Which fitness tracker?

annk18

I am looking for a fitness tracker that will track my distance, time and pace without needing to view it on my phone. I want to be able to see it easily as I'm exercising right on the watch itself. Are there any suggestions? What are the pros and cons of each? TIA

jaymijones

I’ve had a Fitbit Charge 2, and an Apple Watch.

For the Charge 2, all that data was available, but it relied on my phone for GPS. I never trusted that it was accurate. You have to tap the watch to cycle through all the available information, which is kind of a pain during a run. I used one for two years and found it met my needs. I gave it away because it was still running great.

The Apple Watch gives me all the information you mentioned at a glance. The downside is that it’s expensive, you have to have an IPhone, and the battery life is shorter than other smart watches. I love mine though and am wondering how I ever lived without a smart watch. I’ve only had the Apple Watch for a week though. I’m sure others will have more to say.

You can also search your question, as this subject comes up often.

AnnPT77

I use my Garmin Vivoactive 3 in that way. There may be cheaper alternatives, but this one had the combination of features I personally was looking for.

The wrist-based HRM seems to give me reasonable values most of the time, but I always use a chest belt with it (connects via Ant+) for rowing, because the arm movement disrupts the contact between wrist and skin too much and throws off the HR measurement.

I can see all the workout data on the watch, can customize the wrist display activity by activity to show what I prefer, and it stores the workout stats on the watch so I can review the summary right away on the watch. When it gets back in Bluetooth range of my phone, the phone captures the workout data and uploads it to Garmin Connect (accessible via phone app, web, etc.) for longer-term storage, as well as the app offering more reports and such than the wristwatch.

I tell the watch what activity I'm doing, and it records relevant stats for that activity (some measured, some estimated). So, I get a strokes per minute estimate for rowing (on water or machine), estimated from arm movements, but it doesn't do that for cycling (for example).

I like that this model looks more like a normal watch, neither an ugly fashion bracelet, or something that would be more suitable on the wrist of an army ranger. (Nothin' against army rangers, it's just that I'm a li'l ol' lady rower. ). It's water resistant, but not mega-waterproof, so if I were a routine swimmer I'd pick a different model. It does gps tracking of workouts, but not turn by turn directions (I don't much get lost when rowing on the river ).

Any device like this just estimates calorie burn (doesn't/can't measure that). I didn't expect much on that front, as most online calculators estimate me wrong, so I wasn't surprised when this was wrong on all-day calorie burn estimates by about the same percentage.

A great source of info, in case you haven't already found it, is DC Rainmaker (https://www.dcrainmaker.com/).

Read a bit, think through features you personally need, and that will help narrow things down.

NorthCascades

annk18 wrote: »

I am looking for a fitness tracker that will track my distance, time and pace without needing to view it on my phone. I want to be able to see it easily as I'm exercising right on the watch itself. Are there any suggestions? What are the pros and cons of each? TIA

If you're a runner, buy a Garmin and be done with it. I say that because you mentioned pace as being important to you.

Keto_Vampire

Might want to check out this guy: https://www.youtube.com/user/OnwardAthletic
He does TONS of fitness tracker reviews...just search for specific models you are interested in (waaay too many options now a days)

fishgutzy

Garmin. Far more rugged than apple watch.
Apple watch is a glass dome. Too easy to shatter if one is active.
The frame on my Garmin fenix 5X is scratched. But not a mark on the sapphire glass.