Sunday Runday
On this weekly column, Android Central Wearables Editor Michael Hicks talks concerning the world of wearables, apps, and health tech associated to working and well being, in his quest to get sooner and fitter.
Over the previous week, I’ve pitted the brand new COROS VERTIX 2S towards two different flagship health watches—the Garmin Forerunner 965 and Polar Vantage V3—to see how they evaluate when it comes to GPS, coronary heart charge, and elevation accuracy.
COROS gave the VERTIX 2S two key upgrades: a brand new satellite tv for pc antenna for higher “positioning accuracy in dense metropolis/mountain environments” and an upgraded optical coronary heart charge monitor with extra LEDs. Since these are the one main variations from the 2021 VERTIX 2, I made a decision to check how improved they are surely.
I’ve used the Forerunner 965 as my main working look ahead to the final yr and as a benchmark for different watch opinions. As for the Polar Vantage V3, my first mannequin crashed throughout lengthy exercises, delaying my assessment till Polar might ship a substitute. The substitute hasn’t had any points, however I used to be curious whether or not it might match the others for accuracy and overcome my unhealthy first impression.Â
With none additional preamble, let’s dive into the Coros vs. Garmin vs. Polar health take a look at accuracy outcomes for one of the best health watches that COROS, Garmin, and Polar supply!
Coros vs. Garmin vs. Polar: GPS and elevation accuracy
For this take a look at, I wore all three health watches for a 5K city run, a 2-mile monitor dash exercise, and an eight-mile hike on Mount Diablo trails with steep climbs and dense foliage. Listed below are the outcomes, beginning with the 5K run:
- COROS VERTIX 2S: 3.19 miles, 8:27/mi tempo, 318W energy, 167 cadence
- Garmin Forerunner 965: 3.16 miles, 8:31/mi tempo, 406W energy, 166 cadence
- Polar Vantage V3: 3.12 miles, 8:37/mi tempo, 384W, 84 cadence
Earlier than analyzing this, let us take a look at the GPS map. The slideshow beneath reveals a number of key close-ups of how COROS (orange), Garmin (brown), and Polar (pink) carried out:
Picture 1 of 4
One thing was positively happening with the Polar Vantage V3’s outcomes right here, regardless of the dual-frequency monitoring. It had me crashing by means of buildings and homes just like the Hulk for half of the run, then corrected itself and had me totally on monitor for the remainder of the run. It did make the outcomes noticeably shorter than its rival watches.
COROS and Garmin have been nearer to at least one one other. Of the 2, COROS stayed extra correct to my place early on, whereas Garmin was barely off (although not as cartoonishly as Polar). Because the run went on, each have been both in sync or parallel, with the Forerunner (left wrist) and VERTIX (proper wrist) matching their physique positions.Â
As I closed in on the monitor, Garmin fell off barely, having me run by means of automobiles within the parking zone — maybe the timber above have been responsible. On the monitor itself, all three watches have been extraordinarily constant, although Garmin did one of the best job matching my second-lane place.Â
Shifting on to my devoted monitor exercise within the first lane — I ran eight laps of 100m sprints adopted by 100m jogs — these have been the outcomes:
- COROS VERTIX 2S: 2.01 miles, 7:27/mi tempo, 353W energy, 174 cadence
- Garmin Forerunner 965: 2.01 miles, 7:28/mi tempo, 445W energy, 170 cadence
- Polar Vantage V3: 2.02 miles, 7:24/mi tempo, 457W, 88 cadence
Picture 1 of 2
I’ve seen in earlier assessment assessments {that a} watch’s Monitor Run exercise actively makes the GPS map worse than while you use a regular run exercise. I am undecided what to make of how Garmin (brown line) has me working on the grass for eight laps and COROS (blue line) has me chopping throughout the interior monitor, however each gave me the identical distance.
Polar (pink line) technically did one of the best job of matching my one-lane placement, however it additionally had me weaving drunkenly between lanes on the closing stretch, so I can not reward it, both. I am additionally not sure how Polar thinks I am averaging 80–90 steps a minute whereas working, no matter my tempo…
Total, nobody wins right here, however as a result of a Monitor exercise can detect while you return to a place to begin, the lap outcomes must be correct throughout manufacturers, regardless of how wonky the strains look.Â
Lastly, since COROS is advertising and marketing the VERTIX 2S as an adventurer’s watch, I needed to check the way it dealt with a hike, since I am incapable of testing its cliff-climbing accuracy with out dying. Here is the abstract:
- COROS VERTIX 2S: 7.81 miles, 17:45/mi tempo, 2,438 toes elevation achieve
- Garmin Forerunner 965: 7.84 miles, 17:41/mi tempo, 2,329 toes elevation achieve
- Polar Vantage V3: 7.82 miles, 17:44/mi tempo, 2,297 toes elevation achieve
Picture 1 of 4
Distance-wise, all three watches have been fairly comparable, which is encouraging! It was onerous to evaluate accuracy by a zoomed-out satellite tv for pc map.Â
I did discover a few moments the place COROS (orange) appeared to take a straight line to back-and-forth parts of the path the place Garmin (blue) and Polar (brown) saved correct. Garmin appeared to throw me into the underbrush a few occasions, probably thrown off by foliage. However I am nitpicking and do not have a lot to complain about.
The most important distinction is in elevation achieve. Alltrails estimates that my path’s elevation achieve is 2,208 toes, which suggests all three overestimated my elevation achieve by a good portion, with Polar exaggerating the least and COROS the furthest off.Â
The Forerunner 965 and COROS PACE 3 each did higher in my earlier elevation take a look at, so I am not sure if this can be a case of Alltrails being off or all three watches “gaining” top when my GPS map drifts off slopes and again onto the trail.Â
Coros vs. Garmin vs. Polar: Coronary heart charge accuracy
To check these watches’ accuracy, I wore a Polar H10 chest strap throughout my preliminary two runs to see how they dealt with sudden modifications in coronary heart charge. Here is what I discovered:
For the primary 5K portion of my run, all three watches averaged 159 bpm, whereas the Polar H10 (purple) averaged 160 bpm. As you possibly can see within the chart beneath, all three watches confirmed common, minute modifications in coronary heart charge that carefully matched each other, whereas Polar (purple) had a number of moments the place its knowledge spiked above the watches earlier than falling again to the pack.Â
Frankly, I am a bit skeptical I hit 170 bpm at a pedestrian tempo so early in my run, so I am trying askance at Polar’s chest strap right here. For the remainder of the run, the entire watches greater than matched it, which I am completely satisfied about.Â
For the monitor exercise, the Polar H10’s coronary heart charge chart obtained screwed up due to logistical causes I will not bore you with, however I can no less than share the averages: the H10 measured 172 bpm, whereas the Vantage V3 measured 173 bpm. The VERTIX 2S had 170 bpm, and the Forerunner 965 had 171 bpm.Â
All three watches seemingly had their points throughout this exercise. Garmin had deflated coronary heart charge knowledge in the course of the first lap, COROS had deflated numbers throughout laps 5 and 6, and Polar apparently would not monitor your coronary heart charge while you pause a exercise, preserving a flat consequence till you resume.Â
Total, I would say that Garmin and Polar did one of the best in total accuracy, whereas COROS struggled barely throughout onerous sprints as a result of the cumbersome design makes it prone to wobble in your wrist.Â
Then once more, individuals aren’t shopping for the VERTIX 2S for sprints however slightly for actions with far more deliberate, slow-paced movement. And on different actions like mountaineering, the VERTIX 2S has executed exceedingly properly for coronary heart charge knowledge.
Analyzing the outcomes
I can not let you know if the unique VERTIX 2 was particularly inaccurate, however up to now, I am happy with the upgraded HR and dual-frequency GPS outcomes for the VERTIX 2S.
For the final health comparability, the COROS VERTIX 2S carried out greatest for GPS accuracy, the Garmin Forerunner 965 greatest (or least iffy) for coronary heart charge, and the Polar Vantage V3 greatest for elevation accuracy. Nonetheless, not one of the outcomes have been definitive, and I would say they’re all in the identical ballpark.
That would change throughout extra testing, in principle. However repeatedly sporting three smartwatches for exercises is an annoying problem, so I will focus extra particularly on the COROS VERTIX 2S and Polar Vantage V3 within the coming days for his or her respective opinions to offer extra context.Â
