Apple watch 3/other GPS smart watches and ski tracking

[tball]

Jason, you can't go wrong with the Garmin Fenix. The Fenix 5 is just super expensive.

I've been using a Fenix 2 for almost five years. It's been great for ski tracking. I also use it for biking, running, swimming and hiking. Works great for everything, with a few quirks with known workarounds. I have two of them. I lost my first Fenix 2 for a while and missed it so much I bought one used before the other turned up.

Here's an example of a ski day I made public long ago:
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/473075629

Most days I don't use my HRM skiing like that, but occasionally do for a historical baseline.

What I really like is all my activities, including skiing, are logged in one place on Garmin Connect. I also love that there isn't an app burning through my battery on my phone in case I really need it in an emergency..

I bought my wife an Apple watch 3. I don't think an Apple Watch is a real contender for ski tracking because of the battery life. Same for other lengthy activities. And there are not nearly as many sensors you can connect to it as a serious sports-focused watch like the Fenix. (Bike power meter, speed & cadence sensor, running cadence sensor, etc). It's a great device, just a different market than Garmin.

If I had to buy one now, I'd go for a refurbished Fenix 3 for $219:
https://www.gpscity.com/garmin-fenix-3-gray-with-black-band-newly-overhauled

Or you could get a Fenix 2 like mine for $129 if you don't mind the larger size, not as clear display, and a few missing features like step and sleep tracking. It's an amazing ski tracking watch for the price and it's built like a tank:
https://www.gpscity.com/garmin-fenix-2-newly-overhauled

I've bought some refurbished Garmin devices from gpscity, gpsnation, and Amazon. They have a 1-year manufacturer warranty and are a great deal if you don't need the latest and greatest.

Finally, if you haven't seen it already, check out the reviews of the different devices on DC Rainmaker. He details the features of the various generations of Garmin devices and competitors, and each review has thousands of comments from prospective and actual users!
https://www.dcrainmaker.com/

Let me know if you have any questions!

 

[Jason Kurth]

Thank you. Yeah I'm really leaning towards a Fenix now. Can find the 5 for $474 which is still kinda pricey but I'll have to check out what I would be missing with a 3.

 

[surfsnowgirl]

I'm partial to round devices, just not a fan of blocky square watches but that's just me. What I like about my Samsung S2 is since it's the classic the band is fully interchangeable with any regular watch band. In the winter I put on black silicone strap which is more sporty. In the off season I wear a "gold looking" one that's more dressy.

 

[Jason Kurth]

Yeah round is nice. This is a purely utilitarian device so I'm not super focused on aesthetics as long as it looks the right size on my wrist.

The one thing with the garmins is they are big. Fenix 3 is 49mm and Fenix 5 is 47mm. I think the 47mm 5 would work better, I know they make a 42 fenix 5s but I want the longer battery life. I do worry a bit that the garmins will be a little too chunky under a glove cuff.

 

[Primoz]

It's not as popular as Garmin, but Polar is much better way to go It's much cheaper, top Polar (until new ones come out sometime in November) is v800 and it has way more, and it really is waaaay more accurate GPS then any Garmin. Then it has pretty much best possible HRM (HRM is Polar's invention anyway). It has also barometric altitude measurement with autocalibration from GPS, and it's "only" around 250eur nowadays. But yes, it's not really smart watch, even though some smart notifications can be transfered from phone to watch, but it's top of the line multisport training watch. If you cut on some features (mainly barometer), you can get M430 for 150eur already, making it pretty much best price/performance sport watch on market.

 

[Jason Kurth]

eh from reading reviews polar v800 has lots of problems. also can't find it that cheap- cheapest is 350. and no heart rate monitoring on wrist. and no dedicated ski tracking mode like garmin. fenix 3 seems like way better budget buy.

 

[tball]

Yeah round is nice. This is a purely utilitarian device so I'm not super focused on aesthetics as long as it looks the right size on my wrist.

The one thing with the garmins is they are big. Fenix 3 is 49mm and Fenix 5 is 47mm. I think the 47mm 5 would work better, I know they make a 42 fenix 5s but I want the longer battery life. I do worry a bit that the garmins will be a little too chunky under a glove cuff.

Don't worry about any of the Fenix watches fitting under a glove.

Yeah, the Garmin's are big. My Fenix 2 is the biggest of them all and I haven't had any problem skiing with it under lots of different gloves for four seasons. It is too big to fit under a dress shirt, but I'll wear it the entire time I'm at a CO resort, winter or summer. It works fine with any sweaters or long sleeve active shirts I wear.

There is the side benefit of Fenix watches that folks might mistake you for a SEAL since they are the same form factor as Garmin's military Tactix watches. At least you know they are that rugged!
https://www.engadget.com/2013/10/22/garmin-tactix-gps-watch/

Edit: My Fenix 2 came with a large velcro band so you can wear the watch over you jacket skiing if you like. Not sure if the later versions have one, but likely available if not included. I've never used it as I don't really care about the data while skiing. I just want a historical record of my ski days.

 

[Jason Kurth]

I found a local used Fenix 5 for a good price I'm going to try to pick up tomorrow. Main reason I would prefer it over the 3 is smaller size/thickness

 

[tball]

A couple tips from my Garmin buying habit:

• When buying used, it's nice to know Garmin provides an out of warranty safety net that allows you to send in devices for repair for a fixed fee (more likely replacement with a refurbished device). You can see the cost for many devices here or call for those not listed.
• Garmin technical support and customer service is pretty darn good.
• REI is a great place to buy the latest and greatest Garmin devices. Garmin has strong pricing control on their recent devices, so you might as well get the 10% back from REI and be able to walk into the store for returns if you have any issues rather than mailing it somewhere and having to wait for a replacement.

Jason, if you are OK with the size and price it's hard to go wrong with a recent Fenix. There is little they don't do short of military applications. I paid full retail for my Fenix 2 shortly after it came out ($450?) and I'm still happy with my purchase and have every expectation it will keep working long after I someday grow tired of it and buy a newer model.

 

[Primoz]

eh from reading reviews polar v800 has lots of problems. also can't find it that cheap- cheapest is 350. and no heart rate monitoring on wrist. and no dedicated ski tracking mode like garmin. fenix 3 seems like way better budget buy.

Yup first version of v800 when they came out had issues with battery or some battery component or glue or whatever. But Polar was changing them without issues, even if it happened out of warranty (I was without mine for less then 24h when it happened). After that, there was basically no hardware issues, but there were some software issues. Not really issues like, not working, but missing functionalities (like swimming metrics were implemented some half year after launch etc.). But Polar was pretty much keeping their promises and delivered everything on timeframe they promised they will.
Wrist HR... well considering how "accurate" that is, it doesn't hurt if it doesn't have it, as non-chest strap metering is useless with it's accuracy. As far as I'm concerned, far better GPS and way more advanced HR metering and analyze then anyone else in field, are more important for me then inaccurate optical HR. Dedicated skiing mode can be missed as you get all necessary data even without it

 

[Jason Kurth]

idk, wrist based HR seems accurate enough for general exercise to me: https://www.bikeradar.com/us/gear/article/how-accurate-is-wrist-based-heart-rate-vs-hr-strap-48458/

some minor point to point inconsistency during rigorous outdoor exercise but the average readings look comparable. I don't need a perfectly accurate graph of a whole workout just knowing I'm staying in a certain HR zone periodically which wrist based is more than accurate enough for.

 

[tball]

idk, wrist based HR seems accurate enough for general exercise to me: https://www.bikeradar.com/us/gear/article/how-accurate-is-wrist-based-heart-rate-vs-hr-strap-48458/

Good article. I see the conclusion a bit differently. Yes, wrist-based HR is fine for an overall average HR for a workout. Any more specific or shorter intervals and you really want a chest strap.

I've got both and that's my experience. I have a wrist-based Garmin VivoSmart HR I wear most of the time and add my Fenix 2 and a chest strap for some workouts. The wrist basted HR is too far off for pacing on the bike or running, and worthless for shorter intervals.

For skiing, I do think the wrist-based HR is useful to get an idea of how hard you worked on different runs and over the course of the day.

some minor point to point inconsistency during rigorous outdoor exercise but the average readings look comparable. I don't need a perfectly accurate graph of a whole workout just knowing I'm staying in a certain HR zone periodically which wrist-based is more than accurate enough for.

I don't think the wrist-based HR is accurate enough to make sure you are staying in a zone. It can easily be 10-20 bpm off for minutes at a time in my experience and that seems to be reflected in the article you posted. That's even with the band cranked down like it needs to be for accuracy.

For someone accustomed to watching accurate chest strap based HR, wrist-based can be annoying. You probably have a good idea where your HR is based on RPE but your device says something else much of the time. I used to question myself and my workout. Now I just ignore the wrist-based HR or use my chest strap.

Wrist-based HR is really nice to have for 24/7 monitoring, though. Resting heart rate is great to watch for overall fitness and fatigue, and Garmin's HR based "Active Minutes" is worth keeping an eye on.

For me, any watch, especially a Fenix, would be too big to comfortably sleep with, so the sleep tracking and 24/7 HR in a larger watch add marginal value. I just wear a Fitbit size Garmin Vivo band 24/7 and Garmin pulls all the data from my various devices together into the app/website.

 

[Jason Kurth]

Yeah so I got my fenix 5 and after trying it yesterday I ordered a chest strap lol.

 

[tball]

Congrats on your Fenix 5 Jason!

A couple other thoughts, since I obviously spend way too much time thinking about these things.

I prefer the old "hard" chest straps to the new "soft" straps. The soft HR straps tend to wear out much sooner than they should. The electronic piece that snaps on is fine, but the strap goes bad and you get wonky data. I got tired of spending $$ on replacing straps and dealing with bad data, so I use an old-school durable "hard" strap like this most the time:
https://www.gpscity.com/garmin-heart-rate-monitor

I do have HRM-Run and Powercal heart rate monitors that give extra data beyond HR and require a soft strap. I've found the replacement Polar soft straps are the most durable and worth the extra expense. You can snap the electronic piece from Garmin, Cyclops and others on one of these replacement straps:
https://www.polar.com/us-en/products/accessories/polar_pro_strap

If you haven't seen the Garmin forums they can be a good source of info. Here's the Fenix 5 forum:
https://forums.garmin.com/forum/on-the-trail/wrist-worn/fenix-5-5s

For 27/7 HR and sleep tracking, consider one of these little guys to wear overnight:
https://www.gpscity.com/garmin-vivosmart-hr-regular-fit-black-newly-overhauled
https://www.gpscity.com/garmin-vivosmart-3-large-black-(certified-refurbished)

 

[EricG]

Also checkout the Garmin Vivo Active 3 HR. I’ve been using it the past few months for daily activity tracking and plan do use their ski app for this winters tracking. Looks like there are 3rd party ski apps too.

https://www.sunandski.com/p/9317045981721/garmin-vivoactive-3-gps-smartwatch

https://apps.garmin.com/en-US/apps/fff26125-4197-403b-9087-e26aecd4cb69

 

[Primoz]

some minor point to point inconsistency during rigorous outdoor exercise but the average readings look comparable. I don't need a perfectly accurate graph of a whole workout just knowing I'm staying in a certain HR zone periodically which wrist based is more than accurate enough for.

Point of HRM is to know where you are with your HR. Being 10-15% off, which today's optical HRMs are, means your HR can be 15+ beats from the readings on your HRM. Translating that into 5 zone system which is normally used for training, that can mean you are in Z5 while thinking you are in Z3 or vice versa, which makes HRM completely useless. With a bit of experience, you can figure out your HR more accurately just by your feel. But before someone accuses me of being arrogant smarta**ss again, I will finish this here. If someone likes certain watch or certain technology it's fine with me.

 

[Jason Kurth]

Point of HRM is to know where you are with your HR. Being 10-15% off, which today's optical HRMs are, means your HR can be 15+ beats from the readings on your HRM. Translating that into 5 zone system which is normally used for training, that can mean you are in Z5 while thinking you are in Z3 or vice versa, which makes HRM completely useless. With a bit of experience, you can figure out your HR more accurately just by your feel. But before someone accuses me of being arrogant smarta**ss again, I will finish this here. If someone likes certain watch or certain technology it's fine with me.

I can admit when I'm misinformed. I agree after trying it and like I said already ordered the chest strap HR sensor (with the original garmin hard strap).

I still prefer the fenix 5 as a watch though and am happy with it. I'm surprised I like the feel and aesthetics so much and can actually see myself wearing it outside physical activity which I wasn't planning on (I'm someone who usually only wears mechanical watches).

 

[Pequenita]

Congrats on the Fenix! I've a friend who after years of tracking everything uses it as a regular watch now (or, maybe he just doesn't upload to Strava, etc.). The older Garmins basically all looked like what they were -- computers on a wrist. Blech. I just picked up a Forerunner 35 to replace my ancient 210 this weekend. I've been generally pleased with Forerunners, but I really don't expect it to do much other than keep track of time, location, and intervals.

 

[tball]

Point of HRM is to know where you are with your HR. Being 10-15% off, which today's optical HRMs are, means your HR can be 15+ beats from the readings on your HRM. Translating that into 5 zone system which is normally used for training, that can mean you are in Z5 while thinking you are in Z3 or vice versa, which makes HRM completely useless. With a bit of experience, you can figure out your HR more accurately just by your feel. But before someone accuses me of being arrogant smarta**ss again, I will finish this here. If someone likes certain watch or certain technology it's fine with me.

I don't think a wrist-based HRM is completely useless. I agree it's useless for targeting a zone or pacing as you describe. Even looking at it during a workout will probably just confuse you.

But there is another use of a wrist-based HRM. Ignore it during your workout, but look at the average after the workout. The average will be fairly accurate as all those inaccuracies tend to average out over time. Your average HR can be useful to compare intensities of different workouts over time in your training log.

I think that data is nice to have for some types of workouts, including skiing, hiking, walking, going to the gym, and others where you might not want or need to wear a chest strap. It's a great measure of how hard you were working in an activity after the fact.

A wrist-based HRM is also useful for 24/7 HR tracking and monitoring changes to your resting HR over time.

That said, wrist-based HR is totally worthless for what I did last night. I routinely run a steady state mile at 150 bpm as a test of my fitness. I've run the same mile on my local trail at that HR for years and my time will vary by over 2 minutes depending on my conditioning. My chest strap HR was locked on from 149-151 and only varied based on little hills on the trail. I looked at my wrist-based HRM (Garmin vivosmart HR) a few times on my other wrist and it was all over the place from 136-158. I would have gone nuts if I tried to pace off that.