Long term review

I've had my 6X Pro Solar for 11 months. For the first few months I was quite frustrated by the poor ratio of accuracy vs price, especially for WHR outside formal activity. HR is such a fundamental piece of data from which other things are calculated that for HR to be wrong casts doubt on stress measurement, body battery, resting heart rate, recovery, sleep analysis, calories burned. I was on the brink of returning it many times.

I have been disappointed that Garmin keeps adding features while ignoring the absolute fundamentals of performance monitoring 24x7. I don't care about music, payments, live tracking, dog tracking, most of the activities on offer, but bad data isn't data at all. It's just noise. Not actionable.

With that said, I now feel that these problems have mostly been addressed sufficiently if not completely. For actual exercise (other than walk/hike) I use a chest strap, power meter for cycling, Stryd for running, so the important stuff is covered like power, distance, pace, VO2 and, more or less, altitude.

On the plus side I love the rugged, durable design and build, 6X screen quality (compared to previous generations at least), battery life, connectivity, ecosystem, wealth of features, even if I don't use them all. I have never experienced problems with Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, battery drain. GPS tracks are good enough for me, better than some here experience, and as good as or better than any GPS watch I've owned before, including the Polar V800. It now pretty much all works for me and my relatively limited needs, finally.

This is my third Fenix watch (3HR and 5X+ before). I really expected a better experience with this 6th generation product at the time of purchase, already several months after release, but Garmin is Garmin. Never expect a finished product out of the box from Garmin.

Would I buy another Fenix? Yes, but I'm in no hurry as this finally seems to be a product that will last me a while to come. I'm not tied to the brand though. I would switch in time if a better competitor came along, but right now I'm satisfied enough and not seeking a replacement.

I agree with all points

I currently have the identical tactix delta. It has the same diameter as a 6x, but does not appear as large on the wrist due to the offset bezel. Subjectively, but I think the delta looks nicer. Even better in real life than in photos. Speaking of photos. That brings me to the comparisons with the bluish screen. I was able to compare several 6x myself in the shop and was able to experience the really big differences in the colors live. Not only do the colors of the different 6x differ, but also that the colors are inverted. There are watches that turn white into black and black and white when you turn them and look at them from the side. Something like that shouldn't happen again with the next model. Garmin should maintain consistently good standards. There is room for improvement here.

matej787 said:

I miss some more sports like e-bike or e-MTB, i hope Garmin will include them in next updates.

e-bike - it's not sport, it's electric scooter

eezytiger said:

I was quite frustrated by the poor ratio of accuracy vs price, especially for WHR outside formal activity

What does that even mean?  If you paid less you wouldn't be so frustrated?  I never understood why people equate price to functionality. I understand your frustration if the watch isn't working as it's supposed to but does it matter if you spent $1000 or $100?  Everything I've purchased in my lifetime I expected to work regardless of what I paid for it.  Is it for dramatic effect that people feel the need to add this? 

matej787

Regarding HR accuracy.
Take a picture of how tight you have the watch strapped. That alone is a major contribution to WHR accuracy.
In my case, accuracy is typically within 2-3bpm compared to chest Polar H10 sensor (which is widely considered as one of the most accurate on the market). But when the watch moves a bit, the readings can do waaay off, even by 20bpm.

Regarding pulse ox.
There are many cheap devices on the market clamed as beeing 'medical' but their accuracy is bad. They will usually show you values of 97-100% (so you think they are correct) when in fact your true saturation might be lower.
So, which device exactly do you have?

I have BEURER pulzni oksimeter PO 80 | Shoppster which is 100 eur. And i think it is quite correct. My late grandfather used it for his loung condition. And there was values under 90 and even under 80, and next second i take measurement or others and was instantly 98, 99,97...  And i am yearly at my doctor on preventive examination and values are from 97 to 99. So i think Garmin is wrong here.

HR accuarcy - i tried ecerything, i listen to every advice but no luck. But then was few software verisons ago a fix so i can now use wlak activity where is HR quite good. But hiking is still all over the place and i wear watch exactly the same.

OK then, so it looks you have a good reference to compare the watch to. With HR accuracy, maybe try on the other hand and see if that helps. Or use external HR sensor. If chest strap is uncomfortable for you, maybe you could try Polar OH1+ (meant to be wrapped around forearm or upper arm). It tends to be much more accurate than a wrist HR and quite close overall to a good chest strap.

Your comment indicates you are not well-informed about "e-bikes."  While there are certainly some "e-bikers" that have setups that allow them to do little if any pedaling (effectively a "scooter"), most use the "e" as a form of assist and still do plenty of pedaling.  You may agree or disagree with this kind of "assist" (different strokes), but it is certainly no less a "sport" in terms of physical exercise than, say, golf for a person using a cart rather than walking the course.