Apple Watch Ultra 2 or Garmin Genix/Epix

[patches]

 

My trusty Garmin Fenix 3 has had a good run, but the face and bezel are looking a little scratched up, the LCD screen is discolouring around the edges, and it's pretty archaic by today's smart watch standards (no built in HR monitor etc).

 

So I find myself in the market for a new, everyday, smart watch that doesn't look half bad.

 

Here are some parameters:

 

· I'm no athlete. I ride my MTB for fun on occasion. I don't gym and I don't run (although I may start).

· I'm an iPhone user (which I believe is key if the Apple Watch is to be considered. They're not that useful to the Android folk).

· I'm probably more interested in answer watch features than fitness, although I do want to improve my fitness.

· I prefer the rugged look of the Garmins. I've always thought Apple Watches look a little silly. The Ultra has made them palatable in my eyes.

· I like the idea of cellular connection without a phone, but it's not a deal breaker.

 

So after having watched about 50 reviews on the Apple Watch Ultra 2 and the upper end offerings from Garmin (Fenix 7 and Epix Gen 2 varieties), I'm left a little confused.

 

 All the above watches will have features beyond my wildest dreams, and many I'll never use, but hey that's what splurchases are about, and I'm keen to hear your thoughts!

 

[etienne_jordaan]

Suunto Vertical.

[Sandro]

You say you're more interested in watch features than fitness features so I would opt for the Apple then, you're more likely to benefit from the features than the Garmins. I'm not suprised you're confused, they're all great toys but which features will you will actually use the most should be the deciding factor. 

[patches]

Currently I'm in Aus and the Epix is on sale (like 50% off) which added to my indecision.

Prices are as follows (in Rand equiv and after claiming GST (VAT) back under the Aussie Tourist Refind Scheme):

Apple Watch Ultra 2 - R15,750

Garmin Fenix 7X Saphire Solar - R12,370

Garmin Epix Gen 2 (Saphire Black Titanium) - R9,560

Garmin Epix Gen 2 (Slate Steel) - R7,870

Noting there are Fenix Pro and Epix Pro models not listed here that are more pricey than the Apple Watch.

[patches]

1 hour ago, Sandro said:

You say you're more interested in watch features than fitness features so I would opt for the Apple then, you're more likely to benefit from the features than the Garmins. I'm not suprised you're confused, they're all great toys but which features will you will actually use the most should be the deciding factor. 

True, but the Garmins just look so much better than the Apple 😅

But like you say, the Apple's features suit my particular needs better.

And it doesn't look too shappy as an everyday watch, when paired with an aftermarket brown leather strap

Edited December 19, 2023 by patches

[Furbz]

Long and short of it.

I’ve used both Garmins and the Apple ultra.

Apple is powerful. You can make phones calls, open your garage etc etc etc

but it’s battery is rubbish. It needs to be charged so often it spends more time on the pad than on your wrist - which is painful if you are trying to track Heath data.

the Garmin’s are excellent, but not a tech watch. It does health data like no one’s business. But don’t expect it to take calls or open the garage.

imo garmin is the win for its battery life.

the apples poor battery makes it a total loose for sleep data tracking and as a normal activity tracking.

Epix vs Fenix, I tried both. The difference is battery life. 
I wear an Epix. The screen is just so much better and nicer to live with.

and the battery life is a non issue as it charges so fast that putting in on charge when I shower and get ready for bed is more than enough to keep it going.

i put mine on charge maybe once a week

[Cardio Goth]

I have the Fenix 7 Pro Sapphire Solar. I cycle and run and it has more features than I could possibly use, but they're mostly fitness-related. The battery life is incredible. I'd recommend it fully, but it's not the only watch I wear.

[Bub Marley]

If you’re not using it for fitness then go for the Apple Watch. Only negative with Apple is the battery life but the Ultra has improved this a a bit. Still nowhere near a Garmin but I think with the Ultra you can charge it every second day. Personally, i think they look sleeker than a Garmin but that’s just me.

[gerriemtb]

5 hours ago, patches said:

 

· I prefer the rugged look of the Garmins.

 

 All the above watches will have features beyond my wildest dreams

 

 

1 hour ago, patches said:

Currently I'm in Aus and the Epix is on sale (like 50% off) which added to my indecision.

Apple Watch Ultra 2 - R15,750

Garmin Epix Gen 2 (Saphire Black Titanium) - R9,560

Garmin Epix Gen 2 (Slate Steel) - R7,870

 

Maybe the answer is in the pricing?

[Jako De Wet]

A bit of a cheaper option to throw in here.

Garmin Instinct 2 Solar. It's very rugged and the tactical one I have looks pretty awesome imo.

Battery life is amazing, charges while outdoors, wrist HR and Pulse OX. It also doesn't mind a beating.

My previous Apple Watch didn't like MTB too much.

[Simon123]

Do you use an iPhone?

 

I'd go Ultra.  For the 90% of your life you're not excercising it's just such a better proposition it's laughable. The Garmin fanboi's on this site are laughable though, so they'll basically praise anything Garmin.  I tried, I couldn't.   Also dropping a watch onto a wireless charger every two or three days barely registers (I dont sleep with a watch on, I'm not a serial killer).    The built in cycling app syncs immediately with Strava and has all the screens you could want, or run the (admittedly shitty) Strava one.   But what you can do is put on very specific apps and tailor them to your use.

But the off-bike or not excercising usage is so much better.  Takes a while to get notifications to your liking, but the fact that I can do a few other things when wearing the watch, I'm happy.   I cant think how I ever tolerated a Garmin on my arm, looking back it's like a 1980's casio.

 

EDIT:  I managed to scratch up all previous watches pretty badly, but despite building and other things this one still looks mint new.   Even hitting rocks in Morzine crashing (that broke the same wrist it's on) - nothing.

Edited December 19, 2023 by Simon123
added scratch info

[Karooryder]

As many said above...

In essence, smart watches (Apple, Samsung) are fancy activity trackers. The rest are proper fitness training devices and designed as such. It's all about application.  

Personally, I rate practicality over aesthetics - for one, I cannot see myself having to charge a device other than my phone daily and my Garmin Fenix7x with its 20day+ battery life is a no-brainer.

Edited December 19, 2023 by Karooryder

[F@yino]

Geez I’d swear u we’re dating someone called Apple Watch 😲

[nonky]

7 minutes ago, Karooryder said:

As many said above...

In essence, smart watches (Apple, Samsung) are fancy activity trackers. The rest are proper fitness training devices and designed as such. It's all about application.  

Personally, I rate practicality over aesthetics - for one, I cannot see myself having to charge a device other than my phone daily and my Garmin Fenix7x with its 20day+ battery life is a no-brainer.

This statement is no longer 100% accurate.

The Quantified Scientist on YT does a bunch of comparative tests and the Ultra and Watch Series 9 outperform almost everything else on almost every metric (EXCEPT BATTERY).

The battery life can be largely addressed by switching off the "always on" screen, so it only activates when touched or when you rotate your wrist.

Unless you are an ULTRA-endurance (24hrs+) athlete, the apple watches' batteries are more than adequate.

A much bigger problem is Garmin's software, especially if you are an iPhone user. 

 

 

[IceCreamMan]

From a Garmin groupie for me it’s a no brainer. The battery life and health metrics do it for me. I have a 7x solar which I charge maybe every 10 days or 2 weeks and run and cycle maybe 5 or 6 hours a week depending. Even then it’s around 50 percent still anyway. 
 

wear it and forget it. The lil flashlight you may think is gimmicky but it’s incredibly useful. The pro versions have updated HR sensor and have the ability for ECG but not active in all countries as yet. 
 

the fact your Fenix 3 is still going is testament to the robustness of the Garmin devices. How many folks still wear Apple devices from that era? 
 

 

[patches]

2 hours ago, Simon123 said:

Do you use an iPhone?

 

I'd go Ultra.  For the 90% of your life you're not excercising it's just such a better proposition it's laughable. The Garmin fanboi's on this site are laughable though, so they'll basically praise anything Garmin.  I tried, I couldn't.   Also dropping a watch onto a wireless charger every two or three days barely registers (I dont sleep with a watch on, I'm not a serial killer).    The built in cycling app syncs immediately with Strava and has all the screens you could want, or run the (admittedly shitty) Strava one.   But what you can do is put on very specific apps and tailor them to your use.

But the off-bike or not excercising usage is so much better.  Takes a while to get notifications to your liking, but the fact that I can do a few other things when wearing the watch, I'm happy.   I cant think how I ever tolerated a Garmin on my arm, looking back it's like a 1980's casio.

 

EDIT:  I managed to scratch up all previous watches pretty badly, but despite building and other things this one still looks mint new.   Even hitting rocks in Morzine crashing (that broke the same wrist it's on) - nothing.

Yup, I use an iPhone and also don't also with a watch on, so charging nightly with my phone won't be too much of a hassle.

And in my life, make that 97% of the time I'm not exercising 😅

... so yeah, everyday functionality is probably more useful than being able to track my summit up Everest.

But as for the Garmin aesthetic... I quite like the G.I. Joe look.

I guess another pertinent question is, does the next level connectivity (basically a mini iPhone on your wrist) become a bit too much at times?