Grit X Pro Series

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.

Grit X2 owner here. GPS has been rock-solid for me, and wrist HR is accurate for how I train. One caution with reviews: reviewers try nearly every watch and their use case may not match yours. Treat reviews as data points, not directives. I followed the hype and bought a “market leader” Garmin; after \~18 months I went back to Polar. Why? I want enough metrics to make good decisions without the clutter. Keeping it simple is key for me, and the Grit X2 nails that.

No Polar at all?? (I use a Polar Grit X)

This is in line with my observations. Polar Precision Prime is better than Elixir (Pacer Pro better than M3, in my case). I'm glad they went for Precision Prime on the new loop band. Garmin (various watches) was almost always worse than Polar Precision Prime for me.

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.

From a quality perspective, the polar gritx2 pro is superior. I would go for Polar that has more health features and a solid science background. Good recovery tools is probably more important than too much data you won’t use anyway

I have been using Garmin, Suunto and Polar watches over the last decade. I was most satisfied with Suunto. Imho it has the best build quality and the best GPS and heart tracking. Garmin on the other hand has the best software, but I am not a fan of the hardware, plus they are pretty expensive for the higher end models. Polar is a bit in between. I stumbled upon the Trex 3 which is on sale for 145 euro atm. This is a bargain compared to the other brands. Plus it seems a bit of a crossover between sportswatch and smartwatch. I read a lot of reviews where most complaints are about software, coaching, sleeptracking, etc. Most of the reviews being pretty old and I read there are still updates upto 2027. I don't really care about sleeptracking, but some sort of coaching would be nice, because currently non of my watches so this (accurately). What I especially care for is (very) accurate GPS tracking, preferable accurate barometer and if even possible accurate heartrate tracking. I also like the smartwatch gimmicks, the long battery life and the screen. Daily tracking is a nice add on. I will use the watch on a daily basis. Other than that I'll use it for triathlon, running, swimming (both open water and pool), cycling and time trial and mountainbiking. Preferably of coarse with reliable data like strokes and stuff while swimming. I currently use a Polar Grit X which which has accurate tracking, but the software isn't all that either. Plus it hardly has smartwatch features, no amoled screen and minor issues lately. Would this Trex 3 be a step up? Or should I just cough up some more bucks and go with the big brands?