Polar Vantage V2 Accuracy When Polar initially released the Vantage V1, they were keen to stress a differentiator for them in the market was accuracy. Specifically included in that was the original Precision Prime oHR Sensor (we are now on V2) and performance of GNSS/GPS. Polar would also say that they have superior, market-leading algorithms for training load and recovery that add considerable value to their sensor data. I would probably agree with that. However, Polar's Vantage V1 was not super accurate (nor are like-for-like Garmin or Suunto products), so many vendors' physiology-based recommendations are built upon shaky foundations unless the athlete uses an accurate chest strap/arm-band and an accurate power meter. Have Polar's sensors upped their game for Polar Vantage V2? Return: Polar Vantage V2 Review The author asserts their copyright for all material below Riverside Run This was an easy, flat tarmac run building up to tempo and all HR devices agreed, except for a tiny blip by the Apple. The Polar Vantage V2 auto-pairs to other Polar heart rate devices that may be present, don't worry, I made sure that didn't happen and the Vantage V2 really did do a great job here on these flat pavements. The GNSS/GPS tracks were all fine with the Apple doing a lot of smoothing but getting the smoothing right and then all the devices having the occasional problem with the reflected signal when near buildings. The Polar Vantage V2 was perhaps the lesser of the three with a few occasions where it seemed unnecessarily wrong in open skies (image 2/6), that's over 5m of inaccuracy which just shouldn't happen especially toward the end of a long run. [gallery type="rectangular" size="medium" ids="54949,54944,54945,54946,54947,54948"] My Standard 10-Mile Run Test I was also testing the Apple Watch 6 here along with the Polar Vantage V2 and the Garmin Forerunner 745 with HRM-PRO. Just for good measure, I wore a Polar OH1+ oHR arm-band, which is normally very accurate because of the wear-position. This is more of a test run for GPS and the surface conditions are pavements and should cause no issues for the oHR of the Vantage V2. Don't worry about the red line at the start and end of the test, I run to the start of this test from home and here I had the OH1+ recording my entire workout. Let's start out with the HR track which bizarrely shows the HRM-PRO not properly sending the data from its cache. That was £120 well spent! Jeez. It should be perfect. The AW6 performed well until about 90 minutes into the proper part of the workout and then it went off to play with the fairies, there was nothing unusual about this point of the run at all. The Precision Prime Gen 2 sensor on the Vantage V2 was alright but needs to do better as there was frequent under-reading. If you had no comparison device you would never notice that as the results are believable. Turning to the GPS track, it becomes ever-more obvious that the AW6 is still smoothing the GPS track. It's cheating but virtually no-one will be able to tell. Images 2/8 and 3/8, below, show a little bit of corner-cutting by the AW6 (blue) but that's forgivable as it very quickly locks onto the correct route. The same images show the Vantage V2 (yellow)getting the curve right but then being off-track on the straighter sections #Sigh. Image 3/8 shows the Garmin Forerunner 745 correctly shows me run around a tree but all the watches here do well and that's relatively unusual for this particular GPS-hazard. Images 5-6-7/8 all show the Polar just a little too far off course for comfort and the final image shows a perfect effort by the Garmin as the other two flounder a little. [gallery type="rectangular" size="medium" ids="54288,54550,54549,54548,54547,54546,54545,54544"] I repeated the identical 10-mile test with a physically different Vantage V2 watch. This time the HR track was not quite as good, especially towards the end. V2 (first device - green), V2 (second device - yellow), Garmin 745 (red), Apple Watch 6 (blue) [gallery type="rectangular" size="medium" ids="55286,55282,55283,55284,55285"] RiverRun - 2x20, Sweetspot, sweeping, tree-lined bend Apart from the strage overestimation right at the end the V2 did a more than good enough job here with HR. The performance with the GPS track was generally good as well. I've jsut highlighted here some more obvious sections where trees/building push the track away from them, although the V2 is better than the Apple Watch 6 on this but they're pretty close. [gallery type="rectangular" size="medium" ids="55281,55277,55278,55279,55280"] Richmond Hill Octopus 8 ways up a little suburban hill. On a cold, wet and overcast day all the devices put in a good showing. Starting with the HR, the Apple Watch wasn't great (blue) but the accuracy is sufficient. On the other hand, the Polar Vantage V2 had too many peaks that were too low and troughs that were too low. These again are the kinds of errors that you might not spot without a comparison device and/or an eye permanently on the HR display. Dropping the overall average by 5bpm could easily shift the meaningful accuracy of your time-in-zone stats. I was happy with the GNSS track of all of the devices, with perhaps the only point to note was in image 3/5 where the Apple Watch where the blue line at the bottom was the outlier but correct, whereas the blue line at the top of that image was also the outlier but incorrect! It's that smoothing again folks. [gallery type="rectangular" size="medium" ids="55042,55040,55038,55039,55041"] A Different Windsor Loop This was a less travelled route for me to Windsor. There were some turns and some trees close to the roads and a few minor town centres to contend with. Nothing too challenging there, perhaps the underpasses would cause the GPS some difficulties or the at-times, bumpy roads aggravate the oHR? Let's see, Polar Vantage V2 - Glonass, Red Apple Watch 6 - Green Wahoo Bolt + HRM-PRO - Glonass, Blue [gallery type="rectangular" size="medium" ids="54886,54875,54878,54881,54879,54880,54882,54876,54877,54883,54884"] There is nothing untoward in those GPS tracks. Sometimes the lines were notably apart from each other BUT the real route was slap bang in the middle, so both were fine. I was also pleasantly surprised that all devices handled the underpasses really well. A tiny concern was with the Apple Watch 6 through roadside trees, but it was fine. Finally, the oHR tracks were pretty good with both the Apple Watch and Vantage V2 matching the HRM-PRO. I was a little surprised as on this bumpyish road I had expected some oHR errors especially as I had cranked my tyre pressure to just over an uncomfortable 100psi. Running around the block Possibly my most boring run but at the same time a useful GPS test. I've taken several devices on several variations of this route. The Polar Vantage V2 was improved and acceptable albeit with two bad moments, whereas the Garmin 745 wasn't as good as the Garmin 945. For a change, I had used Galileo with the Vantage V2 perhaps it had slightly worsened the performance over GPS+GLONASS but there is not much in it either way. Apple Watch 6 - Blue Polar Vantage V2 Precision Prime oHR, Galileo - Green Garmin 745 HRM-PRO, Glonass - Yellow Polar OH1+ - Pink Garmin 945, GLONASS - Red [gallery type="rectangular" size="medium" ids="54871,54870,54869,54868"] The heart rate track wasn't great for the Apple Watch 6 when compared to the chest strap or the armband (OH1). Even the Vantage V2 was good apart from one hiccup. d'Oyly Carte Island Loop This is a nice looped swim in the Thames and I stopped a few times en-route, a) because I had to as there were rowers and boats, and b) I wanted to see how the devices recovered from a short period fully submerged This was another 4-watch job but I was using the FORM Goggles WatchOS app (and it didn't record a good GPS track at all) and I was using the FR945 which also produced some erroneous GPS points when submerged. Consequently, the raw tracks overlaid are a mess. Here, first, is the raw data and then I fixed the FR945's errors (red) and further totally removed the FORM track (blue). This then changes the colours of the remaining lines for each device in my software in the third image...#Sigh [gallery type="thumbnails" size="medium" link="file" ids="54510,54509,54508"] Here I've circled the points in the swim where either the watches were submerged or where one produces a deviation. You can see that the Vantage is the one that slightly deviates and it seems to be at odds with the other two but remember the two Garmins both use the same smoothing ie the Polar isn't necessarily wrong. That said, the 745's track is good and when it performs strangely when submerged, I would say that is CORRECT behaviour. Garmin 745, Glonass, Green Polar Vantage V2, glonass, Red Garmin Forerunner 945, Glonass, Blue [gallery type="rectangular" size="medium" ids="54508,54507,54506,54505"] So, the Vantage V2's track is OK and acceptable but it could be improved and be a little less jagged. My swimming is straighter than that. Moving on to the Vantage V2's oHR track, here I compare it to the Apple Watch 6 and the Garmin HRM-PRO and it's clear that the new Precision Prime sensor needs work on the algorithm for OWS, it's simply reading too high. Indoor Bike Ramp Test - An easy one for oHR This is normally the kind of indoor bike test that produces a good HR track as the conditions are benign. Whilst the VV2 produced a usable track, it could have been better. A Tale of 5 Hills (with tree cover) Today took in some of the popular, challenging climbs in Surrey including Pitch Hill and Coombe. I started off tired but put in a good effort and got the heart rate up to senisible levels at times, as this chart shows The Apple Watch 6 did a great job here, an excellent job for sometimes strenuous efforts on bumpy, Surrey roads. The latest Polar Vantage V2 needs to up its game on the HR front. As far as the GPS tracks go, below, I focussed today on treecover on hills. So this is both slow-moving uphills and sometimes fairly fast downhills, both through fairly dense treecover. I guess all devices performed acceptably well here given the conditions. The Apple Watch 6 and Polar Vantage V2 were probably evenly matched and the treecover did affect both watches, throwing them off the track at times. [gallery type="rectangular" size="medium" ids="55114,55104,55105,55106,55107,55108,55109,55110,55111,55112"] Finally, all the devices do a great job of getting the altitude correct with the Apple Watch 6 being 'spot on' and the Vantage V2 just needed a good calibration at the start as it tracked the elevation changes correctly throughout the ride Summary My Polar Vantage V2 Review unit performed fairly well in accuracy tests across the triathlon sports and accuracy is improved over the first generation Vantage. Its main weakness was shown in the last few open water swims I managed this year where both HR and GPS were lacking compared to Garmin who also seem to have stepped up a notch in OWS over the last year or so. Most GPS devices tend to do well at cycling and the Vantage V2 is no different. However, the hardest tests for accuracy are when running. The Polar Vantage V2 matched what typical Garmins deliver with running and, other than an occasional wobbly with oHR, there was little to separate a normal Garmin oHR/GLONASS performance to a normal V2 oHR/GLONASS performance. I repeat a GNSS test for every running-capable watch and the V2's best score was an acceptable 75%. Return: Polar Vantage V2 Review
