VO2 Max vs Fitness Classification

I checked several sources online, and they all conclude that 33 is "good" for a man aged 60+.
Having over average VO2Max, you should be given a fitness age under 60.
Have you checked what it says in the Garmin Connect phone app, or on the desktop version of Garmin Connect?

Thanks for the reply.

All 3 places show the same 33, and both the watch and phone app say this is POOR.  It's the phone app that says my fitness age is 74, neither the watch or desktop connect give a fitness age.

Looking in the manual for my Vivoactive 4S, the table at the end shows a VO2 max table that's different to the one on Garmin's website.

I'm confused as to what's a GOOD target for my age (63)?  The >35.5 listed in the watch manual, or the 33 listed on every other published table?  And what "fitness age" should this equal?

33 is in the middle of the "Fair" range for age 50-59, so I guess 55 or so could be an estimate for fitness age.
In the 40-49 age range, VO2Max of 33 would be in the "Poor" category.

Have you checked that your age is correct in your Garmin profile? 

Yes, age (from date of birth) is correct. Using Garmin's chart at https://www.garmin.com/en-US/blog/fitness/whats-a-good-vo2-max-for-me/, then a VO2 MAX classed as AVERAGE correlates to an age of about 56-57, so I don't understand why my watch connect app says I have a fitness age of 74.

Maybe a bug?

I think Garmin uses a different table for devices than the one at the blog you linked:
https://www8.garmin.com/manuals/webhelp/vivoactive4_4S/EN-US/Vivoactive_4_4S_OM_EN-US.pdf#_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d129e23608

In this ^ table, 32.3 is the threshold for "fair", for 60-something males (below 32.3 would be "poor"). It doesn't match what you see exactly, but it's a lot closer.

Here's another to link to the same table as a webpage (rather than a PDF):

www8.garmin.com/.../GUID-1FBCCD9E-19E1-4E4C-BD60-1793B5B97EB3.html

Yes, that's my point. Why does Garmin use a different VO2 MAX table for it's watches than the one they published on their blog, and the table practically every other online website uses?

Garmin should reconsider their calculations of VO2max. Today i ran a personal record on both 5k and 10k. Superproud. And Garmin? My watch tells me my VO2max today has dropped from 47 to 46. So i figure the numbers are useless anyway.

I’m not sure there is (or even should be) a correlation between running a faster time and your Garmin VO2 test score. I assumed the watch is only using your heart performance history for the test so potentially you could get a better VO2 score on a downhill run than an uphill one. Ie. It’s measuring effort rather than result. 

I think it is based on estimated running power. Elevation should be a part of the calculation, but factors like wind and surface type are probably not.