Every October there is a 10K run in a remote area near my town and I always try to take part. The pandemic weakened the disease for a few years, but it has returned with a vengeance, and last week I had to deal with it again for the second day in a row. Exactly, it was a beautiful autumn day with once again a strong turnout. Just over 600 people, many wearing bright yellow T-shirts, eventually ran the course and crossed the finish line. As an avid runner but not an elite runner, I try to choose the equipment that gives me the best opportunity of setting a personal best. On my feet I had the Nike Invincible 3, which comfortably lands on our list of the best running shoes, and on my wrists I had two of the new smartwatches 2023 has to offer: the Apple Watch Ultra 2 and the Pace 3.
I wanted to know how these two watches would perform at a real event, given their different price points and target audiences. The Apple Watch Ultra 2 is a $799 adventure beast for iPhone users who want the best wearable the company has to offer. Meanwhile, the Pace 3 is a dedicated $229 fitness watch with phenomenal battery life and an upgrade over the popular Pace 2. More importantly, both devices are equipped with a dual-frequency GPS module that provides greater accuracy when the signal is difficult to determine. In my case, the route took me through some wooded areas, but it works just as well running through a series of skyscrapers through the city. At no point during the 10K race (just over six miles for those wearing the Imperial watch) did either watch malfunction, and throughout the entire race I was able to look at both wrists and check my current pace. When it comes to user experience, the Apple Watch Ultra 2 has the edge. Launching Training Mode was as easy as pressing the action button, while ;told me to hold down the Home button to unlock the device, then press the same button twice to access the Run option, and finally a few more times to start. It also took longer to acquire a GPS signal than the Ultra 2. If you're in a group of runners jostling to cross the start line and keep up, you don't want to fumble with the smartwatch's controls. In use, the Ultra 2's larger, brighter 1.9-inch, 3,000-nit screen was easier to see and displayed more displays at once than the Corps' round 0.2-inch LCD. But the Pace 3 was more comfortable thanks to its much lighter weight (30g with a nylon strap, versus the Apple Watch's 61g) and thinner case. Corps added a touchscreen to the Pace 3 that its predecessor lacked, but it's not a smooth experience. You can use the rotating crown at the top of the watch, but sweaty fingers aside, I prefer a quick swipe to navigate the screen. This made it easier for me to check my heart rate zone with the Apple Watch Ultra 2, for example while on the move. It's worth noting that triathletes can use a single button on both devices to quickly switch legs - I didn't use this on, it's nice to see this kind of quick functionality. Both watches have the typical sensors: optical heart rate, barometer, altimeter, compass, Sp02 and temperature. The included app lets you dive into the details of your run and carefully analyze your results. As I said at the beginning, I'm not an elite runner, so I just focus on the essentials: heart rate, pace, lap times and GPS accuracy. Both watches mastered everything perfectly.
You must be logged in to post a comment.