Charge 2 with swimming feature

[CGati]

I hope Fitbit decides to launch a swim version of the Charge 2 at some point. I go swimming a few times each month, and it seems like a waste of money to buy a Flex 2 just for this one activity.

Moderator edit: updated subject for clarity

[Rockymount1]

DELETED...

[SunsetRunner]

only jawbone and fitbit have band trackers that aren't 100% waterproof. all other brands of trackers are fully waterproof and many incorporate the things like stair tracking and still are 100% waterproof and at the same price. the fitbits look nicer, the community is better, the app is better but the excuses on waterproofing just don't add up anymore in 2016. you can buy a $10 watch at walmart that is 100% waterproof.

[SunsetRunner]

you can get the garmin vivosmart HR band for $149 and it has stair tracking, optical HR and is fully waterproof. that said it is ugly IMHO and the fitbit app and community are much nicer.

[MusicHead]

The bummer with the Garmin trackers is that thay have either built-in GPS or nothing at all, not even a connected GPS function to use that of your smartphone. Not surprising from a marketing standpoint, given that GPS are Garmin core business.

However, just like FitBit may not have excuses to not make their trackers waterproof, so Garmin certainly do not have one for not including GPS connectivity in their trackers with no built-in GPS.

[CGati]

Apple Watch series 2 is trying to take swimmers seriously. It measures laps and stats, and will show it to you while you are swimming. Fitbit just got some hard competition.

[SunsetRunner]

---

@CGati wrote:
Fitbit just got some hard competition.

---

Not just... Swim watches from Garmin and others have been around for years.

[Dominique]

---

@CGati wrote:
It measures laps and stats, and will show it to you while you are swimming.

---

If all these features are important to you, by all means get an Apple Watch 2 (or another device that does that). There are 168 hours in a week: how many of these do you spend swimming? Can the Apple Watch rival with your Fitbit during the remaining 165+ hours?

[Julia_G]

I have a Garmin with HR strap (a couple of years old now, but was the top of the range when I bought it).  I use it for running, and it works super well and is super accurate.  But it cost at least 3 times what I paid for my Charge HR (which mostly matches it for heartrate when I run wearing both), and the web interface for my Garmin is a NIGHTMARE.  It usually takes me at least half an hour of telling me nothing can be recognized, or my watch doesn't exist, or I don't exist or all of the above, before I can finally get my run to record.

The Fitbit interface is much better and has much better social aspects.  Is it perfect? No!  But for the price and for day to day fitness wear I don't think you can beat Fitbit.

[AlanInAdams]

There is such a thing and they are all from Garmin.  No reason Fitbit couldn't release waterproof devices this year aside from the lil flex 2.  **This was to reply to the comment about 'the next thng you know you'll want GPS**..amazing the attitude of some folks here.  

[MikeF]

---

@AlanInAdams wrote:

No reason Fitbit couldn't release waterproof devices this year aside from the lil flex 2.

---

Absolutely. There's never been any reason they couldn't do this when others could. They simply chose not to.

What I don't understand is why people get so outraged by that choice. It makes no sense to me at all as a reaction.

[MusicHead]

Mike,

I agree, and the reason I suspect it has to do with business opportunities.

Look at FitBit market share compared to the others:

https://www.engadget.com/2016/05/16/wearable-market-share-q1-2016/

Then consider that the number of competitive and recreational swimmers is certainly lower than that of runners. Not to mention all of those just walking or simply wanting to keep track of their activity level throughout the day.

Sure, FitBit would capture more customers if they had more swim-proof trackers, but compared to what they already cover it can be considered a "niche" market.

On the other hand, for other companies that are trying to grow in the market, it makes sense to offer something that FitBit does not have, in addition to going head to head with them in a market were FitBit is a leader already.

I am sure that many people would like to just have a waterproof FitBit for the convenience of not having to take it off when going to the beach, not necessarily to track swimming as an activity.

Fair point, and I think it will eventually happen. Like you said, it is not a technology issue, but a choice. Already 20 years ago I had a watch with a pressure sensor that could perform as a barometer, altimeter AND depth meter, all in one.

[Rich_Laue]

---

@AlanInAdams wrote:

There is such a thing and they are all from Garmin.  No reason Fitbit couldn't release waterproof devices this year aside from the lil flex 2.  **This was to reply to the comment about 'the next thng you know you'll want GPS**..amazing the attitude of some folks here.  

---

Actually @AlanInAdams there is no legal definition of the term waterproof since at some depth a device will fail. The by law it is illegal and deceptive to say a device is waterproof. A manufacturer might be able to get away if it can be shown to withstand at least the deepest section of the ocean,  something most submarines will fail at. 

The correct legal term is water resistant to some depth. The Charge 2 was designed to be water resistant to the accidental dip.

The Surge, Flex 2, Charge 3, Ionic, Versa, and Versa light are designed to be water resistant to the pressures of 5 ATM, or 50 meters, this is the minimum rating that is recommended for shallow  water swimming.