Related
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Venu 2 +

Al P
over 3 years ago

Nice review from DC Rainmaker at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq4zr8oSlU0

Smaller case, same size screen. And having a speaker / mic is a big plus in my mind - that is really the only thing I miss from my former Samsung watch.

Looks like we will all be getting clickable complications, love that. 

Lastly his accuracy measurements are interesting to watch.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to Al P

    if you would use these watches over a longer time you would know that lots of this data is just vague and many times simply false and misleading. Pulse is really good, the rest is so so (floors, steps) or not usable (PulseOX and Health Snapshot)

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to rentagreement

    How would I know that? You should present data to back up that statement. Without anything to back it up, it's simply your opinion. 

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to Scott

    Yes. I have a Samsung watch, a Vivo4 and a Venu2 and have actually used these watches over a "longer time". Steps have been similar, the Samsung can't count floors in my house because the elevation gain is not enough between floors, PulseOX is best on Venu2 (as tested at doc's office), and Health Snapshot seems good to me. But to Scott's point - Ray Maker has some good testing results on his blog (https://www.dcrainmaker.com/about-me#) that say the stats are pretty good.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to Scott

    true, my opinion, based on plenty of data taken from my watches over the last months. The health snapshot gives often random data, the PulseOX, SPO2, HRV give different results in multiple snapshots taken right after each other under completely same conditions, mostly the HRV and SPO2 etc are variating in a manner that does not seem to be plausible. 

    so therefore one should be taking all of this with a grain of salt. It depends just too much on how you wear the watch, on various circumstances and all of that is just to complex than to be easily understandable, 

    If somebody is more motovated to move or do sports by wearing such a device... great! it is sure better than not doing sports or not move. But a fitness watch cant give you precise enough data, it simply cant based on a very unprecise wrist HR. 

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to rentagreement

    I think you’re wrong on the wrist HR.  Like mentioned above by AI P, the HR, steps and even sleep have been tested over and over against reliable instruments like pedometers and heart rate chest straps and have proven to be reliable.  There are numerous YouTube videos where it’s tested.  I like the Quantified Scientist tests.   I find the SP02 is a bit low on the Venu 2S but much better then the SQ though seems to do better if I press it snug against my wrist.  HRV seems to fluctuate a lot though I have read this might be normal for it to fluctuate during the day. The body battery is based a lot on sleep scores and in particular stress.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to CindiL

    The Venu2's Heart Rate masurement is indeed good and precise enough, I wrote that in my first post above. Yes, it is good, I have tested this extensively. True.

    But SPO2, HRV, PulseOX based on wrist measured HR is simply not good enough yet. The technology is not good enough still, but will be one day for sure. Same as wrist based HR measuring was way worse earlier and has really advanced a lot with the Venu2. I have not used a chestbelt HR anymore since I got the Venu2. 

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to rentagreement
    rentagreement said:
    I have not used a chestbelt HR anymore since I got the Venu2. 

    Same for me with the Forerunner 945 LTE. Both devices use the latest Garmin HR sensor, Elevate v4.

  • 0 over 3 years ago in reply to rentagreement

    Yes, agreed. Your comment about "these watches" was actually aimed at all smartwatches I take it Slight smile