Released nearly 3 years after the Forerunner 245 and 945, the Forerunner 255 and 955 have taken over from Garmin’s flagship watches with brilliance. It would seem that the American manufacturer no longer intends to let such a long period pass to renew its tocantes, since the Forerunner 265 and 965 are already becoming clearer.
These have indeed been listed by several online shops, as spotted by the Twitter account FTTest_en. The prices would also be up by 100 €, the Forerunner 265 being displayed at 499.99 € (in “Music” version a priori), while the Forerunner 965 climbs to 649.99 € (i.e. the price of the version “Solar” of 955).
A price increase which could be explained by the on-board display technology, these new watches having to gain an Oled screen, if we refer to the visuals posted online by the the5krunner site.
We can see the Forerunner 265 in its 41 mm version (Forerunner 265s), the watch should a priori also be available in 46 mm format (Forerunner 265), as is the case for the Forerunner 255. The photo of the screen on leaves no room for doubt, the contrast and the depth of the blacks of the screen excluding the use of a MiP transflective LCD screen.
If we will only have to wait a year before taking advantage of these new watches, it is probably because Garmin does not intend to make very deep changes. It must be said that the 255 and 955 already brought many improvements: more reliable cardio sensor, more precise dual-band GNSS chip, new training functions for running and triathlon…
Adding a new screen to its watches would therefore only be a measured risk, especially since the manufacturer is known to make its old models last for several more months after the release of their replacements. Enough to offer the choice between two similar watches which would only be distinguished by their display technology, and of course by their prices. This would be a wise decision on Garmin’s part, since transflective LCD screen technology is still favored by many users who appreciate its excellent readability in direct sunlight as well as its lower power consumption compared to a OLED technology.
Leave a Reply