Run 2

[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.

[Highlands]

@GratefulDeadpan I’m glad I helped you. Still, I do believe the 64 GB version is the better, more future proof choice because 50€ is just nothing. Just because I don’t need memory today, it doesn’t mean that I won’t need more memory after 3-6 months.
As for Suunto maps: in my home area they are totally useless on my V2. They simply lack major paths and trails, not to mention the poor legibility. And as I know my area very well, I don’t need maps there. I hate to say it but in unknown terrains I rely on Fenix maps. So, if I were a user of Run 1, using it only on my territory, the less detailed maps on Run 2 wouldn’t add any additional value to my activities.

[sky-runner]

@Highlands said:

As for Suunto maps: in my home area they are totally useless on my V2. They simply lack major paths and trails, not to mention the poor legibility.

FYI: you can easily contribute to Open Street Maps, which is what Suunto maps are based on. I’ve done that and saw my updates reflected in Suunto maps. It is pretty easy - you can upload GPS tracks to OSM map builder UI and draw the missing trails.

With regards to poor legibility, I fully agree with you. I find that switching to high contrast map theme improves legibility quite a bit (and helps with the battery usage), but still I think this the area where Suunto needs to improve by using thicker lines and higher contrast color combinations. I don’t know who at Suunto came up with an idea of rendering trails as green on green - that makes it much harder to see trails as they become thin at lower zoom levels (e. g. 200m and 500m).

[Steven Hambleton]

Why can’t Suunto clearly communicate why you’d buy a 64Gb over a 4Gb model? That’s quite a significant gap.

[raven]

@Steven-Hambleton said:

Why can’t Suunto clearly communicate why you’d buy a 64Gb over a 4Gb model? That’s quite a significant gap.

Some reviewers, like DesFit and Chase the Summit, indicated in comments of their video reviews they were told by Suunto representatives that the offline maps were only for 64GB and not the 4GB. Of course, others in the comments tell them that’s not so and seems to be the case that offline is available in both.

What if, however, the original plan was the 4GB was not to have maps, and this was an eleventh hour change after seeing recent Coros news of them pushing offline maps to their Pace model with 4GB? If Suunto changed their strategy last minute in response, then this would explain why the video reviewers “got this wrong,” as they had old information. Of course, the other explanation is the Suunto rep that co-ordinated with them was simply confused.

[TrailEyes]

@raven said:
Some reviewers, like DesFit and Chase the Summit, indicated in comments of their video reviews they were told by Suunto representatives that the offline maps were only for 64GB and not the 4GB.

I really like DesFit and not so much CtS, but both of them wrote their comments/replies in ways that it sounds like they only got information about the 64gb and made an assumption that the 4gb version didn’t have maps. They say that their rep told them that the 64gb version (the one they were testing) had maps; the comments I saw from them don’t say they were told the 4gb version didn’t have maps. That’s where I feel like they made a leap.

And the fact that both are defensive and pointing fingers instead of apologizing makes me feel more like they know they messed up and don’t want to face the music.

[raven]

@TrailEyes To me it seems weird they both messed up the same way. I also didn’t see either as overly defensive, and not sure what “music” there is to face. I know the videos of DesFit better, and he doesn’t seem the type to throw someone else under the bus unwarranted; I’d see him more as easily saying he made an error if he thought it was an honest mistake.

It really doesn’t matter though if there was a late change or not, as we know the situation now. It would minorly explain the question of “why you’d buy a 64GB over a 4GB model” though if the 4GB wasn’t originally intended for maps.

However, I think 64GB is also explained well enough by those who want significant maps and/or significant downloaded music files.

[Highlands]

@sky-runner Thanks. I know all that, Used to do it now and then but unintentionally I use Suunto maps less and rely basically on my Fenix’s maps. I tried high contrast theme a couple of times after the update but it isn’t my cup of tea.

Run 2 looks like a better watch than any forunner and Coros Pace 4.

[André Faria]

@Steven-Hambleton said:

Why can’t Suunto clearly communicate why you’d buy a 64Gb over a 4Gb model? That’s quite a significant gap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VzdXDd7aQQ

Someone can correct me if wrong but I believe @joaquin works for Suunto, and this , at least for me explains everything in detail and tells an example of how much maps fit in 4gb or 64gb.
The only thing for me that it “open” is if it has barometer or not. Edit: he just answered me on the comments saying yes.
@dimitrios-kanellopoulos I think that could be a nice thing to have on the product page, right now it only mentions altimeter
https://www.suunto.com/it-it/Prodotti/Orologi-per-lo-sport/suunto-run-2/suunto-run-2-all-black-4gb/

while for example on the race s we have it written on the features
https://www.suunto.com/it-it/Prodotti/Orologi-per-lo-sport/suunto-race-s/suunto-race-s-all-black/

[Egika]

@Steven-Hambleton said:

Why can’t Suunto clearly communicate why you’d buy a 64Gb over a 4Gb model? That’s quite a significant gap.

they do so. See here:

[Egika]

@André-Faria said:

The only thing for me that it “open” is if it has barometer or not. Edit: he just answered me on the comments saying yes.
@dimitrios-kanellopoulos I think that could be a nice thing to have on the product page, right now it only mentions altimeter
https://www.suunto.com/it-it/Prodotti/Orologi-per-lo-sport/suunto-run-2/suunto-run-2-all-black-4gb/

Since it shows the resolution of pressure measurement in the specs, it needs to have a barometric sensor.

[Egika]

@perfekt_tall said:

In one of the reviews (The Run Testers), I saw the screens andddd the issues with the sizing of the metrics on a single line still haven’t been fixed.

Maybe because Suunto does not regard this as being an issue and it is by design.

[jthomi]

@isazi Why do you dislike them? Not for your typical usage?

[jthomi]

@Egika Source, where do you found this?

[isazi]

@jthomi I guess personal preference, the Run did improve quite a lot since I started testing it (it was a prototype at that point), but there are still some quirks that I do not understand, the scrolling of data pages with the crown, the weird sports like “marathon”, many little details that made me think “I will focus on other watches and not test the Run 2”.

[Egika]

@jthomi said:

@Egika Source, where do you found this?

in the technical specs at the bottom of the product page:

[jthomi]

@Egika Hm, can’t find this pic on the german page

[Egika]

@jthomi click on “Spezifikationen”.
Then you will have this also in German:

[Wilson75]

@Egika it’s like buying a smartphone with 128gb or 512gb.
same device and features just storage difference…

@Egika said in Run 2:

they do so. See here:

[2b2bff]

@jthomi yeah, he does good reviews, although he got one thing wrong about the mapping: Race S and Race 2 / Vertical 2 have the same capabilities. There is no price differentiator. Only the Race S is one update behind to have street names…