Race 2 accuracy
-
Hi all. I’m looking at getting the Race 2 to replace my Garmin 265- mainly because I fancy a change and the Race 2 has me completely sold on its looks!
I’ve been a bit concerned though about reports on here saying the watch under reports distance and also there are some heart rate issues. I was just wondering if anyone owns this watch that actually finds it to be accurate? -
@shamilt1 The Race 2 is my best running watch to date. I’ve used Garmin for over 10 years (starting back in 2008 with the FR305).
I haven’t had any issues with distance tracking. However, I agree that the wrist-based heart rate can be a bit buggy. Instead of getting frustrated with it, I simply use an HRM strap for all my workouts.
Regards -
@shamilt1 I have a lot of comparison data showing Race 2 and Vertical 2 having virtually identical distance and altitude for trail running. Others in the forum have stated that the Race 2 measures short. For what I do, I see no differences between the two watches. I am happy to share the data, I often run with both watches for testing.
-
This post is deleted! -
@shamilt1 IMO The Race 2 is shy a few meters than other devices yes, but I think the other devices are more ‘generous’. What I found is that the Race 2 is very much like AWU2/3 when it comes to distance and represents the real distance. I might get the Vertical 2 now that the Vertical Week is upon us and will be able to compare them side by side.
The weirdest thing I experienced on my Race 2 is that when you are navigating a route or snap to route the distance is literally the same as the AWU3, when having it on free (breadcrumbs) it is shy few tens of meters. Nevertheless the GPS track is great and smooth and its one of the most beautiful/light watches I own (the Ocean is still the best looking
) -
@Brad_Olwin I compared the Race 2 against the Vertical 1 Race S for several weeks and opened a dedicated thread to discuss the topic.
As a summary: in all my activities and tests Vertical and Race S recorded practically same tracks (recorded GPS points), distances and paces, and, the most important, showed distance (in the watch ) was very close to the recorded distance when measuring the GPS recorded track.
In Race 2 the behavior is different: Race 2 records practically same tracks (recorded GPS points) but showed distance is shorted (or filtered) and differs from the distance when measuring the GPS recorded track, and this GPS measured distance is similar to the distance measured with both Vertical and Race S, so ir seems that all watches record/save similar GPS info/points but processing algorithm is different. This behavior happens in running and bike activities.
Which watch is more accurate? I really don’t know but for me it’s clear that altough they estimate same track (raw GPS points) they estimate different distances and paces so one must be more accurate than the other. Maybe V1 was measuring excesive distance, maybe Race 2 is measuring less distance. Maybe “perfection” is in the middle, who knows?
The behavior can also be observed in activities of runners using Suunto, so it appears to be “normal” operation of the Race 2. That’s the reason I opened the dedicated thread.
That said, I’m using the Race 2 as my 24/7 watch and the Vertical is in the drawer for “special” days or going out on the bike.
