Need help choosing: VA3 vs FR645

Hi,
regarding 1,2 and 3 I don't expect much difference between FR645 (which I own) and Vivoactive 3 (which I do not own, but I read some details about it, because I had to make same decision, FR645 or Vivo3). I assume optical heart rate sensores are not very different in those watches, if not even identical - and the processing software is most likely the same, Garmin won't develop it independently for all of their products...
What I can say for the FR645 is that I am happy with GPS, fast fix, no drops. Concerning sleep, I don't use it for that. Optical HR is okay, and dcrainmaker is a great source for information - however, for interval training, I recommend using a belt.

4. : The 645 easily gives the 3-4 days not using GPS.

5. NOT having a touchscreen was a major PRO-Forerunner argument for me. I don't like those tiny touchscreens in combination with my big, sweat-stained fingers. The FR concept of operation with 5 buttons in my eyes is very intuitive once you got used to it. And you can configure a lot of details what and how much of information you see on one screen, seperately for each activity.

6. Well, VA3 is available at a good price, yes. FR645 is somewhat more expensive, but it's worth it, in my opinion...

Now, to make a decistion FR645 vs. VA3, consider main differences:

- Touch vs. non-touch (a matter of personal taste)
- Do you play golf? VR3 supports it, FR does not.
- If you get more serious about running: FR can handle data from a foodpod or HRM-run/tri belt. This means, you can collect infomation about vertial movement of your feet, ground contact time, left-right-foot ratio of ground contact, cadence, If you consider those running details important, go for a FR. To me, it's interesting to know, not really helping me to become faster, however ;-)
- The main reason I prefered the FR over the VR3: If you often run new tracks, or run in unknows areas, on holiday, business trip, whatever, it's extremly useful to plan a route with garmin connect on the computer or have it automatically provided (you just tell GC the start point and distance, and it creates a round course for you, I love that feature!). You can upload that course to FR, and it will nicely navigate you along that track. VA3 can't do that, it will just lead you back to your starting point the same way, which is helpful if you got lost.

So, I'd make up the decision from the four points stated above.

Hope that helped a bit. Both are great watches in my opinion.

1. You need a chest strap. Optical heart rate is useless for interval, and IMO any training. If you care to actually track your heart rate, you want accuracy and it simply cannot be done with an optical sensor.
6. Have you considered a forerunner 235?

In about 2 weeks I'll have a good comparison of the VA3 and FR645 and can give you a first hand user's perspective of the tradeoffs. I've been using a VA3 for a few months and having issues with the accuracy of the barometric altimeter. Garmin is sending me an FR645 to test in our environment and see if it is more accurate given the ports are on the side instead of under the watch against the wrist. I'll have a feel for each device after doing some test activities with both running simultaneously. Stay tuned ...

IMO and after readings a lot of watch reviews, Intervals with optical HR is like measuring speed with a finger pointing to the wind. Useless.
Optical HR is ok for measuring rest HR or giving an idea on easy run, but it's mainly a gadget.

As a runner, I would never get a VA3, and the reason is the touchscreen. I used to own a 630, and the touchscreen was abysmal:
1) It would get activated in the rain, which would cause activities to be saved prematurely. I started locking my watch when it was raining.
2) It had problems with gloves (e.g. cold weather), whether or not I used gloves with touchscreen finger tips (which are not supposed to be necessary). It was bad enough that I didn't bother to ever switch data pages during long runs in cold weather.
3) The UX was bad, as the processor was slow which meant swipes were very laggy, so if I wanted the scroll 4 screens (for example), I would have to swipe and wait for the animation to finish, 4 times in a row. With button-based scrolling, I can just press DOWN 4 times as fast I want to. This is the one thing that's probably not an issue with the VA3, which surely has a much faster processor than the old 630.

Anecdotally, I still see people complaining about 1) and 2) for the VA3.

But I especially wouldn't get the VA3 because it lacks a physical lap button. With the VA3, you have to double-tap the screen to take a manual lap. As a runner who does lots of (manual) interval workouts, this is just not acceptable to me.

A touchscreen on a running watch sounds really great on paper (I was super excited when I got my 630), but in practice there are issues.

I know buttons aren't trendy these days, but when you're running hard intervals (or even a medium-effort long run), if you want to take a manual lap or scroll a data page (or two), it's so much easier with a physical button.

I’ve had both watches and if I had the choice to upgrade I would pick the FR645. The VA3 is a good introduction to the smart watch and tracking your fitness but I found it cumbersome to use the touchscreen and with only one button to press it made for difficult navigation and operation of the unit - useless in colder weather if you happen to be wearing gloves and as another person said it was a nightmare to use if it was raining.

Another point to think of is if the touchscreen was to fail out of warranty the watch would be useless - both designs have the round display which appealed to me as it actually LOOKS like a watch!

The FR645 has customisable training plans that can be added via Garmin Connect which I’ve found so useful for interval training such as a C25K program or track work if you’re at an athletics track.

Best of luck with the choice you make - if you are serious about wanting to pursue running I would purchase the FR645 and get a HRM-Run as there is running dynamics that are added data fields whe looking back on your running workouts.

Thank you very much for great comments. After MUCH consideration I decided to try Scosche RHYTHM+ armband. I had very poor experience with HR belts - since I am somewhat thin, after getting sweaty, belt had always become slippery as hell, so the signal was constantly being lost. If this doesn't work, I'm going to consider maaaybe FR645 (and if this won't work, I'll reconsider HR belt option). Speaking about FR235 - it's nice, but sadly too big for my wrist.