DC Rainmaker Review

MLM31

All the other reviews I’ve read mention a reliable GPS and heart rate. Everyone has to find what matters to them. I have a small wrist, I like watches with a style that isn’t too sporty (I still love the look of my 9PP, which I wear every day), and I couldn’t care less about a microphone, flashlight, voice features, or a speaker… I do hiking so maps are a +. In Garmin, the map are on really pricing watch (much more than Race 3s). So I think I will try it!

Dusan Holub

DC Rainmaker reviews were among the ones what convinced me to buy Race 2 instead of Garmin. After 3 month I have it, I regret the buy. I do not blame anybody but me - I was not properly reading between lines. Now I feel DC Rainmaker made more honest review of Race 3S then on Race 2. In my opinion, the multitude of problems can no longer be concealed. Or we accept honest reviews or we accept the lie.
I am still trying to go ahead with Race 2…

snow*

@Dusan-Holub said:

Or we accept honest reviews or we accept the lie.

There are so many lesser-known reviewers out there who deserve to be discovered and who, more often than not, are far better than the more famous ones

elbee

@Dusan-Holub said:

In my opinion, the multitude of problems can no longer be concealed.

What I’ve learned from sportwatches over the last 20 years, they all have their annoyances but most you can live with. Some annoyances are that big it makes you buy an other watch (for me that happened with the garmin forerunner 965). Does my race s have annoyances? Yes, sure. Did any reviewer ever mentioned the annoyances I experienced with my watches? No, never. Not one. Does that make me awkward? Might. Or reviewers just don’t live with a watch 24/7 for quite some time. They just have superficial experience with specific watches.

Maryn

Lately, a lot of new channels have been popping up on YouTube where we can watch “reviews.” Of course, most—if not all—of them just read out the specs; there’s no review to speak of. Besides, if you take a closer look, you’ll see that these “reviewers” had the watch on their wrist for a maximum of 2–3 days when, for example, they demonstrate how the sleep screen works. They’re flooding us with low-quality junk, devoid of any substance. Lately, I’ve stopped watching all these reviews because I can find most of the information on the manufacturer’s website.

You can criticize Ray for many things, but he’s probably the only one who creates text-based reviews with tables and charts—and he puts a lot of work into them. He often makes comparisons and conducts lengthy tests to see how the battery performs in real-world use, etc.

I really like the watch, but I get the impression it was released too early. They could have held off and released it with a working race intensity planner, a working AI assistant, and a working MCP server. As it is, we get the impression that something is coming, but in reality, we don’t know how much it will cost after the trial period. Well, that’s not how it should be.
The price argument is valid; I’m surprised Suunto didn’t offer a choice (steel or titanium, 64 vs. 32 GB).

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

Coros vs Race 3 better quality in components (high quality internals) and better structural design.

A lot of watches are glued together. This one aint. Plus working hard for a carbon neutral.

Some things to share.

thanasis

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos race 3 or 3s?

mich heller

@thanasis race 3 confirmed!

elbee

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos said:

better quality in components

Better quality for what? Are the components more accurate? Are they faster? Do they provide new functionality? Will the battery hold it capacity better after 5 years of use?

And the big question: is it supported by firmware updates longer? (and more specific, how fast are bugs solved)

Just saying, ‘it’s better’ doesn’t say much.

It’s like a college of mine bragging about his rolex can survive in boiling water. Well, I never lost a watch due to damage done by boiling water. And besides, my watch is on my wrist. If it’s in boiling water I’m too and that is a bigger problem than a damaged watch.

Just to say, sure, a rolex has better build quality. But it’s high quality internals and build is over engineered. (to justify it’s high price?)

perfekt_tall

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos

It’s the classic script: “We’re better than the others — just trust us.” Except this line stopped working a while ago. And please, spare me the carbon‑neutrality fairy tales — they sound especially… poetic coming from a capitalist playbook.

Dusan Holub

@elbee Moreover, there is “also” firmware. Without good firmware, any great hardware is nothing.

VoiGAS

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos Are there sources for your arguments? In the past there were some CO2 declarations, but now? Also regarding the quality. If its true it should be communicated better

Egika

@VoiGAS Suunto is publishing Sustainability Reports every year. Here is the latest:
https://www.suunto.com/globalassets/about-suunto/sustainability/documents/suunto-sustainability-report-2025-14mb.pdf

You will find, that the production emissions are 100% compensated.

danutz

@Egika said:

You will find, that the production emissions are 100% compensated.

You say production emissions are 100% compensated. Does that include products made at the Suunto China factory? According to this 2025 sustainability report, only 42% of products were made in Finland, and the report covers Suunto Oy only, with no energy or emissions data for the China factory. And now in 2026 I think much more than 42% is made in China, so I am not surprised “sustainability” is not used in Suunto’s marketing anymore.

Egika

@danutz said:

@Egika said:

You will find, that the production emissions are 100% compensated.

You say production emissions are 100% compensated. Does that include products made at the Suunto China factory? According to this 2025 sustainability report, only 42% of products were made in Finland, and the report covers Suunto Oy only, with no energy or emissions data for the China factory. And now in 2026 I think much more than 42% is made in China, so I am not surprised “sustainability” is not used in Suunto’s marketing anymore.

Why do you think this would not be the case? I see it mentioned very well.
Just read yourself maybe.
The production is counted wherever on the globe it might be.
It is clearly mentioned: https://us.suunto.com/pages/climate?srsltid=AU7gw4XnhYVxh0n-eZLnl_8coFJvOOHRxIsitvCJ9fsYArz6Y0FhYWK6

VoiGAS

@Egika Thats great! In the past there was a dedicated symbol or something per watch with the amount of CO2 and compensation mentioned. This is what I couldn’t find for Race3S

Currently CO2 per watch seems to be 9,7kg CO2. Vertical 1 was 6,6kg. But good to have it reported…

danutz

@Egika said:

I see it mentioned very well.

I’m not trying to get into an argument, but what you’re seing is the emissions calculations, which does not mean they have been “100% compensated.”.

Even the report you shared states this very clearly.

alt text

Veyddon

@BastMaSVSRS9PP said:

@elbee yeah his non Garmin reviews have become pretty useless overall.

No they haven’t. I have a Vertical 2 (first Suunto watch since a Vector in the early 2000s), partly as a result of his positive review of it and other Suunto products at the same time.

Stavrogin

@raven I tend to agree with these points. After seeing all of the recent releases and using Garmin, Suunto and Coros I also agree that Suunto does seem to be getting more and more behind with software. I think that is a common theme here on the forum. Coros is full speed ahead on software development and is making meaningful strides year over year. Garmin has been a bit more stagnant, but I think that is because they set many of the standards and had the money to throw at online music and NFC connections early in the game. (Those two seem to have dried up in terms of opportunities)

Suunto hardware is top notch. They also seem to use top GPS chipsets and other items when they are building watches. These are all great and lead to watches lasting a super long time and also being reliable. It is my opinion that the thing holding them back has and probably will continue to be the software behind the hardware. Suunto just doesn’t seem to be willing to put the money into software development. Resources, live tracking, continue later functionality, and a bunch of other items that seem ubiquitous with other brands either don’t work or are something that Suunto puts out and then doesn’t seem to ever work on it again.

Resources are unusable on the watch. If the intention was a body battery like reading it is a total fail. It cannot reliably track my daily stress and resources during a day both post and pre workout. Looks like something they built code for and walked away.

The missing topo maps for the entire eastern US and Canada is really not okay. Especially since they are like, “uuuh yeah, the fix will be in the next map updates.” Map updates can be multi-year waits at Suunto. Again. looks like they built the code and walked away.

My Plan Beta: how long has that been in beta? Has there been any development??? I will not waste words here. Looks like they built the code and walked away.

I get it, it looks like they do not have a huge software team and things will fall through the cracks, but the days of the Ambit are over. You cannot be a great ABC watch with a touch of GPS tech and still be a great company. People want smart in their training tech and they want it to evolve.

I love Suunto and want them so much to be my daily driver, but some if not all of the criticisms are true. We just don’t seem to like to hear it from someone that is not “us” make criticisms. We live in a time where opinion for some reason with so so many people outweighs facts. Suunto should take the criticisms and try to make better watches.

danutz

@Stavrogin said:

Looks like they built the code and walked away.

I can say the same about SuuntoPlus Editor, which they released in March. Only one version is published, and the account that was active here has not logged in for months now. I understand they are a small company, but this is not how things should be done, just releasing something that is half “baked” and then forget about it.