Suunto 2.50.26 – Q4 2025 Release Notes

[sky-runner]

@Inge-Nallsson said in Suunto 2.50.26 – Q4 2025 Release Notes:

But it seems that the Suunto map situation suffers from two distinct ‘failures’: 1) FW regressed visibility where footpaths were sunk from 500m down to 200m,
…
This must obviously be a source of deep frustration amongst frequent map users.

Yes, very much so! For me this is by far the most frustrating thing about Suunto and the main reason I have decided to not upgrade until this has been addressed. For US users who use imperial units trail visibility regression was much worse - from 0.5mi (800m) down to 500ft (150m).

[MatthiasKlug]

Hi,
i have problem with the new “SMART” barometric algorithm:
Running a track with the 2.50.26 my watch shows 16m of ascent (without measured descent - but just in circles, actually ovals ), while last week with it showed 0m (which is correct). I can confirm that another user not having updated so far, running on the same track still has 0m in his activity.
Just to show you what happened:
Altitude - temperature in 2.50.26 (on a track):

Altitude - temperature in 2.48.16 (on a the same track - one week earlier):

So I am sorry, but i have to state that i do NOT experience an improved altimeter accuracy and stability.
Am I missing something? Am i doing something wrong? Do others have the same issue?
Maybe the initial altitude in version 2.50.26 was inaccurate?
I did like the un-“SMART” barometric algos better, at least on a flat surface like a track.
However the ‘false ascent and descent spikes’ seem to reduced - but there something is significantly wrong here.
But still i think the new update is great

[jjpaz]

@MatthiasKlug It seems that yesterday your watch didn’t calibrate the correct altitude in the beggining, according to the graphs you sent. Your altitude is around ~14m and watch started in around 2m, so that incremental elevation during activity until the final 14m (FusedAlti?) is added to the overal ascent data.

I have suffered similar behavior yesterday (and other days if initial altitude is wrong). In my case with descent data, because my watch started activity 20m over the real altitude, so my final ascent descent data was 46m+/65m- (Race2) vs 50m+/52m+ with Vertical (I was wearing both watches for comparison).

Race 2:

Vertical:

[GiPFELKiND]

@jjpaz i was walking at sealevel. And my vertikal 2 says 222m positive Elevation 🫣 holy 🫣 there is a Problem in the new algorithm. And No its not cause of windy Situation. Jacket and gloves.

[matthinsh]

@Tieutieu thanks for sharing the vid. Is there no documentation at all from Suunto?? Or has functionality not really changed?

[Tieutieu]

@matthinsh said in Suunto 2.50.26 – Q4 2025 Release Notes:

@Tieutieu thanks for sharing the vid. Is there no documentation at all from Suunto?? Or has functionality not really changed?

Sorry I don’t know how documentation or user guides are updated ; with every release the only official communication we have is release notes on suunto’s website.
As far as I know, Joaquin Perez videos are the most complete to describe new features, but only available in spanish.

[matthinsh]

@Tieutieu yeah I’ve scoured the website and can’t anything more than the release notes which have 3 bullets that make very little sense to me.
Tempted to try it and see what’s going on with a basic interval session and report back.

[Tieutieu]

@matthinsh I’m pretty sure nothing changed about interval session/structured workouts, in terms of creation or use in watch. The update seems focused on the app analysis afterwards

[Ecki D.]

@duffman19 I did a comparison of the height diagramms from a run in 2024 with one towday. The rose one is the new diagramm. It looks smoother an more correct to the real terrain for me.
E.g. this drop in the blue doesn’t exist in real. Looks good :

Will see how the S+ Variometer reacts now :

[dani_degi]

ich hätte gern bei RUNNING BASIC immer die HÖhenmeter dabei und die Rundenlaps in GROSS ( nicht diese mini liste) und die gesamte Durchschnitts pace …

[Ecki D.]

Anyone knows what is this field means - grd_pct?
It appears only at recent runs

[Egika]

@Ecki-D. should be gradient percentage. Incline in percent

[Freezer]

@sustah sleep/HRV is not a watch but an iOS Suunto App problem, see this thread/post for a workaround.

https://forum.suunto.com/post/182982

[VoiGAS]

@Ecki-D. Where did you get this graph? Could not find it in the app…

[duffman19]

@Inge-Nallsson said in Suunto 2.50.26 – Q4 2025 Release Notes:

On my map (at least in the local area) the cycleways must be defined as footpaths then, because they have the same short dashes as all the small footpaths and they disappear above 200m.

This is probably correct. I believe the path must be specifically tagged as a “Cycle Path” or “Cycle & Foot Path” in OSM to be recognized as such on the Suunto watch maps (shown as a thin, solid, magenta-ish color, depending on map theme). There are a ton of different tags and variables that can be assigned to paths. Whether they are labelled correctly in your area depends on whether an OSM mapper has taken the time to do so.

@Inge-Nallsson said in Suunto 2.50.26 – Q4 2025 Release Notes:

Looking at the pictures posted by OutdoorMan in https://forum.suunto.com/post/182565 the vertical path left of the central marker dot clearly is a road (longer dashes as explained to me by sky-runner) in contrast to the more dotted footpaths to the right.

The path with the longer, thicker dashes is a “Track / Land-Access Road.” These are things like fire roads and forestry service roads. Suunto treats these the same as cycle paths in that they disappear at the same zoom level (above 500m).

[jannis]

@Mads-Hintz-Madsen it seems the other watches got now the „blessings“ of the new resources algorithm of the Vertical 2/Race 2, too. Please read here more https://forum.suunto.com/topic/14200/vertical-2-resources?_=1767965599570

[Ecki D.]

@VoiGAS Thats from Runalyze.com, you get loads of data there and it can sync the historic data from suunto too.

[Calando]

@jjpaz I compared a known track, seems that my SR2 measures approximately 3.8% less distance than a Garmin Oregon GPS device (and also that amount less compared to a track generated based on OSM maps using Garmin BaseCamp). Will check that with some older tracks as well (when I find the time )

[jjpaz]

@Calando You can check the dedicated thread to that topic here: https://forum.suunto.com/topic/14375/race-2-gps-and-distance-accuracy-vs-previous-suunto-models

[Lorenzo Pintore]

Have any of you already experienced the new OHR algorithm?
I only did a single run, but the results were far from impressive.
I did a set of intervals, and the HR got stuck at high value both during the recovery and during the cool down section of my session.
It was sad, because the start was promising, without any spike (differently from the previous algorithm)
I even walked in the cool down phase, to let my HR go down, but none of this was read by the watch