Sunday Runday
On this weekly column, Android Central Wearables Editor Michael Hicks talks concerning the world of wearables, apps, and health tech associated to operating and well being, in his quest to get quicker and healthier.
Over the previous week, I’ve pitted the brand new COROS VERTIX 2S in opposition to two different flagship health watches—the Garmin Forerunner 965 and Polar Vantage V3—to see how they examine by way of GPS, coronary heart fee, 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 fee 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 operating look ahead to the final 12 months and as a benchmark for different watch evaluations. As for the Polar Vantage V3, my first mannequin crashed throughout lengthy exercises, delaying my evaluation till Polar may ship a substitute. The substitute hasn’t had any points, however I used to be curious whether or not it may match the others for accuracy and overcome my unhealthy first impression.
With none additional preamble, let’s dive into the Coros vs. Garmin vs. Polar health check 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 check, 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 here 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 under reveals a couple 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 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 had 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 had been both in sync or parallel, with the Forerunner (left wrist) and VERTIX (proper wrist) matching their physique positions.
As I closed in on the monitor, Garmin fell off barely, having me run by automobiles within the car parking zone — maybe the timber above had been in charge. On the monitor itself, all three watches had been extraordinarily constant, although Garmin did one of the best job matching my second-lane place.
Shifting on to my devoted monitor exercise within the first lane — I ran eight laps of 100m sprints adopted by 100m jogs — these had 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 evaluation assessments {that a} watch’s Observe Run exercise actively makes the GPS map worse than while you use a typical run exercise. I am undecided what to make of how Garmin (brown line) has me operating on the grass for eight laps and COROS (blue line) has me slicing throughout the internal 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 uncertain how Polar thinks I am averaging 80–90 steps a minute whereas operating, no matter my tempo…
General, nobody wins right here, however as a result of a Observe exercise can detect while you return to a place to begin, the lap outcomes ought to be correct throughout manufacturers, regardless of how wonky the traces look.
Lastly, since COROS is advertising 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. This 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 had been fairly comparable, which is encouraging! It was arduous to guage accuracy by a zoomed-out satellite tv for pc map.
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) stored 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 largest 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.
The Forerunner 965 and COROS PACE 3 each did higher in my earlier elevation check, 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.
Coros vs. Garmin vs. Polar: Coronary heart fee 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 adjustments in coronary heart fee. This 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 under, all three watches confirmed common, minute adjustments in coronary heart fee that carefully matched each other, whereas Polar (purple) had a couple of moments the place its knowledge spiked above the watches earlier than falling again to the pack.
Frankly, I am a bit skeptical I hit 170 bpm at a pedestrian tempo so early in my run, so I am wanting askance at Polar’s chest strap right here. For the remainder of the run, the entire watches greater than matched it, which I am blissful about.
For the monitor exercise, the Polar H10’s coronary heart fee chart obtained screwed up due to logistical causes I will not bore you with, however I can at the least 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.
All three watches seemingly had their points throughout this exercise. Garmin had deflated coronary heart fee 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 fee while you pause a exercise, holding a flat consequence till you resume.
General, I might say that Garmin and Polar did one of the best in general accuracy, whereas COROS struggled barely throughout arduous sprints as a result of the cumbersome design makes it prone to wobble in your wrist.
Then once more, individuals aren’t shopping for the VERTIX 2S for sprints however quite for actions with far more deliberate, slow-paced movement. And on different actions like mountain climbing, the VERTIX 2S has executed exceedingly effectively for coronary heart fee knowledge.
Analyzing the outcomes
I can not let you know if the unique VERTIX 2 was particularly inaccurate, however to date, I am glad 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 fee, and the Polar Vantage V3 greatest for elevation accuracy. Nonetheless, not one of the outcomes had been definitive, and I might say they’re all in the identical ballpark.
That would change throughout extra testing, in idea. However repeatedly sporting three smartwatches for exercises is an annoying problem, so I am going to focus extra particularly on the COROS VERTIX 2S and Polar Vantage V3 within the coming days for his or her respective evaluations to offer extra context.