Review on 🏃 Polar Vantage M: Cutting-Edge GPS Running & Multisport Watch with Wrist-based Heart Rate and Lightweight Design by Lamar Marshall

I have been a dedicated Polar user for many years as an athlete. I still use my Polar M400 with great success; However, I was really looking forward to getting rid of the strap after 15+ years. Below are some pros and cons I found: Pros1. I like the button layout as this is (or was) Polar's standard. So if you've used Polar, it will be much easier for you to adapt. 2. I'm not a fan of touchscreen watches. I train to practice, not to play with dials. I understand fitness enthusiasts who want a fitness/smartwatch that they can wear all the time. I probably like the button navigation process on this watch because I've gotten used to it on previous HR.3 watches. Has a clean look. Much better looking than old polar watches or space age watches. It might be a bit big for someone with thin wrists. Cons 1. The heart rate measurement is not accurate. I did some comparison tests with my Polar M400 watch with different types of training modes and the readings were erratic. HR readings were closer to belt readings when there was less distal or wrist movement. At rest, it was (mostly) close, but as I started increasing the intensity of exercise and training, the readings became inconsistent. This would NOT be a good choice for outcome-based learning.2. Calorie consumption decreased by at least 20% (less than a strap-on monitor). This is useful if heart rate measurements have been turned off. For those trying to gain or lose weight, this isn't a good choice either. I think the size of the watch is suitable for a man's wrist but may be too big for a woman's. This is of course entirely subjective as I know quite a few women who are into big watches these days. Keep in mind that most comparable watches from other competitors are similar.4. Sync and customization options are limited, even if you're using the desktop app, which offers a bit more options than setting up the Clock and Phone apps. I want to be able to lock the screen so I don't accidentally hit a button that might pause the session or something. I would like a brighter screen and a way to keep the lights on. It turns on by turning my wrist, but it's not always reliable and I don't always have to turn my wrist to want it.6. Charging is terrible. It's not a straight wall plug, it's a kind of fancy magnetic plug. The USB cable runs from the wall to a magnetic mount that easily detaches from the clock when it's not resting on the watch face. It's hard to explain, but you'll have to watch some online videos to find out. Just a side note: I did the same comparison test with the Garmin VivoActive 3 (versus the Polar M400) and it was just as bad. In fact, I got my hands on a FitBit Alta HR for fun and it actually had better readings than a Garmin or Polar; but still not accurate enough for me. In any case, I don't think they've improved this wrist-based technology any further. I had my doubts about its accuracy when it first came out, but after reading an article that said it was very accurate compared to "old strap" monitors, I decided to give it a try. I really hoped that was it; I REALLY want to give up the chest strap but not give up accuracy. Maybe much more expensive watches will do better, but I expect they'll be the same. My next step is to test the wrist strap. Much luck.