This summary of the video was created by an AI. It might contain some inaccuracies.
00:00:00 – 00:22:13
The video provides an in-depth comparison between two budget-friendly running and fitness watches: the Coros Pace 3 and the Garmin Forerunner 165. Both watches offer extensive features such as health tracking, running metrics, and multi-sport tracking including open water swimming.
Key distinctions include display types and battery life: the Pace 3 uses a power-efficient memory pixel transflective display, lasting up to 17 days, while the Forerunner 165 boasts a vibrant AMOLED display with up to 11 days of battery life without the always-on display. For outdoor activities, the Pace 3 stands out with a dual-frequency satellite chipset for enhanced tracking accuracy, while both models have extensive interface options and touchscreen functionality.
In terms of health and fitness functionality, both watches support numerous metrics, though the 165 offers additional features like sleep scoring, body battery energy level estimation, and contactless payments via Garmin Pay. For sports profiles, the Pace 3 includes triathlon and more outdoor recreation options, while the 165 emphasizes gym-based activities and advanced running dynamics without needing external accessories.
Both watches provide training feedback and tracking capabilities, but differ in data analysis and sensor compatibility. The 165, paired with ANT+ and Bluetooth, is noted for better integration with Android devices and music streaming services, while the Pace 3 supports more specialized sports features and offers unique functionalities like GoPro control and an "effort pace" metric.
In summary, the choice between the Pace 3 and Forerunner 165 will largely depend on needs such as preferred display type, desired battery life, specific sport features, and the importance of smartwatch functionalities like contactless payments and music streaming integration.
00:00:00
In this part of the video, the speaker compares two budget-friendly running and fitness watches: the Coros Pace 3 and the Garmin Forerunner 165. Both watches offer numerous features such as health tracking, running metrics, training feedback, and multi-sport tracking including open water swimming. The Pace 3 is priced at $229, while the basic Forerunner 165 costs $249, with an option for music capabilities at $299.
Key differences include display types: the Pace 3 uses a memory pixel transflective display, which is better for outdoor readability and power efficiency, whereas the Forerunner 165 has a vibrant AMOLED display similar to a smartphone, which consumes more power. Battery life also varies, with the Forerunner 165 offering up to 11 days without the always-on display and 4-5 days with it, while the Pace 3 can last up to 17 days. Both watches are lightweight and comfortable for running and daily wear, have resin cases, and feature strong, water-resistant glass lenses.
00:03:00
In this part of the video, the speaker compares the battery life and features of the Pace 3 and the 165 smartwatches. To ensure a fair comparison, certain settings on the Pace 3, like stress tracking and real-time heart rate tracking, need to be enabled. With these settings active, the Pace 3’s battery life is around 9 days, still impressive. For outdoor activity tracking, the Pace 3 has a dual-frequency satellite chipset, unlike the single-band chipset of the 165. Despite this, both watches perform similarly in battery life under their highest accuracy settings, with slight variations depending on the mode used.
The interface of both watches includes touchscreens and physical buttons, but they differ in configuration—five buttons on the 165 versus two buttons (one with a digital dial) on the Pace 3. Personal preference will likely dictate which interface users prefer. For smartwatch features, both support notifications for iPhone and Android, but the 165 allows quick replies to texts and calls on Android, which the Pace 3 does not. Regarding music playback, the Pace 3 supports offline playback via MP3 files transferred from a computer, while the base model of the 165 lacks music capabilities unless opting for a more expensive version with Spotify support.
00:06:00
In this part of the video, the speaker compares smartwatches focusing on features important for runners and general health monitoring. They discuss the inclusion of Amazon Music and the usability of contactless payments via Garmin Pay on the 165 model, highlighting the convenience of not needing to carry a phone or credit card. Both watches have 4 GB storage, but differ slightly in health tracking capabilities. The 165 continuously tracks heart rate and utilizes the SP2 sensor during sleep, whereas the Pace 3 SP2 sensor is used for high altitude monitoring, not during sleep. Both provide stress tracking and multiple health metrics via health snapshots. Sleep tracking capabilities are similar, with the 165 offering additional features like sleep scoring, nap tracking, and sleep recommendations. Lastly, the 165 includes a unique “body battery” function which estimates energy levels based on various factors like sleep and stress.
00:09:00
In this part of the video, the features and capabilities of Garmin’s Morning Report feature and activity tracking are discussed. Morning Report provides users with important daily information, including sleep quality, heart rate variability, recovery time, and body battery metrics. For activity tracking, both watch models track calories, steps, and floors climbed, with an altimeter included.
The video compares the two models in terms of sport profiles. Both can track common activities like running, cycling, and swimming, but the Pace 3 includes triathlon and multi-sport support, allowing seamless transitions between activities, which the 165 lacks. The Pace 3 also features more outdoor recreation profiles like skiing and snowboarding, while the 165 offers more gym-based profiles like tennis.
Regarding workout data, both models provide heart rate, calories burned, and training effect metrics. However, the Pace 3 also calculates and displays training load, including weekly training load and intensity distribution. It features an intensity trend that compares recent training load to the past six weeks, helping users ensure their training load is balanced and productive without overtraining. This metric can be used to monitor consistent training, increasing volume, or tapering before a race.
00:12:00
In this part of the video, the speaker compares two running watches regarding their tracking and sensor capabilities. Both watches can measure distance, pace, cadence, and stride length directly from the wrist, as well as running power. The model 165 additionally captures advanced running dynamics, such as vertical ratio, vertical oscillation, and ground contact time, without external accessories. Meanwhile, the pace 3 requires an external running pod to gather similar advanced metrics and offers additional features like running fitness and form tests.
Regarding sensor compatibility, both watches support external heart rate, speed, and cadence sensors. The pace 3 can connect with cycling power meters and smart bike trainers, whereas the 165 supports Garmin’s Varia radar, lights, and temperature sensors. The 165 pairs with both ANT+ and Bluetooth sensors, while the pace 3 only pairs with Bluetooth.
The pace 3 offers an “effort pace” metric, equivalent to grade-adjusted pace, helpful for running on hilly terrain. The 165 lacks this feature despite its presence in higher-end Garmin models. Unique to the pace 3 are GoPro and Insta360 camera control features and a screen mirroring function to display data on a phone.
Both watches support training plans, structured workouts, and pacing features. However, the 165’s pace Pro feature is more customizable compared to the basic virtual pacer on the pace 3.
00:15:00
In this segment of the video, the focus is on comparing pacing strategies, recovery features, and GPS accuracy between two devices. It discusses setting negative splits for a 10K run, highlighting how both devices track Heart Rate Variability (HRV) and provide a recovery time advisor. Both devices have built-in GPS, with the Pace 3 featuring a dual-band chipset for increased accuracy in challenging environments. However, the dual-band does not automatically equate to better accuracy due to other design factors. The comparison reveals minor differences between the devices in GPS tracking accuracy during various activities, including road rides, trail runs, and city runs with tall buildings. The Pace 3 occasionally shows slight inaccuracies, especially in complex environments with tight turns and tall structures.
00:18:00
In this part of the video, the narrator compares the performance of two watches, the Pace 3 and the 165, across different activities and features. Both watches showed comparable results in navigation and heart rate accuracy. The navigation capabilities include breadcrumb-style navigation without full-blown maps. For heart rate accuracy, the latest sensor was used in Pace 3, while the 165 had an older generation sensor. Both watches performed similarly during indoor cycling and running, though each had occasional inaccuracies, including cadence lock and spikes. The Pace 3 struggled with cycling due to vibrations, whereas both watches had inconsistent results during weight training, leading to a recommendation to use an external heart rate monitor for more precise data.
00:21:00
In this part of the video, the presenter compares two watches, focusing on key factors such as display preference, battery life, smartwatch features, fitness features, and accuracy. The display choice and its impact on battery life depend on personal preference. The watch named 165 offers more smartwatch features, including contactless payments and better integration with Android devices, as well as support for music streaming services. On the other hand, the P3 is cheaper for music listening but lacks streaming service integration and is limited to MP3 files. The P3 is also noted for having more sports features, such as triathlon support and comprehensive training feedback, while the 165 is generally rated higher for accuracy. The video aims to highlight these differences to help viewers make an informed choice based on their specific needs.