![]() ![]() The strap rubs against the skin since you’re supposed to wear it reasonably tightly for the benefit of the built-in heart-rate monitor, and the rubber just doesn’t feel that comfortable. In fact, the whole thing feels less comfortable than other trackers I’ve worn. ![]() This does come at a cost, though: if you take it off too quickly, you’ll find trapped skin an occupational hazard until you get used to unthreading the loop first. The strap for the Fitbit Charge HR is actually a lot more secure than that of the Flex, including a traditional watch strap-style buckle to hold it in place on the wrist. You could possibly remove it with a bespoke tiny screwdriver, but it’s obviously not what the company intended. That means that the strap colour you buy is the colour you’re stuck with, so choose carefully. While the Flex, Blaze and Alta all allow the Fitbit’s “brain” to be removed for charging, the device here is built into the strap. Unlike other Fitbit models, the Fitbit Charge HR cannot be customised. It’s certainly advantageous to offer both, and if there’s one thing that living with Android Wear has taught me, it’s that touchscreens and running don’t make for ideal bedfellows, so I’m happy to sidestep that particular input. The screen does the job, and it’s easy to cycle through the various tracking metrics that the Fitbit uses to keep an eye on things, either with the button on the side or by tapping the strap. It’s not unappealing, but struggles to square the circle: it’s too big to be understated, but too bland to be eye-catching. It’s around a third wider than the Flex and draws further attention to itself with a textured criss-cross design on the rubber. The Fitbit Charge HR is a strange beast design-wise, aiming for the minimalism of the Fitbit Flex, but without the svelte style to quite pull it off. At £120 that still isn’t pocket money by any means, but given other models that can read your heart rate cost either £160 or £200, that’s still a bit of a bargain in my book.īut how does the Fitbit Charge HR look in 2016? Let’s find out. Yes, the Fitbit Charge HR is the cheapest of the company’s fitness trackers to pack a heart-rate sensor. Moov Now review: A personal trainer on your wrist Behind its simplicity is one piece of clever tech that other Fitbits lack, though: the “HR” in the name stands for heart rate. ![]() The Fitbit Charge HR is a simple beast: a textured, thick rubber strap with an LCD display and a button. Interested? This is what it’s like to do it. Simply put, it’s a massive running and cycling tour of the UK thats starts Buckingham palace, winds its way up to Edinburgh Castle, and comes back down again. Is the Fitbit Charge HR worth buying in 2016, when the Blaze is more fully featured, and the Alta is sleeker and cheaper?Ĭall yourself a fitness enthusiast? If so, you’ll probably want to know about the Fitbit Fifty. The reason, chiefly, is that with Fitbit venturing into smartwatch territory, piling on features as it goes, the cheaper, more cheerful fitness band models still sell phenomenally well. Why are we reviewing the Fitbit Charge HR in 2016? That’s a very good question, given it’s now over a year old. ![]() So if you get a good price, then go for it. As for the original Fitbit Charge HR – well it’s still a good wearable that won’t let you down with broadly the same fitness tracking capabilities. True, it retails for £10 more (and probably a lot more in the real world as shops clear out stock of the old model), but it’s an extremely worthy upgrade, adding in text notifications alongside the enhanced aesthetics. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |