Sunday Runday
On this weekly column, Android Central Wearables Editor Michael Hicks talks in regards to the world of wearables, apps, and health tech associated to working and well being, in his quest to get quicker and more healthy.
The Polar Vantage M3 is the model’s first reasonably priced AMOLED watch, after the $599 Vantage V3 and $749 Grit X2 Professional first shed off the outdated MIP commonplace. The $399 M3 shares their 4th-gen Elixir OHR and dual-band GPS, which means it ought to supply dependable accuracy on par with Polar’s flagships.
I made a decision to place this to the check! Regardless of the wet climate and coming down with a chilly, I took the Polar Vantage M3 on a number of runs, lengthy walks, and a observe run over the previous couple of weeks, evaluating the outcomes towards the Garmin Fenix 8‘s dual-band GPS, the COROS HRM armband, and the Polar H10 chest strap.
After I pitted the Vantage V3 towards flagship Garmin and COROS watches, it fell a bit brief for GPS accuracy (whereas nonetheless doing higher than a GPS-only watch) and was pretty correct for HR information in comparison with a chest strap. So I used to be curious to see how the mid-range Vantage M3 would do with related {hardware}.
Seems the Polar Vantage M3 is sort of dependable for GPS, however rather less dependable for coronary heart fee accuracy in some circumstances. Nonetheless, the mid-range M3 is already making the flagship V3 look somewhat overpriced by providing the identical expertise for much less.
Polar Vantage M3 GPS accuracy
I used the Fenix 8 as a location accuracy management group as a result of Garmin’s dual-band GPS tends to guide the business for reliable ends in my exams. The mid-range COROS PACE Professional did surprisingly nicely towards it in my accuracy check earlier this month, so I had excessive hopes that the Vantage M3 might do equally nicely.
| Exercise | Polar Vantage M3 | Garmin Fenix 8 |
|---|---|---|
| 11/13 (Run) | 4.04 miles; 324W; 58 TL; 164 spm | 4.01 miles; 351W; 76 TL; 162 spm |
| 11/17 (Run) | 2.00 miles; 312W; 30 TL; 164 spm | 2.02 miles; 338W; 43 TL; 162 spm |
| 11/17 (Observe run) | 4,020m; 477W; 50 TL; 182 spm | 4,010m; 503W; 260 TL; 180 spm |
| 11/17 (Stroll) | 6.31 miles; 83 TL; 124 spm | 6.33 miles; 31 TL; 116 spm |
| 11/21 (Run) | 3.03 miles; 322W; 44 TL; 164 spm | 3.01 miles; 351W; 61 TL; 163 spm |
| 11/21 (Stroll) | 3.27 miles; 29 TL; 126 spm | 3.27 miles; 15 TL; 123 spm |
| 11/23 (Run) | 6.23 miles; 350W; 142 TL; 168 spm | 6.22 miles; 381W; 166 TL; 164 spm |
I am sorry that so a lot of my exams had been brief jogs — which are typically too brief to disclose discrepancies — or lengthy walks which can be normally too slow-paced to problem the antenna’s full talents. I did not get to go on a hike for correct elevation testing or accuracy on a tree-obscured route, both.
From what I used to be in a position to check, nevertheless, the Vantage M3 did respectably nicely, all the time falling intently throughout the similar margins because the Garmin look ahead to a future.
Picture 1 of 7
For those who look extra intently on the GPS map between the Vantage M3 (orange line) and Fenix 8 (blue) for my most up-to-date 10K run above, there are a couple of situations the place the Vantage M3 drifts barely into the road or buildings, with the identical unprompted zig-zagging and exhausting angles because the dual-frequency Suunto Race, in addition to some points with underpasses that the Fenix 8 did not encounter.
Fortunately, the Vantage M3 has fewer gaffes than Suunto and does completely nicely in regular circumstances, sticking to the right aspect of my native path. And for my observe run beneath, it did not stick completely to the primary lane, however that is one thing each watch I’ve examined struggles with; Polar’s end result is definitely among the many greatest I’ve seen amongst dual-band watches.
Whereas I could not do a correct hike, my stroll alongside one other close by path was illuminating. Within the screenshots beneath, you may see how the Vantage M3 (now the blue line) does completely nicely on the unimpeded stretches, however below tree cowl, you may see much more wavering briefly stretches the place I used to be strolling straight forward (and Garmin’s orange line is normally extra constant). My whole distance was solely two-hundredths aside, although, so most individuals will not thoughts.
Picture 1 of 4
General, I believe individuals will probably be pleased with the Vantage M3’s location accuracy, particularly for its worth. What’s maybe extra attention-grabbing is how Garmin and Polar constantly observe working energy, coaching load, and steps per minute in another way.
I am inclined to belief Garmin over Polar for steps; Garmin has gained a number of step-counting accuracy exams, and Garmin, Apple, COROS, and Fitbit all intently matched on whole steps and cadence throughout a 20-mile, four-watch check.
However I’ve seen up to now how Garmin coaching load appears to underestimate walks and overestimate observe exercises, whereas Polar separates cardio and muscle load in a manner that feels extra refined and correct to my effort degree — other than the grossly-underestimated observe load. And working energy has all the time felt like an arbitrary metric that varies by model, so I do not put a lot inventory in it.
Polar Vantage M3 HR accuracy
My Polar Vantage M3 coronary heart fee outcomes gave me whiplash. For most traditional runs, it delivered constant HR averages, if all barely beneath my exterior HRMs. However my observe run outcomes had been disappointing and my stroll information confirmed the right averages however was bizarrely wild on the graphs.
| Exercise | Polar Vantage M3 | COROS HRM or Polar H10 |
|---|---|---|
| 11/13 (Run; COROS) | 146 bpm / 155 max; 546kcal | 147 bpm / 155 max; 536kcal |
| 11/17 (Run; COROS) | 146 bpm / 157 max; 279kcal | 146 bpm / 157 max; 274kcal |
| 11/17 (Observe run; COROS) | 175 bpm / 193 max; 285kcal | 179 bpm / 190 max; 285kcal |
| 11/17 (Stroll; COROS) | 122 bpm / 146 max; 1,119kcal | 123 bpm / 146 max; 773kcal |
| 11/21 (Run; COROS) | 146 bpm / 157 max; 418kcal | 147 bpm / 157 max ; 409kcal |
| 11/21 (Stroll; COROS) | 111 bpm / 120 max; 463kcal | 111 bpm / 120 max; 372kcal |
| 11/23 (Run; Polar H10) | 168 bpm / 185 max; 954kcal | 169 bpm / 186 max; 859kcal |
For each run besides one two-mile jog, the Polar Vantage M3 was 1 bpm in need of my optical arm band or my Polar ECG. Within the two HR graphs beneath (hit the magnification button), you may see how the purple Garmin graph sits barely above the pinker Polar one at most factors, other than when my effort dips and Polar is slower to drop.
Picture 1 of 2
There’s usually a delay between wrist- and arm-based optical screens or chest straps, however a stable health watch ought to nonetheless common out to the identical end result ultimately. I might prefer to see Polar work out its algorithm to shut the small hole, however 1 bpm is not a serious concern and it is nonetheless in the appropriate ballpark.
What’s barely weirder is taking a look at my two strolling exercise charts. Polar actually struggled to remain near my fluctuating coronary heart fee for each actions, with a 5–10 bpm hole above or beneath my precise HR for sustained stretches.
Picture 1 of 2
They ended up averaging out to equivalent or shut bpm averages for 6- and 4-mile walks; so once more, maybe you will not care in regards to the distinction. However that will have been luck greater than every little thing else; I seen this 5Krunner HR accuracy check did fantastic for many runs however had bizarrely inflated HR totals for a peaceful stroll. So I am hoping that is an space the place the Polar algorithm can enhance with time.
As for my observe exercise, I can solely present a portion of the graph as a result of it in some way bought absolutely misaligned in-between lap pauses about midway by way of, so the outcomes had been needlessly complicated. This portion provides you a glimpse of what to anticipate, although: a couple of beats brief at most factors, dipping as little as 20 bpm below at one level, and overestimating my max by a couple of beats. Principally, it is far and wide.
I’ll do an unpaused observe run for my full Vantage M3 assessment, to keep away from any bizarre points with flat, skewed outcomes. However even with this incomplete check, I really feel just like the Vantage M3 might have performed significantly better in that preliminary snapshot. If I had been a severe athlete making an attempt to trace anaerobic effort, I might most likely purchase an exterior monitor to pair with my Vantage M3.
The Polar Vantage M3 holds its personal
There is a new class of AMOLED working watches that value about the identical as an Apple Watch or Pixel Watch however supply a severe leg up for coaching metrics, battery life, and accuracy.
If I had to decide on between the COROS PACE Professional ($349), Suunto Race S ($349), Polar Vantage M3 ($399), and Garmin Forerunner 265 ($449), I might have a severely powerful determination on my fingers — however I might additionally really feel like I could not go unsuitable with anybody alternative.
With the Vantage M3 particularly, I admire its light-weight and skinny design, Strava route and Komoot instructions integration, full suite of sensors like ECG and pores and skin temp, and default topo maps.
Its 7-day battery life is on the brief aspect for a working watch, and I am not the most important fan of Polar Stream as a companion app, however it would not really feel like a serious downgrade from the pricier Vantage V3, with related perks like its helpful VO2 Max and orthostatic exams and comparable accuracy. Whereas I’ve but to assessment it absolutely, the Vantage M3 seems to be extra compelling than the V3 for sheer worth.
I simply want it was somewhat extra correct for anaerobic runs or low-effort cardio.
Mid-range working excellence
Whereas the Polar Vantage M3 is cheaper than the Vantage V3, it has the identical water resistance, well being sensors, multi-band GPS, coaching and restoration software program, health exams, topographical maps, and restricted sensible instruments for $200 much less. It has a shorter battery life, a smaller show, and cheaper supplies, however it’s in any other case a extra compelling choice for many runners.
