WilliamK1974

Back around 2015, I used to wear one of the FitBits. It looked sort of like a smart watch. It read heart rate, tracked activity, gave some ideas of sleep duration, and would buzz whenever my phone got a text. I tried to use it for healthy purposes, and then it quit working right outside of the warranty period. I went back to wearing a regular watch on my left arm, which is my personal preference, and haven't worn one since.

But I'm now trying to get some of the weight off that I've gained in the last couple of years, and remember that the device was somewhat helpful in keeping me active and motivated. That said, I don't want to wear another chunky watch-like object, and that's what most of those gadgets seem to look like. I want to keep wearing a "real" watch on my left arm while wearing a tracker of some sort on my right, so it doesn't really need to have a time-telling function. The Amazon Halo View and Band products look like they would meet the need for appearance and function, but they seem to get a great deal of criticism about their heart rate tracking accuracy during exercise and activity, as well as some of the things they do, such as analyzing the user's speech. That sort of function sort of falls into the "why is this important" category.

Are there any good tracking devices that have the understated look of an Amazon Halo product with accurate heart rate and sleep tracking? Most that seem to be good also look like big chunky watches, and I would rather avoid that.

Thank you,
-William

Iride01 

Well how long do you expect a $60 fitness tracker to last?

Garmin makes a bunch of different lines that can be used for fitness tracking. So do other brands.

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/c/wearables-smartwatches/

The Garmin Fenix line looks pretty much like a real watch.... what ever that is nowadays. So you could get one of those and put your real watch in the drawer for your estate sale later.

Regardless, if you want something that's going to last, I'd up your budget to at least the $150 if not $200 plus level. My son has a Vivosmart that he got in 2016 and it's still going strong even when being worn every day doing physical labor. He has had to replace the bands, but I had to do that periodically with my real watches BITD of wind up watches.

msalvetti

I prefer a mechanical watch as well, so I wanted something that didn’t look like a watch for my right wrist. I settled on a Fitbit Charge 4. Works fine. I keep the GPS off (when I want GPS I pair it with my iPhone), so it lasts for days between charges.

They make an even smaller device but I don’t think it does heart rate.

Mark

But its me

I have used a Garmin Vivoactive 3 for several years now. Like it because it does the tracking bit, yet has quite a number of analog dial options, so it looks and functions like a normal watch, including a second hand (essential for work). It’s a generation or two behind the current model, but still available for $150.

Worth a look.

WilliamK1974

The device I had was the Fitbit Blaze. At the time I bought it, it was *not* just $60... It was over $100, which doesn't put it into Apple Watch territory, but felt like a pretty big purchase to me at the time. When it quit working a month after its warranty ran out, it left a bad taste in my mouth and I didn't think I would want to buy something like that again. But times change, and so do people. But that device was pretty well a watch replacement with fitness stuff added on.

Speedskater

Excluding damage or dead battery.

Five years minimum.

PeteHski

What do you call a "real" watch? Is something like an Apple watch not real? Or do you mean that you prefer the style of a traditional watch? There are a few smart watches that look like "real" watches if you look around. Try searching for "Hybrid Smart Watch" and you will get some idea of what is on the market. The alternative is something like a Whoop wrist tracker (which is actually as chunky as a Fitbit tracker) or the Oura ring tracker - which is the least conspicuous of all.

burnthesheep

Wife and I both have Vivoactive watches we got on sale. Hers I used the REI member cashback from buying a Kickr the year before to get it affordable. Mine I got black Friday. Straightforward, easy, etc.... Want to run or bike? Swipe up, gps says go, you go. Does steps, heart rate, stress. You can tell it what "face" you want to see. So you can see minute hands or go full modern digital look.

They are round unlike the Apple products so they look more like a watch.

PeteHski

LOL. You mean they look more like a round watch vs a square/rectangular watch, of which there are thousands.

burnthesheep

Dude, I grew up around folks that had round watches. Just what I saw. The ladies wore the odd shaped stuff in a smaller more feminine size for their smaller wrists.

Sure, lots of square watches now due to the smartwatch format. That wasn't usually the case, IMO that is.

Literally growing up I can't remember a single kid in school or old man at church that didn't have a round watch until it was a thing for a few kids to have the "hip Casio" calculator watches.......which were square rectangular.

IIRC, James Bond wore a few futuristic looking squarish Seikos in a few movies.........but usually mostly round watches. I mean, the symbol for Rolex is a round watch.

PeteHski

burnthesheep

Ok I give in. That's freaking sweet.

Iride01 

Don't we all love it when the few exceptions and/or outlier data are put up as showing a generalized but for the most part valid idea as invalid.

Iride01 

That was well after the times I started wearing a watch. A round watch. But to be honest, one of the watches in my dad's drawer that was probably before I was born was rectangular. Can't remember the maker. But it was probably from the 40's or 50's.

Don't remember seeing him wear it while he was alive. So he too always wore round watches from my viewpoint.


Still don't know what the OP considers a real watch is. Do we? Fred Flintstone had a sun dial on his wrist... or was that Barney Rubble.

DenBoy

I’m an 82 yo roadie, wearing a Fitbit Charge 4 to monitor my heart rate (while riding) and sleep behavior. I had previously worn a Fitbit Charge 3 for 3 years and would have it still, except that I lost it after taking it off at a rest stop. I replaced it with my (current) Charge 4. I ride 3 or 4 times a week, usually 15 – 30 mile routes that I repeat over and over, recording bike computer and FB data for each ride.



I’m especially interested in my heart rate, and study the graphical plots Fitbit shows on my phone. I’m able to associate the various peaks and valleys in the plots with the hills, traffic light stops, etc. on each leg of my rides (out and back). The FB immediately recognizes whether I’m running or on my bike, and also recognizes when I make a rest stop – therefore stops recording heart rate until I resume my ride. The result is 2 separate plots displaying data only for my actual riding, omitting the time spent at my rest stop/turnaround.



The data I’ve collected is very consistent, heart rate matches my perceived level of effort. Sometimes I ride one of my routes harder than usual, or the wind is really high, or I do a slow and easy recovery ride. The resulting FB heart rate plots look exactly as I expect. I haven’t worn a separate heart rate monitor, so I have no other heart data to allow specific comparison. I’d enjoy hearing how someone who has worn both wrist and chest heart monitors found their level of agreement.

Seattle Forrest

Circles weren't invented until 1929.

PeteHski

I find that my fitbit Charge 3 tends to read low at higher intensity, sometimes quite a lot lower than a chest strap. It's very sensitive to how tight you wear the strap and vibration through handlebars. For everyday use it's generally okay, but for high intensity exercise the data is pretty poor. As I don't like wearing a chest strap, I now use a Polar armband HRM, which I find as consistent as a chest strap. I still use my Charge 3 for sleep tracking and resting HR. It seems pretty consistent for those.

Iride01 

Someone needs to have a talk with the photographer. Just like bikes, there is a proper position certain parts should be in. Typically the time should be in the 10:08 to 10:10 range with the second hand showing 34 to 42 seconds, though some watch makers dictate theirs show 51 or 00 seconds.



https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora...and-timepieces

zen_

Not uncommon for people into watches to wear a "real" watch one wrist with a fitness tracker on the other. I did that for years before selling my mechanical watches to buy bikes!

If you're going to go that route, I would suggest the Garmin Vivoactive because while it does have some issues, the (free) HRV tracking you get with compatible Garmin devices provides interesting and useful insights to stress, fatigue, and general health.

Chubakazubaka

As far as I know, there is no better watch for sports than a Garmin. It's the best watch people have ever invented.

PeteHski

If that is true, then mankind still has a very long way to go.

Seattle Forrest

Both of the above are true.

Polaris OBark

I just got one of these for the wife:


Withings ScanWatch

Polaris OBark

I have a nice pseudo-analogue watch face on my on my Garmin Venu 2, which is a reasonable fitness tracker. (The sleep tracking is fairly worthless, but I think this is often the case unless you glue electrodes to your scalp.)

kinnessa60

You might want to check out the Fitbit Luxe, which offers accurate heart rate and sleep tracking in a slim and stylish design. It's less chunky than some other options and can be worn alongside your regular watch for a balanced look. Also u can check Better me platform. I found out there about calisthenics so here is an url https://betterme.world/articles/types-of-calisthenics/. Good luck with your weight loss journey!