![]() ![]() ![]() I actually expected a worse final graph after regularly looking at the Charge 4 mid-workout to find, several times, its reading around 120bpm when I was amid a 160bpm-plus effort.įitbit needs to upgrade the HR hardware of its Charge series next time around, as it was shown up by the Xiaomi Smart Band 5 - a $40/£30 fitness tracker. The Fitbit Charge’s HR lag meant it only recorded an average heart rate of 131bpm, where my Wahoo chest strap (one of Fit&Well's top-rated best heart rate monitors) recorded 138bpm.įitbit’s results graph is also something of a choppy mess. It’s slow to respond to changes in effort, even when it has the cadence indicators of a run to signpost your heart rate is probably going up.ĭuring the run I changed pace a bunch of times to end up with an HR graph that looks like a choppy sea. I monitored its performance over a 5km run, an indoor bike ride and a 17km walk, and during the first two its HR results were very laggy. The Fitbit Charge 4’s heart rate sensor also disappoints. If you’re after the runner’s equivalent of an exercise computer, I find the Huawei Watch Fit (opens in new tab) better for the purpose. I get the sense that Fitbit expects most of us not to actually use the on-watch stats too much, and largely rely on the summary you get in the Fitbit app post-workout (more on that below). In the run tracker, there are nine stats to scroll through, which feels laborious if you just want to check your heart rate quickly during a run. The issue here is not so much that one metric bogarts the display, but that you can’t customize the stats allowed in. You flick between them with a screen swipe. And the rest of the screen is occupied by a single, much larger stat. ![]() There’s a tiny view of the time elapsed at the bottom, a small distance tally up top. What you see on the Fitbit Charge 4 screen when you go for a run is not customizable. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |