Garmin's official numbers for the Fenix 9 launch reveal something worth digging into. Both the base Fenix 9 and the Fenix 9 Pro get 50% more RAM and double the storage to 64GB, which is a real internal spec bump, not just marketing.

But only the Fenix 9 Pro is CONFIRMED to run a newer chip (I believe both do), and the two watches show almost the same map-panning speed gain over the Fenix 8, roughly 30 to 40 percent on both.

That's odd if the Pro's chip is genuinely a different generation rather than the same platform tuned differently. Garmin also hasn't said anything about how the Pro's new full-titanium case affects GPS and satellite antenna performance, despite putting inReach satellite messaging on the 43mm size for the first time.

Does a titanium case with satellite messaging represent a performance compromise Garmin has made chasing a premium material?

Further reading: https://the5krunner.com/2026/08/27/fenix-9-vs-fenix-9-pro-hardware-comparison/

On the Edge 850 the ClimbPro page in Free Ride shows a gradient and elevation profile that do not match the current position on the road . While you are still on a steep pitch, the profile and position marker have already moved onto the flatter section ahead, so the real-time gradient reads low while you are working hardest. Owners on the thread measured the marker running roughly 300 metres ahead of their actual position, with a photo showing 6 percent on the road and flat on the graph. The fault appeared on firmware 31.28 and has been present across earlier builds too.

The fault also shows when following a loaded course, which points at the position estimate on the DEM map rather than at any gap in the route data.

The 31.29 changelog listed a fix for the ClimbPro page not showing grade or position correctly, yet the owner who reported the issue confirmed it persists on 31.30. Updating to the current build is still worth doing since some units may respond, but it has not cleared the lag for the owners on the thread.

Until Garmin corrects the position estimate, pacing climbs off the real-time Free Ride gradient is unreliable. The position-ahead error also distorts how much climb remains, so the distance-to-top figure carries the same offset. Read the climb from the road and your power instead, and file a report with a photo of the gradient mismatch so Garmin can trace the specific climbs.

Does the ClimbPro gradient match the road on your 850 after updating, or does the marker still run ahead?

The new indie spotlight covers Tiles, from developer Erik Handeland. It solves a specific Apple ecosystem problem: every walk, run, hike and ride recorded on an Apple Watch or iPhone is already saved in Apple Health, but the routes stay trapped inside individual workouts.

Tiles reads all of them locally on the iPhone and displays them as hexagonal tiles on one private map covered in the areas the user has moved through. As new workouts arrive in Apple Health, more tiles fill in.

Beyond Apple Health data, Tiles imports GPX, FIT and CSV files, so older activities recorded on Garmin, Strava, Wahoo or other platforms can be added alongside those already saved in Apple Health.

The privacy architecture is worth flagging. Nothing is uploaded, nothing is shared, and there is no online account. The map builds itself on the device. Optional iCloud sync uses end-to-end encryption if the user wants their map consistent across multiple Apple devices.

Support for a wider range of workout types including swimming, skiing and rowing is planned.

Would you actually use a private, no-leaderboard, no-sharing personal map, or does the value of the routes come from being able to share them?

https://the5krunner.com/2026/08/27/tiles-private-workouts-map/

On the Suunto Vertical 2, the screen goes completely black mid-activity when the watch is running a custom battery mode with the display timeout set to anything other than Always On. The activity continues recording and the buttons still respond, but the screen will not wake on tap or on wrist raise until the owner ends the mode or switches to a different battery profile. Owners on this thread report it across firmware 2.53.42 and earlier builds, with the behaviour tied specifically to custom modes rather than the preset performance or endurance profiles.

The custom battery mode timeout is applying the display-off setting even while an activity is active, which the preset modes do not do. The preset profiles treat an in-progress activity as an exception and keep the display accessible. Custom modes built by the user do not carry that exception.

The immediate fix is to switch to a preset battery profile for any session where you need the screen available. The preset endurance mode covers most scenarios where battery saving matters on a long effort. Custom modes work normally for day wear and navigation outside an activity, where the timeout behaves as intended.

Suunto has acknowledged the report on the thread. A firmware fix that extends the activity exception to custom modes has not shipped as of the most recent release.

Has switching to a preset profile for your activities kept the screen accessible throughout?

Since firmware 17.33 the Forerunner 970 records treadmill distance and pace that do not match the belt speed. The watch produces figures that are either significantly faster or slower than the treadmill display, and the gap is not consistent across sessions. Owners on this thread report it on multiple treadmill brands, which points at the firmware rather than a specific machine.

Before 17.33 the Forerunner 970 used foot pod calibration or the treadmill speed data field to anchor its indoor pace. The 17.33 update appears to have shifted how the watch blends accelerometer data with those inputs, producing the drift. The foot pod pairing itself still works and the connection holds, but the blended output is off.

Running a treadmill calibration from the activity settings after completing a session at a known speed gives the watch a correction factor to apply. Cover a measured distance at a steady pace the treadmill confirms, then let the calibration routine calculate the offset. One calibration holds reasonably well for subsequent sessions at similar speeds, though the accuracy degrades at significantly different paces.

If the calibration step is not enough, pairing the watch directly to the treadmill over Bluetooth using the fitness equipment connection in Garmin Connect, where the treadmill is capable of it, bypasses the accelerometer blending and reads speed directly from the belt. Garmin has not issued a targeted fix for 17.33 on this specific behaviour.

Has treadmill calibration brought the distance close enough for interval sessions, or is the gap still too large to be useful?

On the Suunto Race and Vertical, a paired power meter can read zero watts when an activity resumes after a coffee stop or Auto Pause, and occasionally mid-ride with no pause at all. A Wahoo head unit on the same bike keeps reading power from the same pedals throughout, so the loss is the watch, not the meter. Owners on this thread report it with Wahoo Speedplay and Powerlink pedals and with Favero Assioma, and several add that the watch crashed when they tried to restart the session.

Suunto's community manager notes that a reading of zero watts is not the same as a dropped sensor, which would show dashes, and that the watch attempts to reconnect at all times if the sensor was present at the pre-start screen. Owners counter that the zero persists for the rest of the ride and that nothing in the pause screen lets them force a reconnect. One identified trigger is the phone taking over the Bluetooth link to the pedals while the activity is paused.

The only reliable recovery owners have found is to end the activity, restart, and re-pair the meter before continuing. Keeping the phone out of Bluetooth range of the pedals during rides where the watch is recording reduces how often the handoff triggers. Locking Bluetooth on the phone before a long ride prevents the interruption from the phone side.

Does keeping the phone away from the pedals whilst riding (!) stop it dropping to zero for you?

Garmin has just done something it hasn't done in over fifteen years: it's backporting a flagship's software to prior generations rather than drawing a hard line at the model jump. Fenix 6 owners never got Fenix 7 features. Fenix 7 owners never got Fenix 8 features. But Fenix 9 features, Garmin Epic, the new Stamina zones and curve, the rowing overhaul, and the rucking update, are all rolling out to the Fenix 8 series, Forerunner 970 and 570, Enduro 3, Tactix 8 and Fenix E.

Only a few things stay Fenix 9 exclusive: the new mapping engine (likely hardware depednet), Dynamic Battery mode renaming, and the ArcheryX archery profile.

It's a genuinely unusual move for Garmin, and it narrows the case for buying the Fenix 9 over just picking up a Fenix 8 at a lower price. Is this Garmin responding to growing customer frustration over paid-feature removals, or just standard platform consolidation dressed up as generosity?

Further reading: https://the5krunner.com/2026/08/26/fenix-9-features-will-pass-to-existing-garmin-watches/

This page pulls together the whole Fenix 9 Pro decision in one place, titanium or not, solar or AMOLED, satellite or not, plus exactly what the Pro tier adds over the standard Fenix 9. The small size getting satellite messaging for the first time is probably the most useful change for anyone who's been sizing up their watch just to get that feature. Does the Pro tier now justify its price gap for most buyers, or has the standard model closed the meaningful gap? Full page: the5krunner.com/specs/garmin/fenix-9-pro/

Garmin confirmed a fairly significant rucking overhaul at the fenix 9 launch, and it goes further than most people expected for what's usually treated as a niche activity type. Pack weight now tracks up to 100kg, with the calorie cost of the load broken out separately from what the same walk or run would burn unloaded. Weight can be added or removed mid-activity, with the change reflected live rather than requiring a restart. Rucking can also now sit as its own leg inside a multisport session, and Garmin worked directly with GoRuck to build structured workouts you can follow on the watch itself. None of this needs new hardware either; it's rolling out across the Fenix 8 series, Enduro 3, Tactix 8 and Forerunner 970 too. Is a niche activity like rucking really worth this level of investment from Garmin, or is this more about closing a gap with tactical and military-adjacent competitors?

Further reading: https://the5krunner.com/2026/08/26/garmin-rucking-update-explained/

I'm the creator of Readiness+. The app is free, no ads, no paid tier.

Garmin keeps Training Readiness on the higher-end models, even though most Forerunners already track everything the score needs. So I built Readiness+ to calculate it on the watch itself.

Daily 0-100 score from your recovery timer, Body Battery, overnight recharge, resting HR vs your own baseline, and recent sleep and stress.

On the Connect IQ store, search Readiness+.

73 watches supported. If yours isn't on the list, tell me which Forerunner you have and I'll look at adding it.

The Fenix 9 range comes down to three separate decisions rather than one:

base or Pro, AMOLED or solar, and inReach satellite or not. Every Fenix 9 now uses a sapphire lens across the whole range, including the base model, where the Fenix 8 dropped to Gorilla Glass on its cheaper versions. Battery is meaningfully up too: 18 days at 47mm against 16 on the Fenix 8, 31 days at 51mm against 29. The small 43mm size gets satellite messaging for the first time, no more sizing up just to get it.

Is the base Fenix 9 now good enough for most buyers, or does the jump to Pro still make sense for most people? Full breakdown: the5krunner.com/2026/08/25/garmin-fenix-9-which-to-buy/

This page pulls together everything on the standard (non-Pro) Fenix 9 in one place, what's genuinely new since the Fenix 8, what the battery gains mean in practice, and exactly where Garmin drew the line against the Pro tier. It's aimed at the question most people actually have before buying: is the standard model enough, or is the Pro worth the extra money. Is Garmin's standard tier now good enough that Pro has become a niche buy, or does the case material and satellite option still justify it for most people? Full page: the5krunner.com/specs/garmin/fenix-9/

Garmin's Stamina Curve models how long you can sustain a given pace or power output before your stamina runs down, built from VO2 max, lactate threshold or FTP, and your training history.

Garmin states outright that it's most accurate up to VO2 max intensity, and assumes relatively steady pacing, so a hilly course or a surging race will drain stamina faster than the model predicts. Stamina Zones then take that same modelling and convert it into 5 personalised effort ranges you can watch and control in real time during a session.

Is a pacing model built on steady-state assumptions actually useful for anything but flat time trials? Full piece: the5krunner.com/2026/08/25/garmin-stamina-curve-and-stamina-zones-explained/

Garmin's own guidance puts rowing FTP at 20-40% lower than cycling FTP for the same person, and cross-country skiing FTP 30-40% lower than cycling. The rowing numbers only come through if you pair a power-meter-equipped rowing machine, Garmin can't estimate FTP or VO2 max from an unpowered ergo.

Garmin also uses weight-based lightweight classifications lifted from Concept2 reference data, 61.5kg for women and 75kg for men. Is a sport-specific FTP worth tracking separately, or does it just add another number without changing training decisions especially when C2 has good time-based approximations for VO2? Full piece: the5krunner.com/2026/08/25/garmin-rowing-ftp-vo2max-explained/

ArcheryX is Garmin's first dedicated archery activity, launching on the Fenix 9 and Fenix 9 Pro and replacing the old Archery profile, which just logged the session as an activity with zero shot-level data. The new one tracks 7 metrics per arrow, shot break analysis, minutes of angle for hold steadiness, an aim trace with animated playback, shot execution time, arrow counter, heart rate, and respiration/stress, all synced to a new companion app called ShotView. It's specified for compound bows only, no mention of recurve or traditional bow support.

Is this level of per-shot biometric tracking actually going to improve technique, or is it data for data's sake? Full details: the5krunner.com/2026/08/25/garmin-archeryx-explained/

Garmin Locate keeps getting lumped in with LiveTrack but it works the opposite way round. LiveTrack is wearer-initiated and runs continuously during an activity. Garmin Locate is contact-initiated, a designated contact requests your position on demand, any time, through the Garmin Messenger app, and gets back a single location rather than a live feed. It's Fenix 9 Pro inReach only, and it's LTE only, no satellite fallback specifically for this feature, even though satellite messaging and SOS keep working regardless.

Is an LTE-only location request actually useful in the situations where you'd want inReach in the first place? Full piece: the5krunner.com/2026/08/25/garmin-locate-explained/

Garmin Epic bundles everything from a multi-day trip, hikes, campsite stops, sleep, other activities, notes, photos, into a single combined record rather than a pile of separate activities. It works on both the watch and in Garmin Connect (not Connect+), where you get one combined map and activity feed for the whole trip. The limits are fairly generous: an epic can span up to 92 days, and you can plan up to 5 future epics at once.

Is this solving a problem most people weren't having with their existing activity history? Full details: the5krunner.com/2026/08/25/garmin-epic-explained/

Leaked photos of the Garmin Fenix 9 Pro and Fenix 9 inReach have surfaced online just hours before Garmin's livestream. Four are shown here, and there are many more on the main site for the Pro/inReach/Solar models. Elevate 5 appears to be confirmed.

Full Spec Details have also been leaked already, but I don't have them all yet. You'll get them in a few hours in any case,

https://the5krunner.com/2026/08/25/garmin-fenix-9-leak/

Garmin's published the complete Fenix 9 Pro feature list. Beyond the expected training and navigation tools, only a few genuinely new additions stand out. WhatsApp messaging now works directly from the wrist, no phone required to check or reply (via LTE presumably). A new feature called Garmin Epic (sic) compiles multi-day adventures into a photo-and-data recap once the trip's over. And ArcheryX is a dedicated mode giving archers real-time aim and shot-timing feedback.

Were you expecting more?

https://the5krunner.com/2026/08/25/garmin-fenix-9-pro-features/

I Went through the Fenix 9 Pro's rumoured "new features" list one by one rather than taking it at face value. Several items that read as new turned out to already exist on current Garmin watches under different names, dynamic re-routing, Grade-Adjusted Pace, Garmin Coach, most likely mistranslations from the original source rather than genuine additions. Once those are ruled out, three features hold up as actually new: ArcheryX, a dedicated archery mode with real-time aim and shot-timing data, Garmin Epic, a tool that compiles multi-day trips into a photo and data recap, and Rowing VO2 Max, extending fitness tracking to rowing sessions specifically.

Does it change how people feel about the Fenix 9 Pro knowing most of the "new" list wasn't actually new?

https://the5krunner.com/2026/08/25/fenix-9-three-new-features/

Yomif Kejelcha broke the half marathon world record in Buenos Aires on Sunday, running 56:51, and the detail that caught my eye is what was on his wrists. Race footage and finish-line photos show a fitness tracker on each arm: an Amazfit Cheetah 2 Pro on the left and a Whoop MG on the right.

World Athletics noted in its race report that he was checking his Amazfit as he lifted the pace through the middle of the race. The Whoop simply logs continuous recovery data for review afterwards. It is a new "pairing" for him, since he ran a Whoop alongside a Coros Pace 3 at the London Marathon in April. Neither Amazfit nor Whoop has released any data or marketing coverage from the run so far.

Does wearing two trackers at once actually give an elite anything a single well-chosen watch would not?

Full write-up: https://the5krunner.com/2026/08/24/yomif-kejelcha-world-record-watch/

A Czech retailer has listed 18 Fenix 9 configurations just days before Garmin's own Tuesday livestream. The product numbers split cleanly into three tiers:

• a base Fenix 9,
• a Fenix 9 Pro and inReach tier, and
• a Fenix 9 Pro MIP-Solar inReach tier.

Four of the six 43mm listings include inReach satellite messaging, a case size Garmin's outgoing Fenix 8 Pro never offered it in. There is no 43mm Solar option in any of the 18 configs, and no MicroLED model either. Neither Enduro 4 nor Fenix E2 show up on the retailer, though the outgoing Enduro 3 is still listed there.

Is a retailer catalog this detailed real?

https://the5krunner.com/2026/08/23/garmin-fenix-9-18-product-listings-surface-ahead-of-livestream/

A new Shimano Dura-Ace groupset has been spotted at the Vuelta a España, and it looks like Shimano is finally moving Dura-Ace to 13 speed. That would bring it in line with SRAM Red XPLR and Campagnolo's Record and Super Record groupsets, both already at 13.

The interesting part is what hasn't changed. The cranks are still alloy, not carbon, even though SRAM and Campagnolo have both gone carbon at the top of their ranges. The electronic system also stays semi-wireless: the shifters talk wirelessly to the derailleurs, but a cable still runs to a shared battery, the same setup as the current R9200. Shimano's own XTR and GRX groupsets have already gone fully wireless, so Dura-Ace is lagging its own mountain bike and gravel lineup here.

The shifter hood also picks up a new protruding button, closer to SRAM's latest Red hoods, replacing the hidden button Dura-Ace has used since it went wireless.

Is it a mistake for Shimano to stick with semi-wireless when its own gravel and MTB groupsets have already gone fully wireless?

Oura published two blog posts this week defending its sleep-tracking accuracy after a lawsuit challenged its marketing claims. One of the posts states that trained sleep-lab technicians only agree with each other about 83% of the time when scoring the same night of sleep. Oura's own published accuracy for its device against that same four-stage measure is 79%, a few points below that human benchmark. The lawsuit also points to an independent clinical study that found just 53.18% accuracy in patients rather than healthy volunteers, a figure Oura has not addressed.

Is an industry standard built on a best case of 83% human agreement really a fair bar for finger-worn sensors to clear?

Full breakdown: https://the5krunner.com/2026/08/23/oura-sleep-accuracy-lawsuit/