Vivoactive 3 is not multi sport. So, if you are still using it for triathlons, I would ditch it.

I had a 735XT, and it is fantastic. It does not have a barometric altimeter, so it gets altitude from GPS. This is not as accurate as barometric, but most sites have altitude correction, so that is moot.

I have a 945 now, and it is great, but it is top-end expensive. The 935 is a great middle ground while Garmin is still selling them.

Thanks for the info I'll check it out.

Steve

I have the 735xt. First year, it managed my full IM (13 hours). Last year, battery died during my IM run (after 11 hours). Now, I'm worried it won't even last my next half IM (6 hours).

I love the watch though, in terms of size and usage - anyone know what's the next generation of 735xt?

---

My race site: https://racesandplaces.wixsite.com/racesandplaces

I moved from a 910 about a year ago.
Similarly I don't need the cricket score or the top 40 billboard on my watch.

As others... 735 good but has distinctly limited battery. Think garmin cite 14 hrs but obvs depends on use. A near new one gave up after a bit over 12hrs on a buddy last year on a race.
That will worsen more over time.


Are you locked into Garmin for the replacement ?

I went for a Polar Vantage.
I got the cheaper 'M' which uses gps for altitude. Does more than what I wanted it for and a lot cheaper than Garmin.
Pretty happy with it, 1 year in.

The higher spec V has barometric so more accurate.
The M battery is cited as 30 hrs. Longest Ive been out using it was about 14.5hrs and it was still circa 50% battery.
The V has a bigger battery for 40 hrs cited.

As with all watches a HR strap is mre accurate than the built in wrist optical. One thing to note for the Polar is that its a bluetooth hr vai a strap, not Ant+. So your Garmin hr monitor wont talk to it.
I use a Wahoo TickR HR sensor as its got both Bluetooth and Ant+ output so can feed both the watch and also the garmin Edge when on the bike.

Thanks jigsy.

Unfortunately I can no longer complete an ironman as quickly as I once could. It seems like a good deal if I never made it back to an iron distance race.

Steve

Sounds like everything I would need in a watch without the cricket scores or latest political scandals. I'll spend some time checking it out. I'm not married to garmin, but because I used them for many years there is not a big learning curve. Will the polar do multi sport or can you can it as splits? Also will it read your HR when you're swimming?

Thanks for the ideas.

Steve

Hi

Yes the Polar Vantage has a multi sport mode. And can be set up / reconfigured for various permutations (e.g. can set run-bike-run for duathlon).

As you may expect some of the putton push sequences are different to the 910.
There are 1 or 2 data fields I'd like that are not there unlike the garmin 910 (i used to set a 'last lap time' as one of my screen fields on the 910 - not there on the polar other than for a few seconds when you press the lap button (it DOES record the lap and can see on the web site / app afterwards). But has some other things that I do like.

One other point - in case this is an issue for you - most of the sports settings are set up via the Polar Flow App. Eg what screens, what sports (up to 20 can be on the watch from a large choice), what parameters to display per screen etc. That initial set up is not via the buttons on the actual watch as you would on a garmin.
Once that's set up however and sync'd (using bluetooth) between app and watch, then you don't need the app other than to download.
I find the polar Flow app and web site better for what I want than the Garmin Connect.



Yes it gives HR using the optical wrist sensor on the back of the watch when swimming. (It does work reading / recording. I've never particularly checked the accuracy - but defo does work, with the usual caveats to optical sensors being slower to react to changes than chest straps).
(I'll pay more attention when I swim this eve and reply again with amy additional thoughts).

fenix 5 is a good budget choice. long batterie life.

IMHO, if your budget can handle it, don't over think it and just get the Garmin 935 or 945 and be done with it. It'll do everything you need and you won't need to wonder 'should I have gotten......'....


Cheers

I have a 935 and have no complaints. You can't get HR when swimming without an extra band, but I don't mind. I've never loved HR bands in general so I'm glad to have the optical scanner even if it's not 100% perfect.

If you are interested in heart rate while swimming, the 945 is capable of giving you wrist based heart rate in the water (but is more expensive).

Thanks to all replying. HR is not at all crucial while swimming. I used it many years ago on my open water swims. Never while I was swimming but when I reviewed the workout afterwards. It helped me get a better sense of how hard I was really swimming. I would review it after races to get a sense if I went out too hard. As I've gotten older I don't seem to have that problem. I'm planning on spending a little time over the next couple of days and see if I can narrow this down a little better.

Thanks again to all.

Steve

If you’d like to use the watch for multi sports, definitely return the Vivoactive. I had one for a few months but the data was all wrong ... it is more of an activity watch than an actual sports watch.

Another brand to consider is Suunto which is what I’ve been using for years ... I’ve got the Suunto 9, which has a Baro model if you want accurate altitude readings (in hindsight I wish I got this model as I run on trails often). I use it with a HRM belt as I haven’t found the wrist HR to be very accurate. I’m not sure about what the Garmins are like.

Below is a website with a description of the different Suunto models. I don’t know if you have a budget but the high end Suuntos and Garmins are nearly double or triple the cost of a Vivoactive. Also I’ve got a friend who uses the 910 and still loves it, so at the end of the day nothing wrong with keeping an old watch as long as it’s working.

https://www.sport-passion.fr/...n-suunto-3-5-7-9.php

It works fine for pool swimming and running. If you don't have a powermeter it works fine for cycling too, although it is pretty basic.
Basically open water stuff is the only serious gap.

---

Next races on the schedule: none at the moment

I used it for pool swimming and it consistently added extra laps in my swim .. I returned it (nearly ready to throw it in the bin) when during one session it recorded double the number of total laps that I’d actually done!

really? i swim 3-4 times a week with it for the last 6 months - never a glitch. i do have vivoactive 3 music but i don't think it matters.

---

Next races on the schedule: none at the moment

Mine goes the other way and it doesn't register kick sets and some drills so I am always swimming more than the watch says I am.

You can find great deals on used Fenix 5's and Garmin 935s. Either of those will give you all the data you will ever need. My preference is the Fenix 5 because I think it looks better than the 935 but functionality-wise they are the same.

---

------------------
http://dontletitdefeatyou.blogspot.com

It will track everything. But, it does not have a profile that combines all three disciplines into a single activity. That is what I meant by multisport... if you wanted to time a triathlon, you would have to manually time and change mode for each part of the race.

Right. But it also will not track open water swim as a separate activity type.

---

Next races on the schedule: none at the moment

I'm an old guy and I love my vivoactive HR. Not sure how the HR differs than the 3 model but the HR model has served me well for all my pool swims, all my runs, and my gravel rides. It won't record open water swims which is fine by me and it doesn't do power/cadence on my tri bike in which case I use my 520. What I really like about the HR is that I wear it as my everyday watch so it's always available to me for activities and it also records steps, HR, and sleep data <- which us old guys need to track too!

I picked up a vivoactive3 somewhere around last November.

I've only used it for running (gps & heart rate), treadmill (heart rate and manual distance) and on the trainer just to see how it does (heart rate & speed sensor only, it doesn't do power). For running it has worked pretty well, and I'd say I'm satisfied with the purchase because this is my primary use case -- though it's my first gps watch so my only point of comparison is to using gps on a small phone I'd strap to my arm and using a running app like endomondo. Outside of the first couple times I used it and was still figuring it out, it's always dialed in the gps signal quickly so if I hit the button to start a run as I step out my front door, I am locked in and it's ready to go by the time I hit the gate about 20 feet later. The autopause feature is so-so. It generally pauses about five seconds after I stop moving, and then it takes about five seconds or so of running for it to start timing again. I don't know if it adjusts later on to fill in that small gap from when I start and then feel it buzz, but I really don't worry about that. There's probably a setting for that which I could play with but haven't.

Only weird thing I've hit is after a treadmill run, the distance can be adjusted during the save process, but I noticed the corrected distance didn't upload to linked Strava account (think it was Strava and not Garmin Connect). I haven't fiddled around with that to see if I can fix that issue.

Heart rate tracking is a mixed bag. During a formal activity (run or bike), I think it's pretty accurate, and that's the most important to me by far. I compare it to the Garmin heart rate strap I wear on the trainer, and the two track very closely, within a couple of beats +/- most of the time. When just wearing it during the day, I think the heart rate readings are far less accurate. I'll look down and it might show my pulse at 50, 75 or 100bpm when in actuality I can measure it at 45 at that moment. Usually when I check it like that, it will slowly start to dial in on where my pulse actually is, but not always. Sometimes it's right on the mark, and when at rest it can show readings that are lower than anything I've ever measured at my wrist by about 7 bpm (31bpm on watch vs. confirmed low of 38bpm). However the RHR stats that it tracks over time is adjusted and is probably within a couple beats of what I'd expect. It also provides an estimate of VO2 max, and I've read that the Garmin algorithm for that number might give you within 5% of your actual, though I have no way to verify that claim and I'm not sure what to do with a more accurate number if I had one.

It seems to hold a charge well enough, so that I've never had it be an inconvenience to me needing a charge when I was wearing it. Especially so after I figured out it can be turned off when not wearing it at night. When I connect it to the laptop to sync data, it charges surprisingly quickly off of the USB connector. As others have noted, it's probably not intended as your go-to device for use during a triathlon.

Don't wear it in the shower, it will go nuts when the water hits the watch face. Step count feature is entertaining. The little trophies that it flashes when you reach some goal (stairs, steps, etc.) are great, but you can disable that if you don't want to see them. A couple of times I've suddenly felt the watch buzzing and got a trophy while doing my business on the toilet, and had a pretty good laugh at the timing.

Coros Apex. So underrated.
Absolutely solid watch.
Frequent and easy firmware updates through a superb mobile app.

I went from 910 -> 920 -> 935.

The 910 was great, but the 920 was a big leap forward. I loved it. It was my big square tank.

I just recently sold the 920 and bought a 935. I love it. It isn't as big of a leap as 910-920 was, but it's nice. I didn't think I'd like the round face however it has grown on me. I like how it fits in a little more as a watch. Like you, I could care less about steps. The sleep tracking is not very good.