Run 2
-
I’d say in either way, that’s a bit on Suunto for not ensuring the proper info was out there for everyone.
Good pull on that video. I’ve been trying to dance around something that’s in the back of mind with all this, but it’s likely less about poor Suunto communication and probably more about poor communication from their U.S.-side PR agency. I certainly could be wrong about that, but I’ve been burned with false information before from the new agency that took over in 2025 and just had some friction with them in general.
As a journalist, I mostly wish that the reviewers, when presented with the new information about the functionality of the 4gb version, would acknowledge it. Their responses have felt too dodgy.
-
As a journalist, I mostly wish that the reviewers, when presented with the new information about the functionality of the 4gb version, would acknowledge it. Their responses have felt too dodgy.
On the other hand, as a journalist, do you think it’s common to simply “lie” and say Suunto representative told them something if that never happened? Seems to me the Suunto person being references could easily show up, say “I never told you that,” and call them out for a blatant lie.
So I think from a simplicity point of view, “never ascribed to malice what can be explained by incompetence,” the answer here is not that reviewers are lying about things but instead there was miscommunication. Whether that originated from the Suunto rep who spoke to the reviewers, or the reviewers themselves mistranslated, I have no idea. The reason I’d personally put more “blame” on a Suunto rep (or a US representative acting on their behalf, sure) is that’s their main job to work with these people. Meanwhile, Des, Ray, Chase the Summit, etc are also reviewing Coros, Apple, Garmin, etc. and juggling a lot more things. Sure, they should get things right too, but if and when they make an error, I’d expect them to say something like “ah, I missed that,” and not “someone told me the wrong thing.”
Also, regarding the overall “conspiracy theory,” I gave about a last minute change, while that might explain a Suunto rep giving “wrong” info, I’m not even sure I buy that either. Look at the people who, when told Coros was adding maps to their 4GB model, instantly went “this is a response to the Suunto rumors, they decided to beat them to the punch” which I think is also a bit unlikely. I think feature sets and timelines are setup farther in advance, and making a change like this with a few days notice is unlikely. Instead, I expect both Coros and Suunto had “parallel development,” both independently thinking it was a good idea to “push maps down” as a competitive advantage over Garmin in particular.
On another note, I’ve noticed the Run 2 maps are like the Race S ones I have — that is, not as detailed with lack of street names, etc. that you can get on higher models. I wonder if this is the start of a “three tier system” as we’ve already had “breadcrumbs vs. maps” and now perhaps we will have “breadcaps, basic maps, advanced maps.” If so, I could see Garmin doing something like that on a 570 successor, marking a middle ground but keeping full maps on the ir 9xx line.
-
@raven I definitely don’t think at all that they lied about what the rep said – as noted before, they never really said they were told the 4gb didn’t have maps, only that the 64gb did have maps.
But I also feel that acknowledging that an error was made, correcting it and even apologizing for it is actually a whole lot easier when you are apologizing on behalf of someone else and you weren’t truly at fault. I myself am guilty of getting defensive when an error I’ve made (I’ve been a journalist for 25+ years) was because of my oversight or misunderstanding of a topic – it’s easy to feel dumb about that kind of thing and fear your credibility has been shaken. But if the error was rooted in a source/contact or in someone who works under me, then that’s super easy to smooth things over with the complainer and acknowledge where the error happened, state the correction and affirm doing better moving forward.
I’m sure you and I may see the responses from the reviewers (and the situation as a whole) just a bit differently, and that’s fine. That’s kind of tricky part with texting and comment sections and things like that – tone is so hard to convey when it’s just a one- or two-line response to something. Maybe I’m reading more into those responses than I should. Maybe Suunto’s PR agency is looking at this thread and wondering why I’m dogging on them
I do agree that those reviewers are juggling a zillion different products and operating systems, so it’s impossible to keep it all straight. I commend them for that! I kind of like when I’ve done reviews and could be a bit more niche and not spread myself too thin. For example, I’ve done a lot of trail running shoe reviews, but I really specialized on the rare brands in the North America market. You’ll never see me reviewing Hoka or Saucony or Brooks, but I’m more than happy to put on the miles in Rossignol, Helly Hansen, Dynafit, and Arc’teryx. I liked being able to focus on the subset.
-
Also, regarding the overall “conspiracy theory,” I gave about a last minute change, while that might explain a Suunto rep giving “wrong” info, I’m not even sure I buy that either. Look at the people who, when told Coros was adding maps to their 4GB model, instantly went “this is a response to the Suunto rumors, they decided to beat them to the punch” which I think is also a bit unlikely. I think feature sets and timelines are setup farther in advance, and making a change like this with a few days notice is unlikely. Instead, I expect both Coros and Suunto had “parallel development,” both independently thinking it was a good idea to “push maps down” as a competitive advantage over Garmin in particular.
There was Suunto media event for journalists during UTMB week. I suppose that is when Suunto initially revealed Run 2. This makes me think that the 4GB version initially wasn’t supposed to have maps and that is what journalists were told, and then Suunto changed that in the last moment in response to Coros update making maps available on entry level Pace watches. Changing the restriction in software would be trivial. But again, that is just my speculation.
On another note, I’ve noticed the Run 2 maps are like the Race S ones I have — that is, not as detailed with lack of street names, etc. that you can get on higher models.
As someone who tried to use labels on Vertical 2, I think having labels on a smaller 1.32 inch wouldn’t be useful anyway because of how small and difficult to read the font is. Based on poll that I ran on Reddit, the majority of responders had difficulties reading labels even on 1.5 inch R2 and V2 displays. Personally, I can’t read labels on V2 even though I’ve never had difficulties with that when using Fenix 6X/7X devices. I think Suunto needs to improve label rendering before making it more widely available; otherwise it would do more harm than benefit - more opportunity for reviewers to criticize it. Besides, it is possible that the OS v3.0 running on Run 2 simply doesn’t have label rendering code yet. I am pretty sure that downloaded maps have labels regardless of what device you download maps for, so restricting that on device makes little sense, but who knows!
Suunto: Ambit, Ambit 3 Peak, 9 Baro, Race S, Race Ti, Vertical 2 Ti
Garmin: Forerunner 210, Forerunner 610, Fenix 6X, Fenix 7X Ti -
Also, regarding the overall “conspiracy theory,” I gave about a last minute change, while that might explain a Suunto rep giving “wrong” info, I’m not even sure I buy that either. Look at the people who, when told Coros was adding maps to their 4GB model, instantly went “this is a response to the Suunto rumors, they decided to beat them to the punch” which I think is also a bit unlikely. I think feature sets and timelines are setup farther in advance, and making a change like this with a few days notice is unlikely. Instead, I expect both Coros and Suunto had “parallel development,” both independently thinking it was a good idea to “push maps down” as a competitive advantage over Garmin in particular.
There was Suunto media event for journalists during UTMB week. I suppose that is when Suunto initially revealed Run 2. This makes me think that the 4GB version initially wasn’t supposed to have maps and that is what journalists were told, and then Suunto changed that in the last moment in response to Coros update making maps available on entry level Pace watches. Changing the restriction in software would be trivial. But again, that is just my speculation.
Yes, that’s a good summary of the situation I was postulating. I just don’t know if “trivial” is correct as a way to describe things simply due to not having experience in this particular realm, but having some experience QA testing hardware in other contexts, where there’s quite a bit of ridgity on when certain changes are allowed. It may have been easier here given the 64BG existed and had the feature.
But again this is just minorly amusing inside baseball. If it turns out Coros only added maps to their model in response to knowing what Suunto was doing and then Suunto also altering plans due to Coros, that’s all fun in a spy vs. spy way but a couple months from now there’s going to be people deciding what to get and if they are comparing these two models it’ll be based on what they had now and not what was originally planned in development.
As for the “three tiers of maps” thing, that’s just my mind wandering and thinking how Garmin in particular, if they notice a threat from other companies providing maps at lower price points, might try to address it while still keeping the most premium experience on 9xx and Fenix.
-
@sky-runner It’s weird, and just Suunto knows. Then it’s a little hard to believe that Vertical 1 is really having such problems with the newer SW and that it’s not just a pressure tactic to get people to buy new devices :)))))
-
@martintrail this is a conspiracy - not more
t6, S6, Elementum Terra, Ambit 3 Sapphire, Spartan Ultra Copper, Traverse Alpha, S7 Graphite LE, S9B Ambassador, S9P Titanium, S9PP Titanium, Vertical All Black, Race Titanium Charcoal, Race S Titanium Courtney, Run Lime, Race 2, Vertical 2 Titanium
-
@Egika yeah, it was supposed to be a bit of a joke
-
Deleted duplicate
-
Did anyone get it yet? If so what’s your take on the build quality. Is the metal backplate warranted compared to Run1 and does it impact comfort? Any other thoughts on it?
-
@GratefulDeadpan I received it two days ago and so far I love it. I’m not eloquent enough to find the right words but it definitely feels and looks like a quality watch. Maybe the strap (aloe in my case) is what looks like a bit too cheap in my opinion. Any picture needed / questions please shout - I’m not sure what you mean by “warranted” for the back?
-
Coming from Vertical 1, the only small disadvantages I see so far is the crown to go through the screens while running (it will take me some time to get used to that), and the fact that alarm time doesn’t seem to be an available complication on (any) watch faces. The rest is superb, maps are much more visible (my first non MIP watch…), and the battery seems good enough (I still have to do one full cycle though…). I used to run long trails and in the wild and these days I’m leaning more towards the Sunday occasional runner type(still 2-3h hilly runs from time to time, but in very safe places :)), so the less complex, lighter and less battery capable Run 2 seemed like a more appropriate watch - so far so good
-
@jw-cou Rotating crown to go through data screens is something I absolutely dislike. What does pushing the crown do? I hope this doesn’t come to other watches.
-
@sky-runner it opens a kind of second options for other buttons. For example on map screen it “opens” the option to zoom in and out with the crown (before that it would move to the screen before after). And for the media screen, it “opens” the options to change volume etc…
-
on map screen it “opens” the option to zoom in and out with the crown (before that it would move to the screen before after)
Not sure what you mean, but on V2 firmware watches, rotating the crown on map page zooms in and out. Crown press switches data pages forward, long press backward.
-
@jw-cou I have had no issues with have plastic back on the Run 1. Therefore, from a durability standpoint the metal backing on the Run 2 isn’t necessary for me really but as long as it doesn’t worsen wearing comfort I don’t mind
Thanks for your input! -
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login