You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I've been using an old Fenix 5S (sapphire) that I inherited from my wife. It's an amazing bit of kit. Despite being used and abused for around five years, quite a few ultra marathons and countless days in the mountains it still looks almost as good as new. A bit of "patina" on the bezel but the glass is still pretty much flawless, which considering how many rocks it's been bounced off is quite remarkable.
But I'm looking to do some longer (up to 24h) events and am thinking of upgrading. I did try replacing the battery with one from ebay that promised much higher capacity, but it's not really made any difference (max of around 10h GPS use).
Following a breadcrumb trail on the 5s kind-of works but results in a few wrong turns at junctions. These probably only result in a few hundred metres off course before spotting the error but that could be a pain on a longer event, so I'll probably go for full mapping.
I love ClimbPro on my edge bike computer (probably my favourite feature) so if I'm going to change the watch I want one with that and I've generally been happy with Garmin stuff.
So, it looks like Fenix/Epix vs 955/956. I'm OK with that decision I think. The 955/956 is the plastic version of the Fenix/Epix. Cheaper, lighter, lower profile but wont look as good five years down the line.
But the Mips/AMOLED question seems bit trickier and it would be good to hear from folk who have used both.
I know how this tends to work. Everyone loves whatever they bought, but if you've tried/considered both options it would be good to hear your thoughts, particularly in the context of longer (e.g. 24h) events.
No idea what impact OLED has on battery. But I wonder if it's been introduced as they feel the need to compete with the apple watch?
All I can say is that on my Fenix 6 and Vivoactive before that, I've never felt as though it needed an OLED, especially as the auto light works well after dark. But I guess if I'd had one with OLED I'd miss it 😀
some garmins have modes where it tracks less frequently (every minute or so) to save power. That might work for a long-distance event (like the south downs way) but would be fairly rubbish at riding around a 24-hour laps.
the instinct solar has epic battery life - I've had over 24 hours out of mine, I think the newer one is slightly better. The screen is basic and I guess that helps
I had a Fenix 5X Plus (the big one) and loved it. It was starting to get a bit tired and they stopped updating the firmware stuff and some of the new gimmicks intrigued me (running power, recovery time, HRV etc.) so I opted for the Epix.
The screen is LOADS clearer in bright daylight and general use. The auto off stuff and tilt to wake works well and the battery life I am currently getting out of it is really good (this was my concern with the brighter screen) at about a week between charges with an hour of tracking per day roughly (running mainly).
I loved the Fenix but the Epix is even betterer.
Are you wearing it on your wrist on putting it on the handlebars? I believe the Garmin AMOLED watches dim the screen when on the handlebars as they don't detect a heart rate and assume they aren't being worn.
I looked at an Epix but prioritised the slimness of the watch and bought a Forerunner 255 in the end
Most advice is that Epix is best, and should be the default unless you want to save the money, need a different size, or need one of the few functions not offered (like the light on the Fenix 7s, or solar charging).
I have an Epix. I like it. My girlfriend has a Fenix 6s, and likes it. Functionally they're so similar there's nothing in it.
With my current settings I don't think I would get enough battery life to record a 24hr activity on he Epix, but with some tuning it would be ok. I can record 3x days with 6-8hr activities over a weekend on a single charge.
Had a Venu 2 Plus and the battery was good for around 7 days.
I'd be looking at the Forerunner 965 at this point over the Epic. Lighter, pretty much identical feature set, newer, with better battery life. DCR did a good comparison.
Had a Venu 2 Plus and the battery was good for around 7 days.
not whilst tracking an activity though..
We have a Venu and Vivo 4 at home, same innards, different display tech. Venu is so much more usable as a wris****ch due to the brightness of the screen and when I have to fiddle with the Vivo (son uses it for activity tracking) I’m convinced the screen or battery is knackered (it isn’t).
Some pics and analysis of the displays here https://www.wareable.com/garmin/garmin-venu-vs-garmin-vivoactive-4-7826
Further to my earlier post re what watch Im waiting for the forerunner 965 to be readily available - pretty much all the features ofthe fenix 7 but about £200 cheaper...
The 965 does look nice. Battery life (with the AMOLED screen) won’t be anywhere near as good as the fenix 7 though and that £200 saving might not look so good if it only lasts half as long. Not saying it will, but as I said at the top, I’ve been very impressed with how well the fenix sapphire has survived five fairly tough years of use. It looks as though (with a simple battery replacement) it could easily do another five. Will the plastic and gorilla glass models last as well I wonder.
Contact Garmin about a battery replacement and see how long it'll last then?
I think Garmin still claim that the battery can’t be replaced which is annoying when you see how easy it is to do. Just remove 4 screws, disconnect (and unstick) the old one and connect the new one. Five minute job.
But even when new the 5s doesn’t last long enough for a 24h event and the higher capacity battery I’ve tried didn’t work.
I might still stick with it and just take a charger, but I’m considering other options too.
fenix 6 here. best thing ever coming to this from "smart watches" for sports.
so i would pick the newest discounted fenix.
My Fenix 6 solar is 95% charged. Starting it for a run now it claims it will last 34 hours.
Dunno how accurate or optimistic that is.
Thanks for all the comments.
I guess it was always a bit unreasonable to expect to find anybody that had used both types of display for stupidly long events, but the comments were still interesting.
A lot of it will come down to individual use cases of course. I know ultra endurance folk who argue that mapping on a watch isn't really necessary as you are going that bit slower and a phone with maps will always beat a watch. So those folk prefer a watch that will last longer and if it will just beep at them to say they are off course (so they can pull out the phone) then that's enough navigation for them. Others prefer to do all the navigation on the watch and not touch the phone. Horses for courses.
AMOLED is basically just a prettier display and I guess it's just personal preference and how much you care about the reduced runtime. Plenty of people who have tried it seem to love it and say how hard it would be to go back to mips. But I have read comments from some folk who have gone back along with comments like "I don't want a phone on my wrist" or "it looks too much like a toy".
I can understand that. Before switching to the old Fenix I used to wear an apple watch. That is pretty and can do lots of cool things, which was fun for the first little while. But, in practice I don't (and don't really want to) interact with my watch that much. Mostly it is a glance to see what the time is (or the date) and then (maybe once a day) a look at some interesting stats. But for those stats to be useful the watch needs to be on so taking it off to charge (especially if you do it overnight) can mean you aren't getting the stats anyway. I actually quite like the more subdued (and always on) screen of the fenix as it looks more like a watch and less like a wrist-based computer.
It would be interesting to hear how the non-sapphire watches hold up to daily abuse. As I said, the sapphire fenix has been amazing in that regard and going back to having to worry about it getting scratched would be a big step back for me. I know you can fit screen protectors, but I find them a pain. Even if I do a decent job there is usually some annoying bubble or speck of dust and then they start to look rough after a short while and I have to decide between living with the rough look or risking making it worse by doing a bad job of replacing it.
It would be interesting to hear how the non-sapphire watches hold up to daily abuse
My mate still has his Fenix 3 with the mineral glass. Still looks good. I have a 7 Solar Sapphire and I'm impressed with battery life.
AMOLED do suffer from pixel burn, which LCD don't, which is why I went for a 7 over the Epix, plus battery life is much better.
. Even if I do a decent job there is usually some annoying bubble or speck of dust and then they start to look rough after a short while and I have to decide between living with the rough look or risking making it worse by doing a bad job of replacing it.
for phone screens I'd agree, for watches the size means its a piece of pss to get a screen protector on flawlessly.
if you want a watch for tracking with extra-long battery life, the instinct 2 is pretty hard to beat - 70 hours on max battery mode and 30 on normal (no solar)
It would be interesting to hear how the non-sapphire watches hold up to daily abuse. As I said, the sapphire fenix has been amazing in that regard and going back to having to worry about it getting scratched would be a big step back for me. I know you can fit screen protectors, but I find them a pain. Even if I do a decent job there is usually some annoying bubble or speck of dust and then they start to look rough after a short while and I have to decide between living with the rough look or risking making it worse by doing a bad job of replacing it.
The new 965 etc have slightly curved screens so aren't going to be good with a screen protector on.
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxOeZ3UJMYhEvosgF2GQ88I2TPpWlnpVSn
I have a 255 with a screen protector but the screen is slightly recessed so it sits perfectly flush. The 965 would probably be ok if you crashed and banged it against a rock/tree, but probably not. The sapphire fenix would just shrug that off.
I understand that Garmin have largely dealt with the pixel burn-in issues of the AMOLED screen with the Epix (and presumably the 925/965) employing things like pixel shifting. But I guess it's too early to say for sure whether it is totally fixed.
The curved screen on the 965 does probably make it harder to use a screen protector so it's good to hear that older models using gorilla glass are still holding up well. Still tempted to stick with sapphire though for peace of mind.