Race 2 accuracy
-
Hi all. I’m looking at getting the Race 2 to replace my Garmin 265- mainly because I fancy a change and the Race 2 has me completely sold on its looks!
I’ve been a bit concerned though about reports on here saying the watch under reports distance and also there are some heart rate issues. I was just wondering if anyone owns this watch that actually finds it to be accurate? -
@shamilt1 The Race 2 is my best running watch to date. I’ve used Garmin for over 10 years (starting back in 2008 with the FR305).
I haven’t had any issues with distance tracking. However, I agree that the wrist-based heart rate can be a bit buggy. Instead of getting frustrated with it, I simply use an HRM strap for all my workouts.
Regards -
@shamilt1 I have a lot of comparison data showing Race 2 and Vertical 2 having virtually identical distance and altitude for trail running. Others in the forum have stated that the Race 2 measures short. For what I do, I see no differences between the two watches. I am happy to share the data, I often run with both watches for testing.
-
This post is deleted! -
@shamilt1 IMO The Race 2 is shy a few meters than other devices yes, but I think the other devices are more ‘generous’. What I found is that the Race 2 is very much like AWU2/3 when it comes to distance and represents the real distance. I might get the Vertical 2 now that the Vertical Week is upon us and will be able to compare them side by side.
The weirdest thing I experienced on my Race 2 is that when you are navigating a route or snap to route the distance is literally the same as the AWU3, when having it on free (breadcrumbs) it is shy few tens of meters. Nevertheless the GPS track is great and smooth and its one of the most beautiful/light watches I own (the Ocean is still the best looking
) -
Thanks for your replies guys- I think I’ll go ahead and get the watch.
I like it’s looks, seems like the hrm has improved over the first edition and I just like the way things seem to be clearly set out on the watch. I don’t think the slightly shorter distance measuring will be much of an issue and if it is slightly inaccurate, it could possibly be fixed going forward in an update.I did get a Huawei GT6 Pro to replace my Garmin at Christmas- the watch is a stunner and it initially seemed good…but unfortunately it seems allergic to trees and the gps tracks are shocking under a bit of tree cover making it unusable for running!
Edit….I posted this 24 hours ago…does it normally take a full day to get approved for a new user or did I slip through the net?
-
@Brad_Olwin I compared the Race 2 against the Vertical 1 Race S for several weeks and opened a dedicated thread to discuss the topic.
As a summary: in all my activities and tests Vertical and Race S recorded practically same tracks (recorded GPS points), distances and paces, and, the most important, showed distance (in the watch ) was very close to the recorded distance when measuring the GPS recorded track.
In Race 2 the behavior is different: Race 2 records practically same tracks (recorded GPS points) but showed distance is shorted (or filtered) and differs from the distance when measuring the GPS recorded track, and this GPS measured distance is similar to the distance measured with both Vertical and Race S, so ir seems that all watches record/save similar GPS info/points but processing algorithm is different. This behavior happens in running and bike activities.
Which watch is more accurate? I really don’t know but for me it’s clear that altough they estimate same track (raw GPS points) they estimate different distances and paces so one must be more accurate than the other. Maybe V1 was measuring excesive distance, maybe Race 2 is measuring less distance. Maybe “perfection” is in the middle, who knows?
The behavior can also be observed in activities of runners using Suunto, so it appears to be “normal” operation of the Race 2. That’s the reason I opened the dedicated thread.
That said, I’m using the Race 2 as my 24/7 watch and the Vertical is in the drawer for “special” days or going out on the bike.
-
@Brad_Olwin The comparisons I’ve seen on here are usually against the Vertical 1 (which seems to report accurate distances). I’m wondering if you’re not seeing much difference because you’re comparing with the Vertical 2- perhaps this watch uses the same algorithm as the Race 2?
I don’t mind if the distances are a little bit off as nothing is going to be perfect, but if I have my forerunner 265 on one wrist that says 12k and it’s still 11.8k or less on the Suunto, then that will bug me! -
@shamilt1 chiming in with my experience. I’ve written this in another thread but I’ve compared the Race 2 to Garmin 970, Fenix 8, COROS Pace Pro, Pace 4, Apex 4, Suunto Race and Race S, AND a measuring wheel. Many many data points. I also recently picked up the Suunto Vertical 2. All devices including the measuring wheel compare favourably, EXCEPT the Race 2, which measures short by 0.5 to 1.5 % every single time. Given all of these devices have been compared against a measuring wheel, I would say the Race 2 does indeed show shorter distance at the end of runs, with the other devices all being quite true to real distances.
-
@Finnjf That sounds pretty conclusive…and it’s interesting that you have had the Vertical 2. Can you confirm the distances recorded on the Vertical 2 showed no shortening of distance and performed as well as your other devices and measuring wheel in this regard?
I have a Race 2 being delivered tomorrow and I’m going to run a 12k at the weekend and wear my Forerunner 265 at the same time for comparison- I’ll post my findings on here afterwards. If after a few runs it is always short, I may return it and get the Vertical 2 instead. -
@shamilt1 correct, the Vertical 2 shows no sign of shortening the distances. It’s just the Race 2. I had some chatter with Suunto help, and it seems they are aware of the issue with the Race 2 (but who knows if or when an update will make any changes to the algorithm).
