S9B - nothing but problems, how can you praise this watch?!
-
@hel790 said in S9B - nothing but problems, how can you praise this watch?!:
@TELE-HO no. H7 only allows a single BT connection (plus a 5KHz broadcast)
then it still could be the reason why he does not see calories… well anyway, he has a bunch of inputs now to get his issues solved
-
I still haven’t got the time for new longer exercise.
I don’t plan to use 2 watches in the future, but I wanted to see the differences in number.
Some things mentioned couple of times some of you ignored, that’s the reason I was detailed and again there are mentioned things that I confirmed are fine now.
White theme is worse without backlight. With backlight for sure is brighter.
Just for comparison, on V800 dark theme is much more readable without backlight, on Suunto not much difference. That’s cleared, backlight works.
I barely used backlight on V800 (and had physical button by the way), only in pitch dark if I didn’t have my headlamp on me in such cases.I have read the manual couple of times some parts. Touch enabled, but no light. That is now resolved after reset.
Calories on cycling in my case ARE HIGH on Suunto in my case:) I WEAR H7, once again.
Not an ultra runner, up to two hours are my runs max. I had couple of longer hikes (up to 10 hours) in my life.Difference between H7 and H10…for my needs H7 is enough and never had a problem (not using ANT+, memory, etc.). Maybe if the battery lid becomes unopenable I’ll be forced to buy a new sensor.
Most of my issues are resolved by hard reset as I mentioned earlier. My wishes on the other hand are for another topic.
Tomorrow we’ll see the difference again, is something still wrong or is it OK now with calories comparison.
First I start S9B to pick up the bluetooth signal and after that I start activity on Polar so it gets gymlink or whatever they call it. They should be similar in calories consumption, but I already mentioned that S9B exaggerates with steps count certainly.857 steps today (miband worn on dominant right hand), all day sitting and working in front of the computer and on S9B (left hand) there are 3210 steps. How?! That is something for urgent fix, unless my watch…is too sensitive for some reason:)
Remember it was reset. It is not that I am aggressive and mean, but there are still some of the problems mentioned by me or others. I know most of you want to help.
That’s just stupid because I know I have not moved at all today, to grab a lunch in the kitchen and back maybe.
Active calories 24 vs 112, 20$ vs 600$. Difference, the gap is larger with increase of steps in reality when active. -
@Cuba1hr I know something about how the body expends and produces calories. All I can say is ANY device that you can wear is giving a fanciful estimation of the calories that you are expending. Unless you have the proper equipment you do not have a good grasp on active calories. So you may think that one device is more accurate than the other but that may not be true.
Steps are another matter but there, the amount of arm movement will dictate the number of steps.
-
@Cuba1hr said in S9B - nothing but problems, how can you praise this watch?!:
Active calories 24 vs 112, 20$ vs 600$. Difference, the gap is larger with increase of steps in reality when active.
Well, why stop at $20? You can get a plastic watch for a few bucks. Really! Comparing a mass market fitness band with questionable numbers to a premium sports watch, for which activity tracking is arguably an afterthought isn’t gonna get you far. You don’t buy Suunto 9 if tracking steps and calories is your priority. It’s like buying a nuke to do Hellfire’s job. Impressive, but total overkill.
24 active calories sounds pretty wrong, even if you sat your entire day. Even assuming 850 steps is correct (most likely it isn’t), we are talking 8-10 minutes walk. 2-3 calories over your BMR for a walk sounds way low, don’t you think?
Regardless, as @Brad_Olwin mentioned: the calories are most likely wrong and way off no matter what device you use. Unless you do metabolic testing at the lab, I’d just look at the trends in numbers and not specific numbers. Especially if we don’t know how they derive BMR, TDEE, now they adjust for detected activity, if HR is used or just standard METs, and so on.
-
I agree in some degree with both of you, we have already gone through that topic once, to cash out that money and to say - no it is not for that…I just don’t agree there, they might just remove it from watch as well. In my opinion, better not to have it at all than be so wrong…and one is connected to the other, steps and calories. V800 was within 10% of miband values when worn. I know I mention it all the time, but it is the only one I have to compare it with. Bulky old Timex GPS doesn’t have that feature. Also S9B was bought to replace miband for notifications and vibrating alarm for waking up…and it is not powerful/noticable enough for that.
The watch wasn’t bought primarily for daily tracking, but when notifications set to ON it is very annoying when you get a notification in the middle of a day that you have spent 500 calories or made 10000 steps and yet you have to go for a run after work…which is mostly sedentary by the way.
If that is correct I would lose my belly from 2 last years without additional exercise:) I wrote that because it could be probably fixable, to a degree, with an update.
Also I am not sure if they fixed problem with Resources after you charge the watch. Unfortunately I am not using it because it is battery hungry (daily HR) and I prefer longer battery life. Another thing if you pay that amount of $$…and you get long battery life only during activity (again, comparing to previous watch). Instead of increased battery life we are getting shorter battery life and higher prices + features. Something like the phones nowdays. Garmin claims 3 weeks of battery (or more) on some models, but I don’t have it so I won’t say that’s true. I saw people praise Coros for incredible battery life.Also, mentioned earlier - Polar invented this technology and had the best algorithm for measuring heartrate and calories with chest strap so I trust them more than Sunnto or Garmin to be correct (nothing against Suunto to be clear, I hope everyone catches up). I remember a detalied article or comparison somewhere about that few years ago (not on their official site:)) .
-
@Brad_Olwin
Steps are another matter but there, the amount of arm movement will dictate the number of steps.Brad, good day. I do respect your posts but this input makes me a bit confused. I think that to reach accuracy step counting shall be based on following assumptions: (1) count “whole” body acceleration( both vertical and/or horizontal),(2) skip to count the Occasional arm or any body part movements unrelated to walking process.
Suunto S9 Baro
Suunto Ambit3 Sport
Suunto smart sensor
IPhone 12, iOS 14 -
@Atlen I’m sure there are filters, but try to wear any activity tracker while taking a shower, and you’ll see plenty of steps while brushing your hair. Just standing, but vigorously moving your arms.
-
@isazi i have not checked S9B For step counting, but i do remember that on my previous watches Suunto Ambit 3 Sport such occasional arm movements were skipped. I did kinda tests while driving. The arms are moving due to steering wheel needs to rotate and other needs but the step counting even after 1 hour driving shows almost none of steps added. Means very very few, like 10-20 steps in total after the trip. So it is not crucial or sensitive for daily statistics at all. I did believe the filters and sensors of S9B shall be advanced in comparison to previous Generation model. Might be i got wrong.
-
@Atlen
S9B counts indeed more steps -
It is written somewhere (maybe in the manual) that step counter is more an “active life” counter than an actual step counter … and I’m not surprised as we are wearing it on the wrist
-
Yes, sometimes I notice how after one (vigorous) arm movement steps number is just spinning and going up for 3
to 4 numbers. It reminds me of slot machine spinning.Now…with the update, new exercise (indoor cycling) finished and weird results.
Now completely the opposite, well at least it works better than before.
All physical settings are the same: height, weight, max heartrate, same activity + Suunto has Rest HR.
My only conclusion is that Suunto and Polar calculate much differently calories for (some) activities. I won’t tell which one is more precise.Polar hit 189 bpm, while Suunto 190 but that is negligible. The numbers were the same during the whole period of activity (as it should, average 166), only on Polar there was 1 second delay over gymlink.
About 100 kCal difference in 40 minutes of activity in favor of Polar. I have no idea what happened to it the last time, so Suunto
this time.
The only thing bothers me here is load or recovery time from those extra values.
Suunto - 16h
Polar - 21h
Cannot decide which one to trust…so I’ll listen the one with lower waiting period…which I wear daily.
So, this topic can be concluded unless there some advice and updates/solutions to steps, recovery time and “firstbeat’s” resources after charge. Thanks everyone.
-
@Atlen said in S9B - nothing but problems, how can you praise this watch?!:
@Brad_Olwin
Steps are another matter but there, the amount of arm movement will dictate the number of steps.Brad, good day. I do respect your posts but this input makes me a bit confused. I think that to reach accuracy step counting shall be based on following assumptions: (1) count “whole” body acceleration( both vertical and/or horizontal),(2) skip to count the Occasional arm or any body part movements unrelated to walking process.
I know that the step counter determination is different for the S3 vs the S9, but I do not know why. I have seen the S3 is more accurate. The sensors are used to determine pace while running indoor as well. I do not know how that affects step count but the arm movements are very different. I agree that the step counter in the S9 is not the most accurate.
-
@Cuba1hr said in S9B - nothing but problems, how can you praise this watch?!:
The only thing bothers me here is load or recovery time from those extra values.
Suunto - 16h
Polar - 21h
Cannot decide which one to trust…so I’ll listen the one with lower waiting period…which I wear daily.I trust my body and listen what it whispers to me.
Recoverytime does not really tell me anything, I feel much earlier ready for the next activity than S9B says -
@Cuba1hr The Recovery Time is affected by the HR settings and as I expect you know it is recovery before another hard effort not for no exercise at all. For me it is not all that useful as long runs 40-50k will hit 120h. During the summer when I am training for races my recovery time never drops. I do not feel it is useful for ultra training. I believe it is relatively good for interval training but it is something I do not pay much attention to.
-
@Cuba1hr yeah keep in mind the Suunto calories report also BMR.
-
@Cuba1hr What’s your Max HR and VO2 Max value set in Polar Flow? Your exercise intensity and hence recovery needs will be based off that. Higher values will produce less demanding ranking and shorter recovery. You can validate it by updating your Flow settings and refreshing the legacy Training Load and Recovery page under Diary. Suunto’s recovery is based on EPOC. Both are kind of wrong if you ask me. Again, it’s mostly about trends…
Re: calories, I see easily 15-20% more calories from Suunto than other units BMR included or not, even when operating off the exact same heart rate (using OH1 or H10 sensors like yourself). Can’t say much about veritable Ambits and before. It’s been the case since Spartans for me. Again, it’s just a number. What matters is relative change and trends.
If you are trying to change your body composition by tracking “steps” and “calories” and relying on “recovery hours”, I think you have a few surprises coming your way. Most of them unpleasant and/or outright disappointing. I know you can’t improve what you can’t measure, but the question is: are you measuring the right things for the right reasons?
-
@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos said in S9B - nothing but problems, how can you praise this watch?!:
@Cuba1hr yeah keep in mind the Suunto calories report also BMR.
I think it’s higher even if you include BMR, even if you include prorated “passive calories”, i.e. sedentary calories that go over BMR but do not include actual activity like sitting and being lightly active.
Either that, or Suunto’s BMR is way more optimistic than it should be. You need more middle aged coach potatoes among your testers.
I’d offer myself but I’m not exactly middle aged yet, and thanks to Suunto, no longer a coach potato
-
@Brad_Olwin said in S9B - nothing but problems, how can you praise this watch?!:
I know that the step counter determination is different for the S3 vs the S9, but I do not know why.
I think for the same reason HR is more accurate on S3 and S5 vs S9 despite having practically the same Valencell sensor. The S9 is heavier and has higher profile, so more wobble throwing off accelerometer.
-
Of course I will listen my body, that was a joke.
Yes, I know. Also Polar does that, counts in BMR during exercise. 53 calories of those from training are from BMR by Polar. (I can see that in Activity nicely laid out).
I think there is no way to see that on Suunto. Only Active/TOTAL and also in exercise (logbook), but something is off.Those two (Exercise and activity) are the same at the moment on my watch. Almost, my active calories are exactly 1 cal higher than from my exercise. I wear the watch all the time. Weird:) I cannot find out how much of those are spent on BMR during the exercise because of those strange numbers. There is no way I spent only 1 extra active calorie beside the exercise in the entire day. Another glitch found:)
Polar has that clear in Activity:
Training
Activity
BMR
TOTAL
One thing I forgot to mention is that I finally tried GPS+BeiDou for a short walk (0.5km) and back (total 1km) few days ago, as two activities. Mixed feelings about that one, now it will take some time for me to repeat that and to get out of the house. I would like to compare it during couple of runs along the same roads (GPS only, vs + Beidou and vs + Galileo) for my final verdict and choice, but I will wait for some better times.
First one: it was OK and followed the road for the first 100m, then is all over the place for the next 400m. Path is “through” the buildings, in the middle of the building, all the way till the end.
Second one: The way back was much better, wouldn’t claim that it is better than GPS only, but at least it was away from the buildings, along the road most of the way.@NickK
Vo2 Max - in Polar 42 (via Fitness Test), HR MAX 203, same on both.I am not it the form currently. I am aware all those measurement should be some guidance, to compare with previous results on the same platform.
Suunto - don’t know because it was reset, and cannot go for a run. I have it from last run, about month ago - 34, but with OHR. -
@Cuba1hr said in S9B - nothing but problems, how can you praise this watch?!:
Vo2 Max - in Polar 42 (via Fitness Test), HR MAX 203, same on both.
Both yes, but only Polar takes VO2 Max into account for load and recovery estimates, and 42 on Fitness Test would definitely result in extra recovery hours heaped on top for a good measure. Also, Polar should be adjusting their numbers over time based on your workout history.
Suunto - don’t know because it was reset, and cannot go for a run. I have it from last run, about month ago - 34, but with OHR.
As long as OHR doesn’t show cadence locks and the likes, I’d trust that lower number way more than Polar’s. Their Fitness Test and even Running Index tend to significantly overestimate VO2 Max. Fitness Test is actually a complete statistical voodoo that’s been shown to have little if anything in common with the actual observed VO2 Max values.
I know I said it already, but… Just like steps, calories, and recovery hours, the VO2 Max from a watch, any watch, is another mostly meaningless number. You want it go up, sure! But if I were you, I’d be paying closer attention to improvements in pace, average heart rate, and cardiac drift than any these benchmarks. At the end of the day, there’s more to fitness than just VO2 Max even if you subscribe to a purely mechanistic view of exercise.
