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

Is 735 a pretty stable product now?

godolphins
I'm considering a move from Vivoactive3 (pool swim issues continue and unclear how long before Garmin fixes it)

There is not much conversation in this forum -- which I see as positive sign and means not too many problems. Am I correct or are there lingering issues?

I would love to hear from someone that has both. I've done a comparison of 735 and VA3, so I know what the tradeoffs are.
But, would like to hear about:
1. overall reliability
2. screen visibility comparisons (I have older eyes :()
3. noticeable HR accuracy differences? my VA3 pretty good for everyday use but so-so for run/bike, but i guess that's the deal with most oHRM's... I have a Wahoo HRM I can use too.
  • 0
    The 735 is pretty stable. As it should be since its been on the market for almost 2 years.

    I use a VA3 for daily wear, indoor cycling, gym workouts, and yoga but my 735 is what I use for outdoor cycling, indoor and outdoor runs. I'm not a big swimmer but I did play with the 735 in the pool a couple of times this past summer and it did recognize strokes and laps pretty well. I haven't used the VA3 in the pool though.

    Overall reliability has been fine for me.

    I also have older eyes and the 735 is okay, but I much prefer the full round and higher resolution screen on the VA3.

    Optical HR performance is a person to person thing and it normally works well for for both running and cycling with both watches. There's an IQ data field that allows you to pair a HR strap with your watch as a secondary signal so that it and the optical are both recorded to the fit file. I used it with the 735 when I first got it and the 2 traces lined up almost perfectly. Unfortunately the developer never updated it to work with the VA3 so I haven't been able to test it there.
  • 0
    One thing to be aware of is that the FR735XT has and older type OHR sensor, which does not do every second measurement when not in activity.
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member
    I recently purchased a 735XT, and I was surprised at the difficulty pairing and finding ANT+ sensors before an activity. So, if you plan on using external sensors, especially a power meter on the bicycle, beware that they may not work reliably with the device.
  • 0
    I have absolutely no issues pairing ANT+ sensors. Currently I have 2 footpods, 3 heart rate straps, one bike cadence sensor and the Virb paired to my 735. All paired without issues. All work without issues. So either you're doing something wrong or you have a defective unit.
  • 0
    If I was thinking about a 735 right now, I'd probably also look at the 645. It's got the new OHR, and other things. And if you want on-watch music, you have that option.
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member
    One thing to be aware of is that the FR735XT has and older type OHR sensor, which does not do every second measurement when not in activity.


    I'm genuinely curious, has anyone demonstrated a practical difference between the newer (1s) vs older (735XT) HR sampling rate? 1s gets quoted all the time as an improvement, but is it in practise? Or is it more of a psychological thing.

    I remember when DCR's review for the F5 and 935 came out, the new daily HR graphs he showed. They pretty much looked the same as what i get on the 735T now (including long stretches where your HR hardly changes while sleeping, which is what you'd expect). There are only so many pixels you can fit on a small watch/phone screen or computer monitor; certainly not 86,400! (the number of seconds in a day)

    For those who have had both, was there any difference for RHR, calories or the like when measured with the 1s sampling?
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member
    I can't speak directly to your question because I did not have a 735XT, but I do use the 935 24/7.

    The 1second HR sample in the 935 (and other new sensor models) allows additional firstbeat feature(s), All-day stress & recovery mainly. For me, this is a valuable tool. Psychological, maybe. Physiological, most certainly.

    Does that equate to a difference in RHR or calories over the course of a day? My inclination would be no or minimally at best.