Or the Grit X2 (not Pro) as they have all same stuff just in a different case. I like the look of the X2 more than the M3 but it’s a personal preference. If it wasn’t for the GPS the new Loop would work.
I bought a Polar Grit X2 Pro because I wanted to support a niche manufacturer but I didn’t know how basic the navigation and maps are on the Polar. Their website is of course dishing out superlatives about advanced navigation and dual GPS and whatnot but the maps are very basic. I’ve seen tons of videos and read as many reviews and realised that maps and navigation are a primary use case for me, heart rate and sport metrics are second. Garmin can do both, Polar lot less so. Saying that, if I have a choice of display readability vs battery, I’ll have to take the display readability.
I have expirience with garmin fenix 6, with apple ultra 2. And now I’m tested fenix 7 pro and 8, polar grit x2 and apple ultra 3.
I would say Apple is god tier (espesially if you have apple ecosystem). All works good, all on top level. But not fit me good in a matter that I do a lot of hiking and battery life crucial for me.
Other way garmin give a lot of metrics, application also good I would say. But I don’t like design, I don’t like in same way metrics, because tbf they focused more on really pro guys in sport, not needed functionality for me. Other than that - great device, but in my point of view it’s can bit Apple only in battery life, other aspects Apple win win.
And polar grit x2, design is ok, not best, not worst, better for me then garmin have. But what I love here Polar flow, it’s looks little bit outdated BUT it’s simple as f. It’s give all things what regular person need plus more, I love how with 1 week of tests it’s start give me advice what really works and not hack me so much, compare with garmin where all advice it’s just burst all trainings and die.
And after I check what Polar have else, so I go for myself with Polar Grit x2 Pro 😬 Design is top!
I have expirience with garmin fenix 6, with apple ultra 2. And now I’m tested fenix 7 pro and 8, polar grit x2 and apple ultra 3.
I would say Apple is god tier (espesially if you have apple ecosystem). All works good, all on top level. But not fit me good in a matter that I do a lot of hiking and battery life crucial for me.
Other way garmin give a lot of metrics, application also good I would say. But I don’t like design, I don’t like in same way metrics, because tbf they focused more on really pro guys in sport, not needed functionality for me. Other than that - great device, but in my point of view it’s can bit Apple only in battery life, other aspects Apple win win.
And polar grit x2, design is ok, not best, not worst, better for me then garmin have. But what I love here Polar flow, it’s looks little bit outdated BUT it’s simple as f. It’s give all things what regular person need plus more, I love how with 1 week of tests it’s start give me advice what really works and not hack me so much, compare with garmin where all advice it’s just burst all trainings and die.
And after I check what Polar have else, so I go for myself with Polar Grit x2 Pro 😬 Design is top!
Ich habe aktuell eine Forerunner 265 und überlege zurück zu Polar (Vantage M3 oder Grit X2) zu wechseln.
Meine Vorgängeruhr war die Vantage M die mir 5 Jahre lang gute Dienste geleistet hat bis der Akku aufgegeben hat.
Bei den aktuellen Polar Modellen kann der Aklu getauscht werden, außerdem hat die Polar offline Karten und einen flachen optischen HR Sensor.
Mein Mann hat die Vantage M3 und ist zufrieden, und mein persönlicher Eindruck ist, dass die optische Herzfrequenzmessung von Polar besser ist als die meiner Garmin Uhr.
Was die Polar nicht kann ist direkt Musik von Spotify spielen, ich persönlich habe mein Handy aber ohnehin dabei.
Und der größte Nachteil an Polar ist, dass sie keine API bieten über die Trainingsprogramme auf die Uhr geladen werden können, die müssen manuell erstellt werden
I have been using a Polar watch for several months (Grit X2 Cooper). I don't have experience with AW because I understand that I only need apps for running, load/recovery tracking, planning, and possibly other sports activities or offline maps. All of these features are built into the sporting watch. I don't need to buy additional apps or pay for a subscription. Also, I use Polar H10 ECG HRM chest strap.
Before that, I used several Huawei smartbands and one Xiaomi watch. I like that the Polar watch is designed for sport, with 5 physical buttons, and nothing is distracting. Light to wear, good-looking, round, classical design.
Recently, I have wrote a review in Reddit: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Polarfitness/comments/1u94y72/polar\_grit\_x2\_review\_after\_using\_for\_a\_few\_months/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Polarfitness/comments/1u94y72/polar_grit_x2_review_after_using_for_a_few_months/)
https://preview.redd.it/owjqkrmdzf8h1.jpeg?width=1913&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3b96bd716e2389b03d9a2d2687403f28a86d15a0
If your goal is training, I don't think I'd get the Samsung. Seems to me like you'd be paying for "smart watch" features (which I personally don't want) when you want "training / health monitoring" as the primary function.
Polar Pacer is $300 USD. The Pro is $350.
Polar Unite is $200 USD.
Probably also worth looking at Sunto (Run) and Coros (Pace 3) too. Both under $250 USD.
No mater what you're thinking about getting, if you live in the US you should absolutely wait a month and buy on Black Friday.
But if you're looking for the best value, Polar probably won't be the right brand (especially if you live in the US). I like their watches (currently have a GritX Pro1). But their pricing strategy seems is pretty odd. They aren't on par with a company like Apple, but they seem to have adopted an Apple-light pricing strategy.
I think this was true when I got my GritX Pro \~ 2 years ago.
It might even still be true with some watch series. Your Vantage V3 is $700 USD. For price, Garmin's Forerunner 970 is comprable at $750. The 970 has maps and has a sapphire lens for $750. If I'm spending $700 on a watch, personally I'd spend the extra $50 for the sapphire...but I'm rough on my watches.
Which is why I like the GritX line. But the value here is pretty terrible now IMO. X2 Pro is $1000. Same price as the Fenix 8, which I think is probably a better watch. Basically every review I saw for the X2pro when it came out was "really nice watch...but the pricing strategy here is very aggressive making it a poor value".
X2 is $800 in the US. Same price as the Fenix E (not sapphire though). And more expensive than any of the Forerunners (970 is $750). I think I'd take the 970 over the X2 if I was going to spend that much (and I don't want to spend that much). If the X2 was at price parity in the US vs. rest of the world, it would be a reasonable value IMO (and would make the X2 Pro kind of irrelevant IMO).
It's not clear that the Polar watches are better than similarly priced Garmin watches IMO.
Looking for price parity on similar (maybe worse?) watches vs. the brand with the highest name recognition / snob appeal in the market doesn't seem like a good strategy for the much less well known small brand to me.
Brand wise, Polar is probably more on par with Suunto, but the value is so much less with Polar.
Vertial 2 is $600, and probably comparable to the X2 (pro?). Race 2 is $500.
I would strongly prefer to buy another Grit series watch when my current watch dies. And I would also prefer to stay in the Polar eco system (unlike many I like the app vs. hate it...and I also think that staying with Polar will mean fewer connectivity issues with my H10s).
But I can't justify spending an extra $300 - $500 for a comparable watch when compared to Suunto. And if I was going to spend that much, I'd probably just get the Forerunner 970 and save the $50 over the X2.
I think this was true when I got my GritX Pro \~ 2 years ago.
It might even still be true with some watch series. Your Vantage V3 is $700 USD. For price, Garmin's Forerunner 970 is comprable at $750. The 970 has maps and has a sapphire lens for $750. If I'm spending $700 on a watch, personally I'd spend the extra $50 for the sapphire...but I'm rough on my watches.
Which is why I like the GritX line. But the value here is pretty terrible now IMO. X2 Pro is $1000. Same price as the Fenix 8, which I think is probably a better watch. Basically every review I saw for the X2pro when it came out was "really nice watch...but the pricing strategy here is very aggressive making it a poor value".
X2 is $800 in the US. Same price as the Fenix E (not sapphire though). And more expensive than any of the Forerunners (970 is $750). I think I'd take the 970 over the X2 if I was going to spend that much (and I don't want to spend that much). If the X2 was at price parity in the US vs. rest of the world, it would be a reasonable value IMO (and would make the X2 Pro kind of irrelevant IMO).
It's not clear that the Polar watches are better than similarly priced Garmin watches IMO.
Looking for price parity on similar (maybe worse?) watches vs. the brand with the highest name recognition / snob appeal in the market doesn't seem like a good strategy for the much less well known small brand to me.
Brand wise, Polar is probably more on par with Suunto, but the value is so much less with Polar.
Vertial 2 is $600, and probably comparable to the X2 (pro?). Race 2 is $500.
I would strongly prefer to buy another Grit series watch when my current watch dies. And I would also prefer to stay in the Polar eco system (unlike many I like the app vs. hate it...and I also think that staying with Polar will mean fewer connectivity issues with my H10s).
But I can't justify spending an extra $300 - $500 for a comparable watch when compared to Suunto. And if I was going to spend that much, I'd probably just get the Forerunner 970 and save the $50 over the X2.
I think this was true when I got my GritX Pro \~ 2 years ago.
It might even still be true with some watch series. Your Vantage V3 is $700 USD. For price, Garmin's Forerunner 970 is comprable at $750. The 970 has maps and has a sapphire lens for $750. If I'm spending $700 on a watch, personally I'd spend the extra $50 for the sapphire...but I'm rough on my watches.
Which is why I like the GritX line. But the value here is pretty terrible now IMO. X2 Pro is $1000. Same price as the Fenix 8, which I think is probably a better watch. Basically every review I saw for the X2pro when it came out was "really nice watch...but the pricing strategy here is very aggressive making it a poor value".
X2 is $800 in the US. Same price as the Fenix E (not sapphire though). And more expensive than any of the Forerunners (970 is $750). I think I'd take the 970 over the X2 if I was going to spend that much (and I don't want to spend that much). If the X2 was at price parity in the US vs. rest of the world, it would be a reasonable value IMO (and would make the X2 Pro kind of irrelevant IMO).
It's not clear that the Polar watches are better than similarly priced Garmin watches IMO.
Looking for price parity on similar (maybe worse?) watches vs. the brand with the highest name recognition / snob appeal in the market doesn't seem like a good strategy for the much less well known small brand to me.
Brand wise, Polar is probably more on par with Suunto, but the value is so much less with Polar.
Vertial 2 is $600, and probably comparable to the X2 (pro?). Race 2 is $500.
I would strongly prefer to buy another Grit series watch when my current watch dies. And I would also prefer to stay in the Polar eco system (unlike many I like the app vs. hate it...and I also think that staying with Polar will mean fewer connectivity issues with my H10s).
But I can't justify spending an extra $300 - $500 for a comparable watch when compared to Suunto. And if I was going to spend that much, I'd probably just get the Forerunner 970 and save the $50 over the X2.
Top Fitness Trackers on Reddit
1
Garmin
Forerunner 255 Series
86% positive of 466 users
Long battery; but wrist HR tracking is inconsistent.
Aedon2hg
