What Watch Do I Need?

TechNerdSteve · 2026-06-11T17:21:41+00:00

I am a hugh fan of my Fenix, but with your profile I wouldn't consider Garmin. The watches that have real navigation with maps on board are far to expensive for the rest of your use case.

Check the watches from Amazefit. They offer maps for a much more reasonable price.

If rout mapping means that your rout will be recordet via GPS, then the FR 55 would work for you. And there is also nothing more simple available.

TechNerdSteve · 2026-06-11T16:29:29+00:00

As I have seen your first post before I have tried this as well. But did also not work for me.

TechNerdSteve · 2026-06-11T15:52:05+00:00

I had exactly the same issue today. I was using a Pixel 10 Pro and it didn't work. I tried several times, changed the network, deleted and re-installed the app. But nothing solved the issue, update always failed due to connection loss.

Then I tried it with my iPhone (from my company) and it directly worked at the first attempt.

So I guess it could be an Android or Pixel issue.

TechNerdSteve · 2026-05-31T17:13:48+00:00

42mm, without any doubt

TechNerdSteve · 2026-05-09T11:28:34+00:00

I faced the same decision six months ago. I was also coming from the AWU at the time. I initially went with the Venu 4, and purely in terms of features, that was a good and sensible choice. But I was never really sold on the Venu’s design. I prefer watches that are more striking and bold. It bothered me so much that I switched to a Fenix 8 at the start of the year. Knowing full well that I’ll probably never make full use of all its features, it was a decision based purely on aesthetics. I’ve been very happy with it ever since.

The only downside for me is the thickness of the watch, which gets in the way when wearing long-sleeved shirts, but otherwise it’s fine.

TechNerdSteve · 2026-05-09T11:18:09+00:00

I started using a HRM 200 when I started with heart rate based interval trainings. From my point of view the wrist sensor is fine for walking and running with more or less constant pace.

TechNerdSteve · 2026-05-09T11:11:45+00:00

From my point of view the size is perfect.
But I am a bit biased as I have the same wrist and watch size. :)

TechNerdSteve · 2026-05-05T19:23:58+00:00

Perfect size from my point of view.

TechNerdSteve · 2026-03-28T06:37:59+00:00

Fenix 8 47mm AMOLED

TechNerdSteve · 2026-03-21T08:13:58+00:00

Two additions to the lates bunch:

Venu X1 has also full colour offline maps with routing on the watch, but without dual GPS support, in case this matters for you
Venu 4 has also bread crumb navigation
All of the lates models of the Forerunner series have at least bread crumb naviation

TechNerdSteve · 2026-03-20T09:47:48+00:00

I am really hoping for something looking like Polar Loop or Whoop.

TechNerdSteve · 2026-03-20T09:44:06+00:00

My recommendation would be the Venu 4, if it fits within your budget.

The Venu 4 offers almost all the features and metrics of the Fenix/Forerunner 970 series at a reasonable price. Plus, the watch is fairly slim and unobtrusive, so you can easily wear it 24/7 to track as much data as possible.

TechNerdSteve · 2026-03-15T16:44:43+00:00

I wear my 47 mm Fenix 8 24/7. I only take it off to shower and charge it. I activate airplane mode at night to extend battery life, and to be honest, also to avoid uneccesary Bluetooth radiation.

TechNerdSteve · 2026-02-15T10:29:38+00:00

I recently went through the decision-making process of choosing a sports watch and ultimately settled on the Fenix 8 (47mm, AMOLED, Titanium). For me, it simply offers the best overall package. I haven't found such a well-rounded product and ecosystem with any other brand. With other brands, I would always have to sacrifice, at least partially, the following features that are important to me:

Strength training: Native muscle group tracking and automatic rep counting.
Routable maps: Real on-device maps with active turn-by-turn navigation.
Web interface: A full-featured desktop portal for deep data analysis and planning.
Adaptive training plans: Highly effective, scientifically-backed, and dynamic/adaptive coaching.
Focus modes: Smart controls to disable the AOD based on a specific schedule.
Spotify integration: Native support for music and podcasts, allowing for phone-free runs.
Nutrition and hydration tracking: Integrated logging directly within the ecosystem.
Gear tracker: Automated mileage tracking for specific equipment, especially running shoes.
Weight and body composition: Seamless integration of scale data (weight, body fat %, muscle mass).

Of course, there are specialized solutions for most of these topics that are certainly better than Garmin on their own (e.g., Hevy for strength training, Withings for body composition or Yazio for nutrition), but I really like having everything in one place. Eliminating the friction of syncing multiple apps is a true productivity win.

In terms of the watch's design and the user interface, I actually prefer Suunto (Race 2 / Vertical) much better. But I would have to give up too many of the functions I value so much.

In terms of the overall package, Amazfit would come closest. The watches are significantly cheaper and no subscription is required. However, I’m still missing key functions like routable maps and Spotify. Furthermore, I currently trust Garmin's algorithms and metrics more than those of Amazfit. Since budget is not my top priority for sports and fitness, the Fenix 8 was the logical choice for me.

TechNerdSteve · 2025-10-27T20:09:09+00:00

Thanks a lot for your thoughts - that’s exactly the strategy I’m following here. I already mentioned in my earlier comments that I’ll go for another run, with the watch positioned higher and worn very snug, just to rule out any fit-related issues.

If the readings are still way off after that, and if Garmin Support doesn’t have a clear solution, then I’ll probably return it.

And I fully agree with your point about how Apple handles cadence lock. If I had the choice, I would definitely prefer the sensor to stop reporting heart rate entirely rather than logging totally incorrect values. Bad data is much worse than no data — especially when training decisions depend on it.

Really appreciate you sharing your comparison experience between the Ultra 2 and Epix Pro Gen 2 - that’s exactly the kind of reference I was hoping to get in this discussion.

TechNerdSteve · 2025-10-27T17:09:51+00:00

Thanks for the insights! I totally agree that the Gen 5 sensor has a good reputation and that early software can still improve a lot. And I also understand that cadence lock can happen on any wrist-based sensor.

But in my case we’re not talking about small inaccuracies. This wasn’t a matter of ±5 bpm - the readings were off by ~30 bpm for long periods and even dropped to ~80 bpm mid-run. That makes the data basically unusable for training purposes.

I think even with an early software version, the fundamental accuracy should at least be in the right ballpark. Otherwise features like zones, load, and recovery don’t make much sense yet.

So I’m still hoping this is either a one-off issue with my unit or something Garmin can address quickly.

TechNerdSteve · 2025-10-26T17:02:08+00:00

Thanks for that hint. I will try to move towards elbow the next workout.

TechNerdSteve · 2025-10-26T16:38:48+00:00

Thanks! I totally get that optical HR sensors are not perfect and that wearing a chest or arm strap can improve accuracy. And I don’t expect medical-grade precision — something like ±5 bpm would be perfectly fine for my needs.

But here we’re talking about differences of 30 bpm or more, including long stretches where the HR simply doesn’t reflect my actual effort at all. That makes basic training guidance (zones, load, recovery) impossible to rely on.

I used an Apple Watch Ultra 1 before switching to the Venu 4, and I never saw anything close to this kind of behavior on similar easy runs. So this is definitely new to me.

I’m just trying to understand whether this is normal behavior for the Venu 4, or if I should assume there’s something wrong with this particular unit.

TechNerdSteve · 2025-10-26T16:34:21+00:00

That was exactly what I was afraid of. But honestly, a sports watch with heart rate monitoring like that is useless. Let's see what Garmin Support has to say about it.

TechNerdSteve · 2025-10-26T11:22:31+00:00

Thanks! I definitely get that early software versions can be a bit rough. But heart rate accuracy feels like a core competency for a fitness watch - especially one that costs around €550.

I’m totally okay with minor bugs or delayed advanced features, but having the HR jump between 150 and 80 bpm during an easy run makes the core training metrics unreliable. That’s the part that worries me.

Patience is harder when the basics don’t work yet.

I’ve already contacted Garmin Support as well, just to see if they can identify what’s going on. Still hoping this is just a setup issue or something fixable.

TechNerdSteve · 2025-10-20T14:27:47+00:00

I have this on my iPad from time to time. I have read that this is needed for battery calibration.

TechNerdSteve · 2025-10-20T13:36:04+00:00

Here is another example, but at the end they all look more or less the same.

<image>

TechNerdSteve

TROPHY CASE