Thank you.

@herlas Yes, Suunto shows both average powers, with and without zeros and in Wahoo settings, you can set if you want average power with zeros or without. I have set this to without zeros and I got SMALLER average power without zeros from Suunto than on Wahoo. Never got higher values from Suunto. On last ride, the difference was 3,6%. It’s clear, that algorithm will differ Suunto vs. Wahoo, but I think, this difference is high and this is the reason, that I’m not sure, if Suunto really doesn’t count auto pauses to the average power… With connecting to device which doesn’t support dual sided wattmeter, Assiomas should send the instantaneous power at a given time and it should be the sum of both pedals. EDIT: On ride with “longer” snack pause, the difference was 5,1%. EDIT2: So no, the difference is not because of auto pause🫤. [image: 1776505793278-screenshot_20260418-114309.png] [image: 1776505803202-screenshot_20260418-114248.png]

@aiv4r no worries. I think the current way is not bad at all. It just need to be consistent. Having a 5km run as PB for 5k - great, Having a 10.xkm run as PB for 10k instead of the 9.95km race I did last time - accepted Having a 20.4km run as PB for the half marathon - what? And nothing I can do to decline that half marathon PB and go back to the one before… support hasn’t been that helpful with that, yet…

@sky-runner said in Race S: Extremely high battery use rate: I suspect this is a software issue so it is likely the same across all models. Indeed as software issue, but maybe connected with the changed HR sensor algorithm? In that case it is a solution solely for the Race S. But who knows… Interested about your results…

@Brainicus Pssst, careful with that negativity or they’re going to bury you in downvotes ^^ @tieutieu Improved a lot’? One of the most ‘exciting’ updates was simply getting the system to run smoothly, just because Suunto couldn’t even bother to properly optimize their own software for launch day. Navigation is still struggling, the maps are still limited compared to the competition, the weather forecast is still limited, and smartphone connectivity is still severely lacking (just look at the missing DND sync). Setting an alarm is a century behind the competition (even a basic Casio does it better), even a simple timer function is terribly executed, and let’s not even bring up watch face customization. Sure, you can always excuse all of this with a simple: ‘well, it’s strictly a sports watch, not a smartwatch’ – but if that’s the case, given the ratio of capabilities and features to the price tag, it must have been one of the most overpriced watches on the market, considering it launched at €800. It’s just sad.

@Gunnar said in Map Design Update 2.53.42: memory is not storage Unfortunately, I can’t find any information anywhere about the difference in RAM between the Race and the Race2.