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

FR 945 vs. F5+ questionaire

Former Member
Former Member

I have a following questionaire for those, who upgraded from F5+  to FR 945:

Is FR 945 vs. FR 935  better same worse comments
GPS accuracy
altimeter accuracy
OHR accuracy
ANT + sensors stability
BT stability
Other
  • For Fenix 5+ vs 945. I have both and still use them the 5+ is my daily and the 945 I use for ultra running. GPS track seems pretty similar on both. Both seem accurate within about 5m. Altimeters are also very similar with neither being perfectly consistent in the same routes but within an acceptable range of error of about 3%. I don't use OHR because I feel it's garbage for activity. Sitting around I'm sure it's fair. I haven't tested the 945 sensor ability like I have on the 5+. The 5+ is Rock solid with sensors. Always picks up my sensors and I've never had them dropped. This includes speed and cadence, hrm TRI, and stryd foot pod. I've only paired hrmtri with the 945 but I've had only 1 drop out but it picked it right back up. Bluetooth stability seems better in 945. I constantly get disconnection alerts throughout the day on my 5+ but I haven't noticed anything like that on the 945. I used airpods with music on the 5+ and since the lastest software update I rarely ever get drops but with the old software I used to get a few drops during every run. Battery life on the 5+ isn't close to what Garmin claims even under ideal circumstances. Which is why I got the 945. I needed something with battery life upwards of 30 hours. Sorry for the long winded response. Hope this helps.

  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 6 years ago in reply to Rayjeffr

    Thank you for a very detailed reply!

  • For me GPS+GLONASS has been slightly better than GPS or GPS+Galileo on the my F5S+. Distance is much the same but the tracks on Connect and Strava are a bit prettier. So overall I consider it a wash for now and look forward to what happens with further updates for the new chipset.

    So far the altimeter has been better than F3, F5+, and FR645. Much more consistent than the others especially with regard to temperature causing big changes when going from cool house to hot outdoors.

    I’ve mostly been using a Polar OH-1 HRM but when I’ve used the built in monitor it’s given me results that I would expect given the conditions and pace I was running. I will say that the 945’s HRM is better during the first few minutes than past watches. 24/7 HR has been on par with other Forerunners I’ve had, but better than the F5+. Weight of the Fenix is probably the bigger factor here.

    Sensor connections have been great so far, but I never had problems with others watches either.

    Bluetooth connection to my phone has flaked out a couple of times after taking the watch off the charger so that does needs to be looked at.

    Battery life has been great for me so far. I’m getting the expected amount of battery life in both smart watch and GPS modes. Getting at least a week of use between charges with 4+ hours of GPS activities and recharging at 20%-25%.

  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 6 years ago in reply to R_Tellis

    Thank you! I just do not understand well the first part about GPS. Do you observe that 945 is worse than older devices, possibly due to new GPS chipset? 

  • I’m saying that the distance measured on my normal routes is unnoticeable, but the tracks on Connect and Strava look slightly better. So if nobody told me that there was a different GPS chipset in this watch I would’ve noticed.