Fitbit Charge 5 vs Garmin Forerunner 35

Edit: I ended up sending the device back because the GPS is so unreliable. Maybe there's another FItBit model with better GPS connectivity, but this particular one isn't going to work for me.

95 at Fitbit)(Opens in a new window) , which gives you the option to send a canned response, emoji, or voice-to-text reply.

Fitbit has basically become a household name in the tracker health monitor field, but the company hasn't been resting on its laurels. They continue to...

Are you a runner looking to take training to the next level, but can't afford a really pricey device? Wondering why in the world you'd even need one? I was in your shoes! As an activity tracker, the Forerunner 35 is very nice. I give it 3 stars because many of the features that a runner would use don't work, and I feel it's deceptive to sell a device with these features when they're not really usable for training. Essentially, this is a good activity tracker posing (ineffectively) as a training tool. Many reviewers mention that the Forerunner 35 isn't for "serious runners", and I took that to mean that they believe "serious runners" need all the complexity of a very expensive watch

The while for its price, the Fitbit Charge 5 offers a lot. It won't be the perfect fit for everyone. With limited workout tracking features and a less...

Well, we're pretty much all my workout gear. The risk based heart monitor to me was a major selling feature. I want to be able to learn the maximum I ...

I can comment on the Charge 5 comfort - it's amazing, I have it on 24/7 and don't even know it's there.

I use it primarily as a device to help family at home feel comfortable with me being off grid.

The Fitbit Charge 5 is better in every way except form/fit. As long as you can stand something on your wrist, I highly advise against the Oura ring.

I think as long as you can run comfortably at a conversational pace, your HR shouldn't matter too much. That's not to say you shouldn't strive to get better at running, but there are so many more metrics than just HR to tell you if you're on the right path. Happy running :)

So, when I walked the neighborhood loop to my house, it really is nice when my Charge 4 let me know that I also did the equivalent of about 10 flights of stairs with each loop. Without the altimeter, that information cannot be shown.

What I don't like: ------------------ Phone integration for text and call notifications is spotty. Sometimes they work and sometimes they don't. It's a nice feature when it works. The phone downloads slowly but reliably to my Moto G7 Power

And today we've got a complete review of the new FitBit Charge 5, as well as nine new things to know about this unit. Now, I've been using it for a wh...

Garmin won't be able to sell the Forerunner 35 for $200 for too long. $150 seems like a better price point. I'm sure a Forerunner 35-level watch will be selling for only $100 or so in a couple more years. The Forerunner 35 wears pretty nicely

Then there's the disgusting battery life which seems to be caused by bad software. 7+ days battery life advertised on the box but it barely gets 24 hours with even with features turned off.

While I have found getting these alerts on my wrist pretty useful, this particular feature falls short of what the Pebble offered. There's no queue or timeline for reviewing notifications as there is on the Pebble and I find I miss the ability to simply scroll back through previous alerts. BATTERY LIFE The Forerunner 35's battery life is outstanding. I get between 8 and 10 days between charges, and a full charge takes only a few hours

One downside is the apparent need to sign up for an expensive membership, but I figured I'd give it a year and let the Fitbit ecosystem prove its value. The trouble started almost immediately when I unboxed the device and went through the initial setup. Total PTSD, from previous attempts to use Fitbit hardware & software. Here, the device kept failing to perform the initial software update

I used the quick-release wristband because I would go back and forth between my road bike. I don't think I'll ever rely on it again because this is the second time it's disconnected accidentally, and certainly the last time since there's no hope of finding it along the 10 mile trail of rock and mud.

In a world filled with smartwatches, fitness trackers feel kind of liberating. They're smaller, they generally have better battery life, and they're e...

The first of the three times I got up to pee the Garmin showed that my ARHR had by that time dropped to 44, indicating that even though customer service told me that ARHR is an average over the last 7 sleep periods, my ARHR when I went to bed was close to 44 - which tracks with readings of the previous night, which also dropped intranight to 44. However, last night, except for those 4-5 brief intervals, which totaled about 10 minutes across the duration of my 6:30 sleep period, the graph of my HR shows a resting pulse that ranged from 34-44, with the average for the night being about 40. Yet at the end of my sleep period my ARHR had gone back up to 45! How did customer service explain this anomaly? Apparently the device ignores any resting pulses below 40 as artifacts, and since my RP was in the 30's for about an hour and a half, and since this wasn't even counted in averaging over the night (which gave more weight to the brief periods when my RP was in the high 40s and 50s) there was no drop in my ARHR, and in fact, over the last 6 months I've only briefly ever gotten it down to 44, even though my actual RP for the night is typically around 10-42, except on the nights after intense training sessions. Despite these evident software design flaws, my overall impression of Garmin, and even of the Forerunner 35, is positive

- the time needed to update and sync between FB5 and app is almost instantaneous when the app is opened and is a great change - no more, "hold, this is taking longer than expected" and sometimes having to restart the process on the FB3

SUMMARY As disappointed as I am in the Apple Watch as a running watch, I'm not switching to the Garmin until they address at least the first two items under CONS above. I feel certain the CONS I mention above are purely in the software, so hopefully they'll enhance some of those capabilities in a future update. If not, maybe Garmin needs to release a Forerunner 40 that handles those features better. The higher end Garmins may already cover those complaints, but they're too expensive for a running watch and not sufficiently capable for a smart watch