The Garmin Cirqa is making waves in the fitness community. I put the new screenless tracker through its paces over 10 days of intensive testing, and awarded it 4.5 stars in my Garmin Cirqa review. As part of the testing process, I wore it for all of my workouts over the past couple of weeks — and, unusually for a device I’ve been testing for review purposes, I’m still wearing it now.
I normally alternate between an Apple Watch Ultra 3 or a Garmin Fenix 8, but I’ve found myself loathe to ditch the Cirqa just yet. This isn’t only because it’s good: I’m gravitating towards the Cirqa because it interfaces with a system I already use, and because it’s helping me get over the dreaded „Strava-itis“.
Latest Videos FromTechRadar
Even uncoupling my watch from automatically uploading my run to Strava is only half the battle. I’m constantly glancing at the watch to check my pace and time, engaging in subconscious judgement, comparing my own performance to that of my mates, colleagues and acquaintances. I didn’t realize quite how much my self-judgement was sapping my enjoyment of exercise.
The Cirqa, and to some extent the Google Fitbit Air I tested earlier in the year, goes some way to changing all that.
While the Cirqa offers up some fitness and wellness metrics (certainly plenty to understand the effect of exercise on your body and health), what it doesn’t give you is workout specifics. You won’t find split pace per kilometer, for example, which runners use to measure average speed across a distance run, or heart rate zones to display a workout’s intensity. With other models, I get those statistics piped into my ears at regular intervals, and my watches offer them at a glance.
Having access to such statistics removed during the workout can be detrimental to performance or for those times you’re training for a specific event, but it’s oddly freeing for day-to-day fitness training. I ran a 10km route during the testing period (at least, I assume it was 10km based on previous runs) and the Cirqa recorded plenty of heart rate-based statistics and applied them to recovery metrics such as my Training Readiness Score, along with how it improved stats such as my VO2 Max and Fitness Age.
However, it informed me of these statistics after the run, and didn’t deliver any specific run performance information at all beyond time and heart rate information. Without my watch to glance at during the workout, I wasn’t adhering to a target pace: I was running on vibes and perceived effort.
I concentrated on how my body felt, and responded to that in the moment. I paid attention to my form, my music, the trees and the road. I didn’t feel guilty about stopping to stretch part way through, nor did I pause the Cirqa for that particularly pause, as doing so would invalidate the whole „complete, holistic workout overview“ thing it’s got going on. For the first time in quite some time, I had no idea at all about how fast I had run — but I knew that it was a good workout as a result of every other metric and the fact that I felt awesome.
Although it isn’t a running-specific device, the Cirqa is exactly what I needed to reinvigorate my relationship with the road. When the time returns to take my training seriously again, taking speed and times on board again, I’ll switch back to my best Garmin watch, with all my fitness stats ready to be incorporated into Garmin’s workout plans.
Do you run without a fitness tracker, or use a screenless model, to better run on vibes, or are you a metrics-fiend with a dedicated running watch? Let me know in the poll below.
The best Garmin watches for all budgets
Follow TechRadar on Google News and add us as a preferred source to get our expert news, reviews, and opinion in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button!
And of course, you can also follow TechRadar on YouTube and TikTok for news, reviews, unboxings in video form, and get regular updates from us on WhatsApp too.
