Discovering an affordable health tracker with dependable accuracy and all the important thing options you want is a problem. On paper, the Garmin Forerunner 165 seems to be like a strong choice that prices a whole bunch lower than most Garmin watches. So after receiving my evaluate unit, I got down to see the way it compares in opposition to my two favourite low cost health trackers: The COROS PACE 3 and Fitbit Cost 6.
First, I walked 5,000 steps and ran 1,000 steps carrying all three units, whereas counting my steps with a handbook pedometer. Then I ran 5 miles to check their GPS accuracy, whereas additionally carrying a Polar H10 chest strap to guage their coronary heart fee accuracy. Lastly, I completed off with a dash exercise on a neighborhood observe to double-check GPS and coronary heart fee accuracy in additional vigorous circumstances.
Listed below are the outcomes, evaluating the Garmin Forerunner 165, COROS PACE 3, and Fitbit Cost 6 for accuracy!
Step accuracy
Once I did my authentic step-tracking accuracy check, the Garmin Forerunner 265 beat the opposite manufacturers, with the flagship COROS watch coming in third and the Fitbit Sense coming in final for accuracy. However I wasn’t certain if Garmin’s benefit would stick with a watch mannequin that prices $200 much less.
I wrote down the incidental steps for all three watches outdoors my entrance door, then tracked 5,000 steps of strolling whereas counting each step with a pedometer. I then ran one other 1,000 steps whereas counting, to see if the accuracy modified. After that, I finished monitoring every step, however I nonetheless wrote down my closing step depend for every health tracker, to see how far aside they had been.
| Variety of steps | Garmin Forerunner 165 | COROS PACE 3 | Fitbit Cost 6 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5,000 steps walked | 5,011 | 5,084 | 4,801 |
| 1,000 steps run | 1,005 | 1,007 | 1,011 |
| Whole steps | 21,603 | 21,460 | 20,809 |
Apparently, my outcomes mirrored my final check: Garmin did exceptionally properly at avoiding false-positive steps at simply 11 over estimate, in comparison with 14 final time. COROS over-estimated my depend my 84, whereas the APEX 2 Professional was 70 steps off. And as soon as once more, Fitbit considerably undercounted my steps: 199 off this time, 284 off final time.
Whereas monitoring operating, Fitbit and COROS did a lot better, which is smart as a result of the accelerometer can detect bigger motions extra simply. Garmin nonetheless gained for accuracy, although it did higher on common for strolling.
I can not inform you my precise step depend for the day, however I am inclined to consider that Garmin’s quantity remained essentially the most correct. If we assume that, then COROS’ depend (143 brief) is inside an inexpensive margin of error for such an extended distance, whereas Fitbit (794 brief) is much less forgiveably faulty.
Coronary heart fee accuracy
I wore the Polar H10 chest strap, one of the crucial standard and revered coronary heart fee screens on the market, to see how the Garmin Forerunner 165 in comparison with it in accuracy and responsiveness.
For my first five-mile run, solely the Forerunner 165 matched the Polar H10 for common coronary heart fee at 158 bpm, whereas the Fitbit Cost 6 and COROS PACE 3 got here shut at 157 bpm. The identical goes for minimal coronary heart fee, with Garmin and Polar displaying 96 bpm whereas COROS and Fitbit listed 95 bpm. As for the utmost, each Garmin and COROS registered a max coronary heart fee of 176, whereas Polar solely hit 175 and Fitbit topped at 174.
The center fee chart above reveals how the Garmin Forerunner 165 and Polar H10 evaluate immediately. As with all wrist-based optical HRM, the Forerunner 165 lags barely behind the chest strap, climbing at a slower tempo and protecting the identical coronary heart fee readings after the H10 has already begun to dip again down.
For essentially the most half, the Forerunner 165 remained inside 1–2 bpm of the chest strap always, and often corrected itself pretty shortly. It explains why they ended up with the identical common, regardless of the variations. That mentioned, it did appear to wrestle a bit in a single context: on hills, it could climb as much as the appropriate studying pretty shortly however lag by way of dropping again down on the downhills.
Trying on the different two comparability charts, it is tough to say if COROS or Fitbit are essentially higher or worse. Each manufacturers constantly underreported their coronary heart charges by about 1 bpm, which is annoying. Nonetheless, they did not have fairly as a lot issue adjusting to fast coronary heart fee adjustments.
We all know Fitbit has Google’s HR algorithm to thank for that, whereas COROS simply did job by itself.
Shifting on to the outcomes for my observe dash exercise, it is tougher to find out accuracy as a result of my Polar H10 had bizarrely deflated outcomes for about 15 seconds early on (as seen within the graph above). So, whereas the Forerunner 165 and Cost 6 (173 bpm) had been larger than the H10 and PACE 3 (172 bpm), I feel Garmin and Fitbit may be on level this time.
That half apart, the Forerunner 165 was as soon as once more shut however at all times lagging barely behind the chest strap as I switched from sprints to jogs and again. It averages out properly sufficient in my thoughts, however for those who’re somebody fixated on actual specs, you won’t be totally glad.
Trying on the competing choices, the Fitbit Cost 6 impressed me. The chart reveals the way it reacts virtually in lockstep with the Polar H10 to altering coronary heart fee information. It did learn barely low most often, however this may very well be partly as a result of I used to be carrying it larger up my wrist than regular to make room for the Forerunner 165.
The PACE 3 did adequately sufficient, however had extra points than the Forerunner 165 with lagging information. There are just a few main discrepancies the place it rose larger than it ought to have, or did not rise in any respect. That mentioned, it did hit a really affordable common HR, so I would not be too dissatisfied with the outcomes.
GPS accuracy
The Garmin Forerunner 165 does not have the dual-frequency GPS monitoring of the dearer Forerunners, however it does have an “All-Programs mode” that pulls from GPS and one other satellite tv for pc system like GLONASS or GALILEO concurrently for higher outcomes. In the meantime, the COROS PACE 3 does have top-tier dual-band monitoring, whereas the Fitbit Cost 6 solely makes use of GPS or GLONASS individually, with some assist out of your smartphone GPS for those who use “Dynamic GPS” mode.
Additionally, COROS and Garmin gave their respective operating watches an altimeter to guage elevation, one thing the Fitbit Cost 6 lacks — so it estimates based mostly on GPS information.
| Class | Garmin Forerunner 165 | COROS PACE 3 | Fitbit Cost 6 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Distance | 5.00 miles | 5.02 miles | 5.05 miles |
| Tempo | 9:01/mile | 8:59/mile | 8:46/mile |
| Ascent | 70m | 57m | 204m |
| Descent | 49m | 42m | 177m |
Garmin and COROS had been comparatively shut to 1 one other, whereas Fitbit’s GPS-only outcomes appeared to overestimate how far I might run and my tempo because of this. That particularly applies to my elevation achieve: My route had hills, however Fitbit’s estimate actually exaggerated how excessive they had been.
Trying on the precise GPS satellite tv for pc map, the Fitbit Cost 6 was predictably inaccurate, straying wildly off the trail. So, I centered as an alternative on the 2 watches that I might truly depend upon to be fairly correct: the Forerunner 165 and COROS PACE 3. Within the screenshots under, Garmin’s path is pink, whereas COROS’ route is orange.
Picture 1 of 6
In every case, Garmin “gained” the accuracy battle. I usually stayed on the appropriate facet of the trail in each instructions. In Garmin’s measurement, it confirmed me nearer to the center in each instructions, whereas COROS constantly confirmed me operating within the grass and filth alongside the trail.
Does this matter? Given the same general distance, it is laborious to say. If GPS inaccuracy of any variety frustrates you, you will need to have a look at a dearer, higher-end Garmin watch just like the Forerunner 255 or larger. I am personally glad that these outcomes are reliable in comparison with GPS-only watches.
Turning to my observe exercise, I ran my 4 laps totally within the third lane so I might evaluate the watches’ constancy in satellite tv for pc view. Garmin, COROS, and Fitbit have pink, orange, and blue traces, respectively.
With the Garmin Forerunner 165, the watch would present me within the second or third lane on curves and the start of straightaways, then drift nearer to the inside lanes over time. I think this was the watch filling in gaps in protection, pulling my precise location to the left as a result of I’d ultimately flip left. The tracked distance was precisely proper at 1,660 meters, however that is in all probability as a result of I marked myself as within the third lane within the pre-activity settings.
COROS’ observe outcomes mirrored what I famous in my authentic PACE 3 evaluate: They are not as correct as anticipated. My GPS map confirmed me means off within the right-side lanes for many of the run and chopping throughout the inside observe on one of many turns. Although its 1,658-meter consequence was correct, that is (once more) as a result of COROS has a Observe Run exercise that allows you to set a lane.
However, a minimum of the PACE 3 and Forerunner 165 had been constant of their slight inaccuracies. The Fitbit Cost 6 wavered wildly throughout lanes as if I used to be purposefully doing sidesteps (or barely drunk). The gap (1,625 meters) was extra noticeably off, even after I forgot to show it off and walked off the observe to chill down. The GPS-only monitoring and the shortage of a Observe Run exercise mode damage Fitbit’s means to compete, right here.
Deciphering the outcomes
The Garmin Forerunner 165 deserves its place among the many greatest health watches for frugal runners, proper alongside the COROS PACE 3 and Fitbit Cost 6. Every has its respective strengths, nonetheless.
The Fitbit Cost 6 has dependable coronary heart fee outcomes and does extra with that information. Garmin and COROS do help HRV information for stress and restoration, however solely the Cost 6 measures AFib each actively and passively, together with pores and skin temperature. It is the lightest and most cost-effective watch of the three — although Fitbit Premium will shut the hole after the 6-month free trial and one annual subscription — and has just a few Google app perks you will recognize, like Maps and Pockets.
The COROS PACE 3 has a implausible 24-day battery life, 38-hour GPS, and 15-hour dual-frequency GPS, crushing the 7-day Cost 6 and the 11-day Forerunner 165. The trade-off is its uninteresting MIP show, which makes it much less pleasant to take a look at in non-fitness contexts. What issues extra for runners is that it will get the complete extent of COROS’ coaching evaluation, like Coaching Load and Standing, whereas the Forerunner 165 is artificially restricted from sure metrics to upsell you to the 265.
The Garmin Forerunner 165 gained for step and GPS location accuracy, regardless of not having essentially the most correct satellite tv for pc tech that Garmin presents. It additionally held its personal for HR accuracy, even when it might have been higher. I merely want that Garmin had given the Forerunner 165 the Coaching Load metric. I could make do with out Coaching Standing or Readiness, however it’s laborious not realizing whether or not you are staying constant on exercise stage in comparison with previous weeks.
General, I am actually pleased with the outcomes for my three favourite health trackers, and really feel snug recommending the Forerunner 165 if you may make do with out the upgrades that the Forerunner 965 or 265 presents.
Inexpensive high quality
The Garmin Forerunner 165 added some main upgrades in comparison with the Forerunner 55: A revamped Elevate v4 sensor with stress information, multi-system GNSS, an AMOLED contact show, an altimeter and compass, Coaching Impact outcomes, a Morning Report, and different perks that you will recognize.
