Why I've shelved my Peak for a 9

Foxster

@tonyg said in Why I've shelved my Peak for a 9:

@miniforklift I had a similar reaction to the S9Peak when I first opened the box I couldn’t believe how small it looked, especially on my wrist after using the S9B for a couple of years.

I’ve got over the shock now and find its a great form factor on the wrist (barely realise its there) but as I mentioned, for me the fonts are just too small when I glance at the watch whilst exercising especially trail running.
I have a S9P and S9 too.

Initially I really liked the Peak but I just couldn’t get over the small face. I was squinting trying to read stuff while using it in anger.

So I got myself a S9 (no baro, as its not of much use to me) and its so much easier to read but it has pretty much all the good stuff of the Peak.

sky-runner

@miniforklift said in Why I've shelved my Peak for a 9:

According to his experiences of using both watches the Enduro is way ahead of the S9B and there’s actually nothing that the S9B does better than the Enduro. Altitude and elevation gain is more accurate (he runs in a group at least a couple of times a week where his S9B was usually considerably down in vert), Strava Live Segments are flawless, better GPS in heavy woodland or cloudy/overcast days and obviously better battery life

My understanding is that Enduro isn’t that much different from Fenix 6X. It has the same body and display, the same GNSS antenna design, the same GNSS chipset. It has better than 6X battery life but lacks maps.

I have been using 6X for 2+ years. Before that I used Suunto 9 Baro for 1.5 years, and before that Ambit and Ambit 3 Peak.

I agree that Fenix 6X is definitely more accurate than Suunto 9 Baro in measuring altitude and elevation gain.
However I’d disagree with your opinion on the distance and Strava Live segments. At the time when I moved from S9B to F6X, Suunto’s distance accuracy was horrible and it was consistently too short, however later a new firmware was released and Suunto 9 now is more accurate. Interestingly enough, F6X GPS tracks look better, but it manages to consistently shorten the distance. Looking at activities of my friends who still use S9B, their distances are usually more accurate. When I apply distance correction to Fenix tracks the distance improves a lot, but somehow initially Fenix distance is always about 5% shorter then its own GPS track length.

And don’t get me started on Strava Live Segments. That feature, when running on wooded PNW trails, fails to successfully track a segment to a completion more often than it succeeds. Any sharp turn almost guarantees my watch would drop off a segment. And if I stop to e.g. tie laces, it drops off a segment too. In general, the quality of tracking depends very strongly on tree coverage. It is quite decent on an open terrain but degrades very quickly when there are any trees around.

I don’t know if Enduro is really any different than Fenix in that regard but I really doubt that.

TrailEyes

@sky-runner I wish I could defend the 9B right now on distance accuracy, but since the last update, it feels like that metric has taken a hit. We’ve always known that elevation gain gets undercounted, but I did a recent long trail run with a group and my 9B was showing 4%-5% more distance than everyone else’s watch (they all had various Garmins) and about 7% more than what SA had for the route when I dropped a gpx file in there pre-run and pushed it to my watch.

Compare that to a race I did in September where the official course distance was 39.52 – my 9B came in at an amazing 39.62 when I finished. So I was super happy back then! But I feel like something has changed lately, but I need to do more group/partner runs to have additional data to say for sure.

@traileyes i think i have to agree with you. I have posted as well in gps-stuff thread, that after latest firmware update, 9P gps accuracy totally went downhill , unfortunately. Something must have changed. It used to be super accurate.

Frederick Rochette

@surfboomerang That would be great!
Hope suunto hears us…

freeheeler

I put my hands on the S9P yesterday.
The buttons really feel nice to operate. But I can absolutely forget about pressing them even with my lighter gloves
…and it definitely is too small for my wrist
so please, Suunto… surprise us

Brad_Olwin

@freeheeler said in Why I've shelved my Peak for a 9:

I put my hands on the S9P yesterday.
The buttons really feel nice to operate. But I can absolutely forget about pressing them even with my lighter gloves
…and it definitely is too small for my wrist
so please, Suunto… surprise us

For me, lighter gloves are fine, heavier ones are not.

Ultrarunner

I did the same. The screen on the Peak is IMO too small for folks who like to see lots of fields when running, etc. Looking forward to an XL version of the Peak. What I’d really love to see is a watch that can do res/brightness like the 7 as a daily driver and then as soon as you switch to exercise mode, you get the current resolution of the 9 peak. That would be really awesome for readability vs battery life.

Mister PYC

@surfboomerang 30% to win !!!
The problem is more … is a such big screen with such a size and same battery consumption available on the market … may be not yet but to come soone …
so without changing hte external size it will change the display and so the readibility also …

freeheeler

@mister-pyc
and the other topic: where should Suunto place the antenna?

surfboomerang

@freeheeler That’s not so hard to solve

Mister PYC

@surfboomerang
Humm … in future we will even not need the helmet … wnd tehre will be different models

More seriously … the succeed to have this solved in the S9PEAK … so a bigger screen in a bigger watch is the same, isnt’it ?

I imagine with no constratnts … I will haev done something like this …but it’s just a drawing …
so out of any constraints … easy to do …

Egika

@mister-pyc GPS antennas are not just a piece of wire. To receive any signal at all from a satellite sized like a medium fridge that covers the whole earth with it’s transmission, is an art in itself. Bit rate is super low, but still a lot of cross correlation calculation is necessary to extract any data out of the noise.

So you can be sure that Suunto is not waisting any screen space if it would not be necessary.

Mister PYC

@egika we are on the same page … my point is super simple : if they succeed to place the screen into teh S8 PEAK that take all the watch, I’m sure they will succeed to place a bigger screen when it will exist into a S9 baro … may be will it be a S10 baro …
So antena should not be an issue

Egika

@mister-pyc what makes you think, the screen in S9P takes the whole screen? Your assumption is wrong in the first place. S9P has similar antenna space as the other models.

Mister PYC

@egika Hey Hey !!! YOU ARE RIGHT !!!

I wrongly though that the 9 Peak was keeping the same screen as the 9 Baro but inside a smaller watch
Most of the time when I was looking to a S9Peak watch the dark background was the same as the external part so I got confused …
After your comment I went to search for some comparison pics and found this one where we see effectivelly a slight different color on the S9Peak external circle …
so I was totally wrong !!!

Well … let’s still dream that there will be in that case some solution for Antena in future whch could allow a bigger screen … I dream of it …

freeheeler

@mister-pyc
I don’t care about the size of the screen… it is just the watch that has to be BIIIG

TheGuyFromTheSummit

@freeheeler I actually prefer the smaller watch. It is by far easier to take off backpacks/ jackets etc with a smaller watch + I can wear it to work without feeling weird

Bulkan

freeheeler

@theguyfromthesummit
I see the benefits for having a smaller watch, too…
…but: I want it BIIIG
…similar with the skies… I feel I should go even wider than my 105… would it be good for pow?! absolutely! would it be good for the slopes? no way… that’s why I stay on that size
everything within reason