Header banner
Revain logoHome Page
Agata Zarzycka ᠌ photo
1 Level
154 Review
0 Karma

Review on Enhance Your Swim Performance with Garmin Swim 2 Smart Watch, Black by Agata Zarzycka ᠌

Revainrating 3 out of 5

Average product, you can do better.

An "interesting", but quite understandable policy of Garmin was revealed by me on their official website (I can't show the address according to rules). I was unable to post my review of their product on their website. Apparently, he did not pass moderation. I wrote on their forum (I can’t indicate the forum address according to rules) about this - I expressed my opinion about Garmin’s policy, which is to “screen out” reviews they don’t like. My message on the forum "hung" for several festive New Year's days, and on January 11 I could no longer find it. Apparently, it was also moderated and removed. And interestingly, just in case, they blocked my account. Probably to no longer "make waves" about his swimming watch. :0). Capitalism, you know.

img 1 attached to Enhance Your Swim Performance with Garmin Swim 2 Smart Watch, Black review by Agata Zarzycka ᠌



Pros
  • Positive emotions tend to zero
Cons
  • 1. Constant failures in determining the swim distances in the pool 25 meters. "Floated" pools are added, sometimes up to three instead of one. 2. All statistics in connection with paragraph 1, to put it mildly, do not correspond to reality. According to this watch, my "records" in breaststroke pull on the master of sports of international class (58 seconds for 100 meters). In reality, I still can’t swim four pools faster than 2 minutes. That is, the clock is wrong twice.

Comments (2)

Пожалуйста, войдите, чтобы написать комментарий
July 14, 2023
Some pros: in the pool are more or less accurate, but the styles are confused. Cons below: on open water, they draw the track incorrectly and almost double the footage :((
May 26, 2023
With its pros. Lightweight and comfortable Different cons: Shame and disgrace to Garmin, the watch does not show the correct distance in the pool, they are wrong by 2 times, practically.