Run 2

[GratefulDeadpan]

@enriqueescoms said:

@Kraisun-Tunta What is clear is that RUN2 and RACEs are now overlapping, both in price and practically in usage.

Shhhh. People will play you the S+ card if you say things like that.

Edit: I agree with you, I barely find any idea of S+ with my Run as it is as many of the features I wanted from that platform is already natively baked into the OS.

[Inge Nallsson]

@GratefulDeadpan said:

What storage size are people picking? I’m wondering if it’s work going for the 64gb even if I won’t have music on it. My guess is that it isn’t?

When I first installed maps on the Race S (which has 28 GB free for the maps) I went with the whole of Sweden, Denmark, the Norwegian Oslo area and some near Finnish areas. It took an inordinate time - even though Sweden is at maximum 4 GB of the maps. When Suunto updated the maps - happens infrequently - I restricted the downloads to only the southern half of Sweden. After the last map updates I went with Scania exclusively (Skåne County) which is 129 MB… This is where I run I don’t travel, and if I would, along with all other preparations a map download doesn’t seem too onerous.

On the other hand, there is a mere 600 SKr difference between the 4GB and 64GB (about 63 US$ today). Hardly a fortune.

[GratefulDeadpan]

@Inge-Nallsson yeah I agree on the price difference but that thinking will eventually land me on a Vertical 2 But I would approach maps the same way so it’s good to know they’re tiny!

[duffman19]

Not saying that Dave is right here, but…

Either way, Suunto seems to have flubbed the clarification of the difference between the two versions, especially with the early reviews.

Maybe the 4gb model wasn’t originally going to have maps, but Suunto changed their mind after the Coros announcement?

[jthomi]

Both reviews (Desfit and Chase the summit) say the same about those possible restriction of maps, and honestly this would be a really vital information before ordering a watch…
German review says 4GB and offline maps work, but also has some questions about the mapping software, and Suunto yet has no answer to his questions.

[Highlands]

@Inge-Nallsson If I wanted to buy this watch as a primary device I’d very likely go for the 64 GB version - 50€ difference as you mentioned isn’t that much.

[isazi]

@jthomi I asked people at Suunto for an answer, I did not test this watch

[jthomi]

Thank you @isazi
Not testing anymore or just not this one?

[isazi]

@jthomi not this one, I do not particularly like the Run family of watches, and I only have two wrists

[GratefulDeadpan]

@Highlands €50 for unused space is a however incredibly unnecessary for me

[GratefulDeadpan]

@duffman19 said:

Not saying that Dave is right here, but…

Either way, Suunto seems to have flubbed the clarification of the difference between the two versions, especially with the early reviews.

Maybe the 4gb model wasn’t originally going to have maps, but Suunto changed their mind after the Coros announcement?

This sounds plausible and would correlate quite well with the naming convention!

[TrailEyes]

@duffman19 To be fair, this isn’t Suunto directly but their U.S.-based PR firm OutsidePR. They’ve given me wrong information before too, so it’s not super surprising.

[duffman19]

@TrailEyes Yeah, I don’t imagine he has a direct link to the best information. It’s just a bummer that the confusion happened in the first place.

[Egika]

@jthomi @gratefuldeadpan

The maps on Run 2 are the same, whatever memory you get.
The difference to the more outdoor and adventure focused watches is that there are no extra labels, like street names, POIs etc. You get contour lines and this is pretty much it.
Good enough to follow a route, a little limited to explore the unknown

[Highlands]

@GratefulDeadpan Not really cause I can fill more than 10GB with offline music. But each to their own.

[GratefulDeadpan]

@Highlands yeah I was obviously talking from my perspective. As in that I wouldn’t have music on the watch at all in the first place—so in other words unused space for me.

[GratefulDeadpan]

@Egika Ty! Wonder if Suunto will budge on this given how Coros present maps on Pace 4 which in a way then presents a better value (to some). For me it won’t matter much as I would just need to see where a trail might take me, and if I should choose different and it seems I will be able to make that call with the Run 2.

[Highlands]

@GratefulDeadpan The point isn’t whether one listens to music or not. I might prefer to stream music on my iPhone. Then I need no space for offline music. But I used to have Race 1 with 16 GB, I travel and it’s not convenient to keep only small amount of maps on the watch. Suunto doesn’t update maps often. For me, the inconvenience to delete and download maps because I picked up the 4 GB version isn’t worth it 50€ spared.
The bigger problem is that Race 2 here costs 422€. If I were on the market for a new Suunto, I’d pick any time the Race 2. I know you’ll say like that one would end up with V2 but for 72€ one gets the sapphire, more detailed maps and 55 hours of dual band with the Race 2. But if one doesn’t need all those things, better off staying with Run 1.

[enriqueescoms]

GratefulDeadpan

[GratefulDeadpan]

@Highlands okay, so in my initial question regarding which storage size I should pick I did mention that I wouldn’t use any of it for music. Regarding the pita of loading maps due to travel—that is likely never happening to me either as I very rarely travel.

Thanks for helping me come to the conclusion that the 4gb version is most likely good enough for me

But I hear your point and if I needed it I would also pay for the convenience. But would rather buy the V2 for the added convenience of the flashlight in that case.