News Polar Insider Running Tests & Experiences

Polar Grit X Pro Titan – Accuracy, some initial thoughts

8 October 2021
tfk, the5krunner

Polar Grit X Pro Titan – Running Accuracy Polar’s new Grit X Pro Titan is even lighter than before because of the Titanium bezel. This might make a difference to the oHR and GNSS (GPS) performance for a couple of…

Please log in to see the full content on this page

There are too many industry professionals and media companies using my content without attribution and without contributing to the work I do here. This has been the case for over 5 years.

Genuine readers can create a WordPress account and log in for free to read the full text.

Industry professionals seem to want to be paid to do their jobs but want me to do mine for free. Please reciprocate at the correct tier of subscription. If you are using this site as part of your job then the correct tier is a COMMERICAL supporter. People abusing the Follower status will have their IP address banned! Sorry.

Less mainstream content, like this post, is exclusively available to any reader logged in on the free FOLLOWER tier.

This content will become fully available to anyone at some point in the future.

 

here -contribute grey
to become a subscriber

7 thoughts on “Polar Grit X Pro Titan – Accuracy, some initial thoughts”

  1. Very interesting…

    Had several runs with Vantage V2 this week, and it fared quite well compared to Forerunner 945 LTE. There was a spot or two on a 10-mile run where V2 lost the story a little bit, but similarly a spot or two from FR945. Nothing drastic in either cases. I’d certainly expect Grit X Pro to match V2 performance. I remember the original Grit X was solid. At least, where I normally run.

    If it indeed performs like Fenix… Ouch!

    1. That said, having followed the route in DCR Analyzer, while it was almost always shifted to the side by like 5-7 m, it wasn’t awfully off like F6 was several times. The total distance neatly matches Ambit, which was the best, and AW. So does heart rate, which is on par with AW and HRM Pro.

      I’m sure we gonna see some tweaks to GPS in the post-release firmware.

      Any reason FR935, which track looked pretty good, is so much shorter than Ambit?

        1. I understand the backpack. But the track looked fine, it’s just come up really short compared to others.

        2. the spreadsheet that has all the results for each device has my official figures for distance for the 935 vs the rest. they are all +/-1% of the median which is interesting in itself

  2. “The best Garmin and the best Polar are not as good as the mid-range Apple Watch at just over half the price.”

    The fact two of the biggest names in the sport watch sector haven’t taken OHRM accuracy seriously over multiple generations makes me all kinds of worried.

    And I mean seriously, because Apple has been the industry leader in wrist-based ohr for years now. Enough so that multiple apps suggest or demand you use the apple watch for measurements within their program or app.

    Not once do you see them say something like “We suggest users use Garmin’s Fenix *X* or Forerunner *xxx* for the best accuracy.” And sure, Garmin and co aren’t building tech just so some 3rd party can piggy back their breakthroughs, but people buy Garmin or Polar because they perceive them as industry leaders in all ways.

    None of these companies seemed bothered to make this work.

Comments are closed.