Garmin’s new 935 is currently priced at a near identical price point to Suunto’s Spartan Sport. Fix that in your mind and read on.
The Spartan Sport has pretty awesome GPS and native STRYD support. I actually use it now for running most times I go out. I’m currently also using the WHR optical version of the SPARTAN too – that has oHR enabled for swimming.
The Fenix 5 (and hence 935) needs some work on the GPS front (remember the woes of the Fenix 3 and SPARTANs when first released) and the 935 can support NOW an awesome STRYD CIQ data field. Not quite native but it will more than ‘do’.
OK the 935 will have more features NOW than the SPARTAN will have in a year’s time, probably. Some major SPARTAN feature are due out nowish eg including structured workouts, I believe.
But I would DEFINATELY prefer to wear 247 the SPARTAN 247 over the supposedly plastic 935 AT THE SAME PRICE. OK the SPORT is pants at cycling sensor support but it gives me the stuff I NEED for running and swimming. (None of us really need the fancy features anyway, I reckon 😉 ). And yes I use a cycling computer for cycling…even in triathlons. Although, yes, we do NEED basic features like structured workouts and the like. I know. I know.
But if you think about what you NEED and what you want it to look like for a given level of quality, then the Suunto is worth considering for all you round-watch lovers.
I was going to finish off by saying. “And to prove it I’m wearing my Suunto Spartan Sport WHR right now,” then I looked down and realised I was wearing a Garmin 235 aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.
“The Fenix 5 (and hence 935) needs some work on the GPS front” … not sure about that statement. The 935 has a plastic front, so it won’t be using the “exo antenna” that the Fenix has. It may have better GPS reception, along the lines of a 235 or 630… but I guess we’ll find out soon.
F5 still needs some work.
The 935 is a new Garmin
The 935 WILL almost certainly need some more work on the GPS. IMHO.
I can’t make up my mind between the Spartan Sport WHR vs the FR935. For running only, no biking and no swimming (will be swimming but no crucial tracking needed there). I’m coming from no watch at all. What should I base my choice on? What would you pick?
the looks are quite different. I’d go for the prettiest in your opinion. suunto are a bit less commonly worn.
whr has better gps
optical on either could be great or poor on you as it varies by person.
they have all the basic metrics you’d ever need
buy a footpod (eg milestone=cheap or stryd=best, discount on this site in the UK too)
should be a 10% discount with the whr on powermetercity and the code TFK10 when in stock. they have the garmin in stock too when I last checked. thank you for helping this blog.
Thanks for the quick reply… I do like the looks of the WHR better, and it seems it might be a bit easier of a face to read while running (I trail run). My only other doubt of the WHR would be weight, the FR935 sounded so nice at its lighter weight but perhaps I won’t mind the heftier WHR. But now down to the nitty gritty of the Suunto… the blue or the black???? 😉 42yo male btw, thanks!