DC Rainmaker Review
-
I’m not very concerned if there’s some people out there with worse comprehension skills. I don’t need reviews dumbed down for the lowest common denominator of intellect
simplicity isn’t the enemy of intelligence, often it’s the proof of it…
-
I’m not very concerned if there’s some people out there with worse comprehension skills. I don’t need reviews dumbed down for the lowest common denominator of intellect
simplicity isn’t the enemy of intelligence, often it’s the proof of it…
That’s orthogonal to my comment. Of course, making something overly complex without cause isn’t ideal, and simple things that do the job are worthwhile.
What I mean is Ray shouldn’t have to explain every sports term in every review. Should he explain how GPS works before he talks about the accuracy each time? For a Suunto review, does he need a long digression on how exactly CTL/ATL/TSB works? One might argue that, yes, he should do this, if his audience is “people new to a fitness journey who have never had a fitness watch before.”
If that’s your position, then fine. If you want Ray’s reviews to be short as possible, that’s your prerogative, but a five second video: “Suunto Race 3S. Decent watch. Overpriced.” sadly likely won’t give him YouTube ad revenue long term, but I do admit that’s harder for people to misinterpret.
-
@raven Allow me to disagree with the “overpriced” part in your post because when Race 1S Ti (without sapphire crystal) was released cost 450€ and now Race 3S Ti with sapphire crystal, better oHR sensor and other improvements, costs 500 €.
Again, hopefully Suunto will release a stainless steel version for the folks who for one or another reason don’t want the titanium version. -
@raven Allow me to disagree with the “overpriced” part in your post because when Race 1S Ti (without sapphire crystal) was released cost 450€ and now Race 3S Ti with sapphire crystal, better oHR sensor and other improvements, costs 500 €.
Again, hopefully Suunto will release a stainless steel version for the folks who for one or another reason don’t want the titanium version.The point is the Race S was also released in a non-titanium version that was cheaper, making an overall lower “starting point” in cost, of €349 I believe. So it’s 43% more expensive now if using the “entry point” costs (and we presume the person who cares about this neither cares about titanium nor sapphire).
For those who do want titanium and sapphire, the pricing is not as bad of course, and given the “RAMageddon” affecting tech pricing overall is understandable. The “pricing problem” is for people who want cheaper entry points.
-
@raven Again, your reasoning is misleading. Liesheng not releasing stainless steel version for the time being is one thing. Race 3S Ti costs 500€, i.e. 50€ more than the Race 1S Ti which didn’t feature titanium is completely another thing. I get charged 50€ more compared to Race 1S titanium and in return I get sapphire crystal and better oHR. Not too shabby I’d say.
-
@raven Again, your reasoning is misleading. Liesheng not releasing stainless steel version for the time being is one thing. Race 3S Ti costs 500€, i.e. 50€ more than the Race 1S Ti which didn’t feature titanium is completely another thing. I get charged 50€ more compared to Race 1S titanium and in return I get sapphire crystal and better oHR. Not too shabby I’d say.
Where am I being misleading? I have specified that I am talking about the perspective of someone who does not care about titanium nor sapphire and is budget conscious. They may be looking to Suunto, Coros, etc. as an alternative to more expensive Garmin watches. For this hypothetical individual, they had a decent option with the original Race S. That is no longer the case for the Race 3S. Now, they can look at the Run 2 instead, and I noted that in a previous reply.
If you point out where exactly it am trying to mislead people, then I can address the discrepancy. Instead, I think we are talking about two different things. You want to talk about someone who cares about titanium and sapphire and requires that in a watch. I am not.
-
Please be correct, I said your reasoning is misleading, not you. I’d add to that flawed reasoning, as well. No offense, not a personal attack against you.
How did you calculate that number 43%? Because you presumed that Suunto is supposed to release (I hope they do) a cheaper version of the watch? In the first place, did Suunto guarantee us that they’d be a cheaper version of R3S? I can only hope but certainly I can’t expect for sure that Suunto will release a cheaper version of that device. Suunto didn’t promise me anything. What if Suunto’s strategy is positioning R3S as a high performance premium watch and a cheaper price doesn’t fit that strategy? I don’t know, I don’t have any internal info and I prefer to not make any assumptions or presumptions.
Whatever Suunto’s strategy is, the success or failure thereof ultimately will be decided by customers voting with their wallets.
Suunto 3S for 50€ euro offers more than Race S1 at the time of its release. That’s a fact. And, yes coming with some presumed numbers like 43% about a non-existing entry-level product (cheaper 3S possibly without titanium and/or sapphire) is totally misleading and flawed reasoning.
For example, Run 2 (even Run 1 for that matter) is totally enough for the sport activities that I do. There’s only one problem for me there – the R1&2 lists of activities are software limited. So people like me who use activities outside of those lists buy something more expensive than R1 or R2. So, look for other alternatives and voted with my wallet. -
Please be correct, I said your reasoning is misleading, not you. I’d add to that flawed reasoning, as well. No offense, not a personal attack against you.
How did you calculate that number 43%?How did I calculate it? Maths.
Entry price for Race S: 349€
Entry price for Race 3S: 500€(500 - 349) / 349 = 0.433 (43%)
However, checking my work, I made one flaw. I used your 500€ value without checking it, rather than looking it up, as I live in America and more used to USD. Technically, the Race 3S price is 499€, so let’s redo the maths:
Entry price for Race S: 349€
Entry price for Race 3S: 499€(499 - 349) / 349 = 0.43 (still 43%)
Let’s do it in USD too, why not?
Entry price Race S: $349 USD
Entry price Race 3S: $599 USD(599 - 349) / 349 = 0.716 (71.6%)
-
@raven So, again your misleading reasoning. You keep insisting on having your imaginary cheaper version of S3S. Pay attention, as of today Suunto doesn’t offer that. Hence your calculations based on that flawed logic are totally useless for any comparisons.
-
@raven I think the appropriate comparison is with the Ti version of Race S, that makes the difference only 50 euros. This has been stated several times. I suspect Suunto opted for better materials this time around. When Race S was released there was only a steel version, the Ti version came later. I tested a steel version and found the Ti version much more comfortable. I think DCRainmaker used the wrong version of the S for price comparisons.
-
@raven I think the appropriate comparison is with the Ti version of Race S, that makes the difference only 50 euros. This has been stated several times. I suspect Suunto opted for better materials this time around. When Race S was released there was only a steel version, the Ti version came later. I tested a steel version and found the Ti version much more comfortable. I think DCRainmaker used the wrong version of the S for price comparisons.
I agree if one wants to compare based on materials, features, etc.
However, if one is just looking at entry prices, that doesn’t matter. Let me bring up the Apple TV comparison again:
Apple TV (3rd gen) 2022
$129 for WiFi (64GB) and $149 WiFi+Ethernet (128GB)Same model, June 2026: $199 and $249
October, the 4th gen is released, and there’s only an Ethernet/128GB version at $299.
Someone wants an Apple TV box and doesn’t need a lot of storage. Last year, they could spend $129. Earlier this year, they could spend $199. Today, they’d need to spend $299. (Or look for the older model, which I’ll note for Suunto in a moment.)
Back to Suunto. Someone wants a Race S series as it’s a smaller watch. Previously they could get it for $349. With the Race 3S they need $599.
Now to be fair, Suunto is continuing to sell the Race S, so the answer for the budget conscious person is to buy that model if cost is the fundamental concern. Pointing out that Suunto changed the entry point is valid though, in my mind. It’s a different point than comparing the most similar titanium to titanium models. One can do both examinations; doing one does not deny the other and different people will value different things. If one comes into buying a watch with a demand for titanium, then my “entry point” examination is not a concern. If one does not care about titanium, then comparing to the old titanium is not a concern as the person would have went with steel given a price emphasis.
-
@raven I do see your point on the entry price. I am sure Suunto had reasons to go with premium materials. You might remember in the forums many folks including me wished the Ti version came with a sapphire crystal.
The Run 2 could be seen as the entry level watch. I like the Run 2 a lot…until I want planned workouts from a third party or any other S+. I hope the longer goal is to combine OS somehow so Suunto has an entry level watch. I agree they need it. The 3S seems to be targeted to premium use for smaller wrists.
I bought a 3S for my daughter for exactly that reason, she has a Race 2 from my testing but finds the watch far too big for her. I am happy to have a premium smaller Suunto available.
I believe Suunto needs an entry level watch that is S+ capable but I am not marketing savvy, probably the opposite. -
@raven I do see your point on the entry price. I am sure Suunto had reasons to go with premium materials. You might remember in the forums many folks including me wished the Ti version came with a sapphire crystal.
The Run 2 could be seen as the entry level watch. I like the Run 2 a lot…until I want planned workouts from a third party or any other S+. I hope the longer goal is to combine OS somehow so Suunto has an entry level watch. I agree they need it. The 3S seems to be targeted to premium use for smaller wrists.
I bought a 3S for my daughter for exactly that reason, she has a Race 2 from my testing but finds the watch far too big for her. I am happy to have a premium smaller Suunto available.
I believe Suunto needs an entry level watch that is S+ capable but I am not marketing savvy, probably the opposite.I agree with all of that, and let’s bring it back to the criticism of Ray DCRainmaker’s review, which is where this originates. The focus on “entry price” as we’re showing here is one valid discussion point, but I think it should also have included noting the Run 2, as an alternative for those who might want a steel version of Race 3S. As I recall, Ray doesn’t mention the Run 2 at all, and as of now, still has not reviewed the model. So I do see this as a valid criticism of his review — not that he was focused only on “entry price,” but extending that to noting options for budget people: the Run series and the fact the original Race S still exists.
When I bought my Race S, I did so partially as at the time I preferred a smaller watch, not for my sessions where I’m ok with a larger size, but more in my overall day doing other things. I also appreciated, at the time, it was the cheapest option of the modern watches (the Run series did not exist yet). When I ended up buying, I decided to “upgrade” to titanium when Race S went on a sale, mostly due to the Courtney colorway but also thought I might appreciate a bit lighter a watch. I ended up paying $338.85 USD in April 2025 for it. So I can see both points, being budget conscious and also appreciating better materials.
Here’s proof of what I paid:
cid:F65D15BE-B424-4282-886D-CF8396D88642
Given what I paid, Race 3S would be a pretty significant increase:
Raven’s cost, Race S Titanium $338.85 USD
New Race 3S starting price $599 USD(599 - 338.85) / 338.85 = 0.768, 76.8% increase if I wanted to upgrade. I’ll need to wait for another sale.
-
@raven Are you comparing the price of the R3S one week after it got launched to a R1S which was on sale after launch? Members of Suunto club (I’m not part of it) buy their stuff from the Suunto.com with -30% (at least it was like that the the time when V1 was released). Let’s compare apples to apples.
Also, a side note which might have to do with the pricing of new models: On Telegram channel Joakin mentioned multiple times that Run 2, in spite of the naming, isn’t a successor to Run 1. It’s a part of the new vision how Suunto position their watches. He also mentioned that with their new models everything clicks into its right place. Exactly that’s why in one of my previous posts I wrote you that we don’t know what’s the strategy of Suunto and that Suunto might see the R3S as a premium high performance watch and that’s why there’s not a cheaper version of it released. We know nothing about their strategy.
-
@raven Are you comparing the price of the R3S one week after it got launched to a R1S which was on sale after launch?
No. I never mentioned what I personally paid until my last reply. I only did that to show that I am someone who can understand the value of both “low / entry price” and “upgraded materials.” I certainly would not think it’s fair to compare a just released product with a sale price for the general public. For me personally, if I was motivated to upgrade it’d be a factor, but I’d wait for a sale like I did for the original Race S. So my bringing it up was simply to show why, for me, I’m not going to consider an upgrade at this time.
In a similar vein, I think criticisms of the Race 3S pricing should use the non-American pricing, as the $599 USD is an outlier, and I think Suunto is more relevant outside of America. Of course, for me, I need to consider USD pricing for my personal considerations.
Also, a side note which might have to do with the pricing of new models: On Telegram channel Joakin mentioned multiple times that Run 2, in spite of the naming, isn’t a successor to Run 1. It’s a part of the new vision how Suunto position their watches. He also mentioned that with their new models everything clicks into its right place. Exactly that’s why in one of my previous posts I wrote you that we don’t know what’s the strategy of Suunto and that Suunto might see the R3S as a premium high performance watch and that’s why there’s not a cheaper version of it released. We know nothing about their strategy.
Certainly, it’s hard to know what Suunto is thinking when they don’t give details.
What I can do is consider my own process of evaluating watch options. Typically, I look for a “good, better, best” option within the “same generation”.
Using Apple as the example, that would be the Apple Watch (3rd gen), Apple Watch Series 12, and Apple Watch Ultra 4. Using the Garmin Forerunner as the example, that would be the good (70, 170), better 570, and best 970, when considering the x70 series. I’d consider the Forerunner 265 to be a previous series, despite still being sold, etc. One of my problems with Garmin is they have too many models overall though, with their Venu, Fenix, etc.
So at the time I bought my Suunto, the options I was looking at were Race S, Race, and Vertical. For me those were the three I was considering. If I had waited a few months, I’d also get the Run as an option, and to me that felt “more complete.” So I saw the good / better / best as Run / Race S | Race / Vertical, if that makes sense as of June 2025.
Now it’s more convoluted. With Race 2 / Vertical 2 in Sept 2025, those feel they are of the “next gen” so now the matrix is:
Previous Gen: Run, Race (S), Vertical
Current Gen — , Race 2, Vertical 2That is, I saw “Run” as filling in the “good” part of the previous gen, but it’s awkward as Run has its own OS different from the others. It’s almost like the Run comes from another company.
Now with the Race 3S, and we all assume a forthcoming Race 3, we should ideally have as the “current gen”
Run 2, Race 3S, Race 3,
And now the “missing part,” is a Vertical 3.
I don’t know if other people would think like this, but that’s how I’d make initial comparisons. Suunto is starting to get like Garmin though, keeping around older models (in the US the Suunto 9 Peak Pro is still in the store as a new model) and making comparisons confusing.
-
@raven Yes, I agree, all that huge choice is pretty much confusing. I don’t know if such small companies like Suunto should stick to less models. I guess people at Suunto know better their market.
Imagine if a person wants to pick their first watch: Suunto, Garmin, Huawei, Samsung, apple, Coros, Polar and what not… -
I wish Suunto would state their strategy with regards to the OS so we can make an appropriate decision.
I wouldn’t touch the Run 2 due to its lack of third party and Suunto+ support but I also wouldn’t buy the Race 3S as it’s too expensive.
Watch: Suunto Race S
-
@raven said:
Let’s do it in USD too, why not?Entry price Race S: $349 USD
Entry price Race 3S: $599 USD(599 - 349) / 349 = 0.716 (71.6%)
The US dollar price hike isn’t Suunto’s fault but due to your moron in office.
Suunto t3c | Suunto Ambit 3 sport | Tomtom runner 2 | Garmin forerunner 935 | Garmin forerunner 965 | Suunto race s
Stryd | Bryton Gardia R300L | Polar H9 | Polar oh1+ | Wahoo bolt v2 | 4iiii precision 3 -
@Steven-Hambleton I returned my Run 2 precisely because of some of the software limitations and was waiting for the new Race 3s but it is quite expensive in CAD…
For reference,
Suunto race s titanium: 500 cad
Suunto race 3s: 800 cad
Suunto race 2 titanium: 800 cad
Coros pace 4 pro: 650 cad
Suunto run 2 (64gb): 550 cadIf the “S” version of the race 3 that just released is at the same price point as the suunto race 2 Ti, does this mean that the regular Race 3 or Race 4 will be even more expensive? I am quite confused by what this pricing means for the future
-
@raven said:
Let’s do it in USD too, why not?Entry price Race S: $349 USD
Entry price Race 3S: $599 USD(599 - 349) / 349 = 0.716 (71.6%)
The US dollar price hike isn’t Suunto’s fault but due to your moron in office.
You’d think so. That was certainly my first thought, and I’m more than willing to blame the moron in question. Ray thinks otherwise though, in these comments from the YouTube review.
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