Comparing A370 and Loop 2
When considering the Polar A370 and Polar Loop 2, it’s important to recognize that each offers distinct features, functionality, and design. Choosing the right fitness tracker can be a key factor in reaching your personal fitness goals and staying motivated throughout your journey. Polar, the brand behind both these devices, has a long-standing reputation in the wearable and fitness tracker market, continuously innovating and improving its product offerings to satisfy customer demands and preferences.
In today’s article, we will provide a comprehensive comparison of the Polar A370 and Polar Loop 2, so you can confidently choose the right fitness tracker for your lifestyle, personal preferences and requirements. Throughout this in-depth analysis, we will discuss the design and build, features and functionality, user interface and user experience, price and value, and frequently asked questions of these two popular trackers.
Design and Build
Polar A370
- Materials: Silicone wristband
- Size: S/M and M/L wristbands available
- Weight: 31.7 g
- Display: 160 x 80 pixels TFT LCD screen with touch capability
Polar Loop 2
- Materials: Soft silicone band
- Size: Adjustable wristband, one size fits most
- Weight: 38 g
- Display: 85 LED dot-matrix
Comparison of design and build quality
Both the Polar A370 and the Polar Loop 2 feature a comfortable and durable silicone wristband, but the A370 offers more size options. The A370 also has a larger TFT LCD screen with touch capability, making it more user-friendly and visually appealing. Conversely, the Loop 2 has a simple LED display which, while less visually attractive, contributes to its longer battery life. Overall, the choice between these two designs will be a matter of personal preference, balancing aesthetics and usability with battery life and simplicity.
Features and Functionality
Polar A370
- Operating system: Proprietary
- Sensors: Accelerometer, heart rate sensor, GPS (connected via smartphone)
- Battery life: Up to 3 days
- Fitness tracking: Steps, distance, calories, sleep, swimming, heart rate
- Additional features: Phone notifications, clock, vibration
Polar Loop 2
- Operating system: N/A
- Sensors: Accelerometer
- Battery life: 8 days (without notifications)
- Fitness tracking: Steps, distance, calories, sleep
- Additional features: Phone notifications (iOS only), clock, vibration
Comparison of features and performance
The Polar A370 offers more advanced features, including a heart rate sensor and GPS via smartphone connectivity for precise tracking during various activities. However, it has a shorter battery life compared to the Loop 2. The Loop 2, while more limited in its tracking abilities, offers a longer battery life and greater compatibility with different mobile operating systems. The choice between these two fitness trackers will depend on the specific features and activities most valued by the individual user.
User Interface and User Experience
Polar A370
- Display: 1.18 inches, 160 x 80 pixels, color TFT LCD touchscreen
- Navigation: Touchscreen and physical button
- Apps and customization: Polar Flow app (iOS, Android)
- Compatibility: iOS, Android, Windows Phone, Mac, Windows
Polar Loop 2
- Display: LED dot-matrix
- Navigation: Physical button
- Apps and customization: Polar Flow app (iOS)
- Compatibility: iOS (limited Android and Windows Phone support)
Comparison of user interface and user experience
The Polar A370 provides a superior user experience with its color touchscreen, wider app compatibility, and greater customization options. However, the Loop 2 offers a unique, simple user interface with a single-button navigation system. Ultimately, considerations such as app compatibility and smartphone integration will impact the user’s choice between these two devices.
Price and Value
Polar A370
Cost: $179.95
Polar Loop 2
Cost: $120
Comparison of price and value
With its higher price point, the Polar A370 offers a more extensive feature set and a more user-friendly interface. The Polar Loop 2, though more affordable, comes with a more limited set of features, making it a better choice for those seeking a basic fitness tracker with fewer bells and whistles. Ultimately, personal budget and preferences will guide the decision between these two devices.
Conclusion
In comparing the Polar A370 and Polar Loop 2, we have discussed various aspects such as design, functionality, user experience, and price. It’s clear that each fitness tracker offers unique benefits, and the best choice will depend on individual preferences, needs, and budget. We hope this comparison has provided you with valuable insights to make an informed decision.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which fitness tracker is more suitable for swimmers?
The Polar A370 is the better choice for swimmers, as it offers swim tracking and a water resistance rating of WR30. The Polar Loop 2 is not designed for swim tracking and has a lower water resistance rating (2 ATM).
Do these fitness trackers work with third-party apps like Strava or MyFitnessPal?
Both devices connect primarily to Polar’s own Flow app for syncing and analyzing data. However, you may be able to manually or automatically export your activity data to third-party apps, depending on compatibility and settings.
Which device has a better battery life?
The Polar Loop 2 has a longer battery life, lasting up to 8 days without phone notifications. In comparison, the Polar A370 lasts for up to 3 days on a single charge.
Can I change the wristbands of these fitness trackers?
Yes, both the Polar A370 and Polar Loop 2 have detachable wristbands that can be replaced with different colors or sizes, available from Polar or compatible third-party manufacturers.
Do I need to carry my smartphone during a workout with the Polar A370 to track my GPS data?
Yes, the Polar A370 relies on a connected smartphone to access GPS data. So, if you want to track your workout route or distance covered, you’ll need to carry your smartphone with you during the workout.
