- Joined
- Feb 3, 2016
- Posts
- 241
I didn't mean to imply that I pair my chest strap HRM with my watch, I use it with my Garmin bike computer.
-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Smart/Fitness Watches - Reviews, Opinions, and Recommendations
- Thread starter Lauren
- Start date
I didn't mean to imply that I pair my chest strap HRM with my watch, I use it with my Garmin bike computer.
A Polar HRM should be able to transmit to an Apple Watch using Bluetooth through an app like ismoothrun or (I think) endomondo. It’s a Bluetooth only device I believe.
Regarding accuracy... The thing about optical heart rate monitoring (i.e., what’s built into your watch) is that it’s often wildly inaccurate by up to 30bpm depending on what activity and if it involves moving your arm a lot. I have optical HR data that says I was running at 185bpm for an hour when chest strap and the good old pulse+watch measurement agreed it was more like 150. This is just the nature of the technology. It requires consistent contact with your skin, no light leaks, and no jarring. Different manufacturers will be better at at resting heart rate or high intensity. There isn’t really a product on the market yet that does both to an acceptable level of accuracy.
Regarding accuracy... The thing about optical heart rate monitoring (i.e., what’s built into your watch) is that it’s often wildly inaccurate by up to 30bpm depending on what activity and if it involves moving your arm a lot. I have optical HR data that says I was running at 185bpm for an hour when chest strap and the good old pulse+watch measurement agreed it was more like 150. This is just the nature of the technology. It requires consistent contact with your skin, no light leaks, and no jarring. Different manufacturers will be better at at resting heart rate or high intensity. There isn’t really a product on the market yet that does both to an acceptable level of accuracy.
Say hello to my little new friend...
So far so good, YUGE improvement over the 5X I had previously, the screen is not so annoyingly small and it does not lag so much, although being Garmin, it lags of course.
Presently this is the Garmin device I hate the least, which is kinda compliment...
Please do yourself a favour and invest in a proper chest strap, watch heart monitors are kinda imperfect.
Time to revisit!
I decided to purchase Apple Watch 5, and, have been cycling and walking with it for about a month. I stated in prior posts that I'm interested in monitoring my heart rate during exercise periods without using my dedicated Polar watch/strap, just to avoid wearing multiple gadgets. Cycling using the Polar gave me a very good baseline for heart rate during exercise periods, I have a pretty good ability to know heart rate from how heavy I am breathing.
When starting to use the Apple 5, I assumed, incorrectly, that the Heart Rate app would be the primary training tool to use. Wrong! It samples the heart rate much too slowly, and, disappears into background quickly. It also takes a too long to measure heart rate when opening it. It's main benefit is storing heart rate data over an extended period of time.
The watch does have exercise apps built-in that offer a wide verity of dedicated workouts, including cycling and outside walking. These apps remain visible for the entire workout period and show active heartrate, the heart rate number is large enough to be readable even for my aging eyes that need reading glasses, not as easy as the Polar watch. Following the workout, all the data, HR, time, distance, avg speed, GPS route map is saved and viewable on an Apple iPhone. It also provides data about how long recovery to normal heart rate takes following exercise period.
Both my experience to-date, and, from YouTube reviews, indicate the watch does a very good job of monitoring heart rate in an acceptable level of accuracy. When cycling, we all learn intuitively what speed to ride at for extended periods, the Apple Watch matches my normal heart ranges from Polar levels. Perhaps most important to me is to know when my rate approaches 10 beats more than normal levels as this can only be sustained for a short period without too much long term fatigue. The watch does a good job of showing return recovery to normal riding heart levels. We all need to push during training rides. I should add that my typical ride is 15-20 miles on very, very flat roads, my enemy is the wind that blows off the ocean in my So. Jersey seaside community.
Another minor benefit of the Apple Watch, is the fitness tracker functions that monitor body activities throughout the day. If I go into "slug" mode, it tells me to get off my ass and get cardio done.
Don't get my review as an indicator that the watch is a good as a dedicated chest band device. If I were going to push into more extended rides, I would add a Bluetooth strap. For my needs, the Apple 5 (and 4 that uses the same optical monitor) does what I need.
I decided to purchase Apple Watch 5, and, have been cycling and walking with it for about a month. I stated in prior posts that I'm interested in monitoring my heart rate during exercise periods without using my dedicated Polar watch/strap, just to avoid wearing multiple gadgets. Cycling using the Polar gave me a very good baseline for heart rate during exercise periods, I have a pretty good ability to know heart rate from how heavy I am breathing.
When starting to use the Apple 5, I assumed, incorrectly, that the Heart Rate app would be the primary training tool to use. Wrong! It samples the heart rate much too slowly, and, disappears into background quickly. It also takes a too long to measure heart rate when opening it. It's main benefit is storing heart rate data over an extended period of time.
The watch does have exercise apps built-in that offer a wide verity of dedicated workouts, including cycling and outside walking. These apps remain visible for the entire workout period and show active heartrate, the heart rate number is large enough to be readable even for my aging eyes that need reading glasses, not as easy as the Polar watch. Following the workout, all the data, HR, time, distance, avg speed, GPS route map is saved and viewable on an Apple iPhone. It also provides data about how long recovery to normal heart rate takes following exercise period.
Both my experience to-date, and, from YouTube reviews, indicate the watch does a very good job of monitoring heart rate in an acceptable level of accuracy. When cycling, we all learn intuitively what speed to ride at for extended periods, the Apple Watch matches my normal heart ranges from Polar levels. Perhaps most important to me is to know when my rate approaches 10 beats more than normal levels as this can only be sustained for a short period without too much long term fatigue. The watch does a good job of showing return recovery to normal riding heart levels. We all need to push during training rides. I should add that my typical ride is 15-20 miles on very, very flat roads, my enemy is the wind that blows off the ocean in my So. Jersey seaside community.
Another minor benefit of the Apple Watch, is the fitness tracker functions that monitor body activities throughout the day. If I go into "slug" mode, it tells me to get off my ass and get cardio done.
Don't get my review as an indicator that the watch is a good as a dedicated chest band device. If I were going to push into more extended rides, I would add a Bluetooth strap. For my needs, the Apple 5 (and 4 that uses the same optical monitor) does what I need.
I am looking for a heart rate and oxygen monitor for a friend with pulmonary hyper-tension. She lives at 9,750 feet, is on supplemental oxygen at night and wants to continue to be active. I don't care about it having GPS, just instant, reliable and recordable data about heart and lung operation.
Has anyone had experiences with this type of device? Most I see are wrist worn. Does anyone have experience or knowledge of devices with chest straps for better accuracy? At this time she only has a finger monitor which is slow to start up so doesn't give accurate data while in the activity. She also has only an Android phone for technology; no bike computer.
Are straps a typical option for wrist systems?
Has anyone had experiences with this type of device? Most I see are wrist worn. Does anyone have experience or knowledge of devices with chest straps for better accuracy? At this time she only has a finger monitor which is slow to start up so doesn't give accurate data while in the activity. She also has only an Android phone for technology; no bike computer.
Are straps a typical option for wrist systems?
@Doug Briggs, have a look at the Garmin Vivosmart 4 and read the DC rainmaker Review and the many comments.
buy.garmin.com
The Vivosmart 4 is relatively affordable compared to spending a boatload on a Fenix with a pluse oximeter. Not sure but I believe those are the only Garmin devices with pulse ox. I think maybe Fitbit and others make wearables with pulse ox too.
No personal experience since my Fenix 5 doesn't have it, but I doubt a wrist-based pulse ox is as good as fingertip reading because the location is more difficult to read. It's also never going to work while you are exercising. She'll have to stop to take the reading.
Even the fingertip pulse oximeters in the hospitals give incorrect readings quite often when you are moving or they don't have a good signal for whatever reason. It would be interesting to have pulse recorded automatically, especially at night, assuming the accuracy is decent.
As for heart rate, the wrist base sensors are fairly good at rest but they are just OK for exercise. Chest straps are accurate and what you need if you want to train based on heart rate. If you just want to look at the data after the fact the wrist-based is probably OK but it will likely have some erroneous readings.
I think the usefulness of these devices very much depends on how they will be used and if the user is able to filter and interpret data that could be bad.
Garmin vivosmart® 4 | Fitness Activity Tracker | Pulse Ox
Style meets function with the vívosmart® 4 fitness activity tracker. Features include a Pulse Ox sensor to gauge your blood oxygen saturation levels.
buy.garmin.com
The Vivosmart 4 is relatively affordable compared to spending a boatload on a Fenix with a pluse oximeter. Not sure but I believe those are the only Garmin devices with pulse ox. I think maybe Fitbit and others make wearables with pulse ox too.
No personal experience since my Fenix 5 doesn't have it, but I doubt a wrist-based pulse ox is as good as fingertip reading because the location is more difficult to read. It's also never going to work while you are exercising. She'll have to stop to take the reading.
Even the fingertip pulse oximeters in the hospitals give incorrect readings quite often when you are moving or they don't have a good signal for whatever reason. It would be interesting to have pulse recorded automatically, especially at night, assuming the accuracy is decent.
As for heart rate, the wrist base sensors are fairly good at rest but they are just OK for exercise. Chest straps are accurate and what you need if you want to train based on heart rate. If you just want to look at the data after the fact the wrist-based is probably OK but it will likely have some erroneous readings.
I think the usefulness of these devices very much depends on how they will be used and if the user is able to filter and interpret data that could be bad.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2017
- Posts
- 1,578
Ok, I'm resurrecting this post bc now it's my turn to ask:
What should I get???? I went down the rabbit hole of dcrainmaker.com and my mind went
.
Desires: accurate heart rate monitor (I guess chest straps rule here) with a watch to display info. I don't want to have to carry my phone during workouts. I don't need GPS, or music. Mainly will be used for running, biking and maybe at some point swimming (and skiing!!) I'd like something for both myself and my hubby, so more budget friendly (don't need the top tiers).
Thanks my interweb friends!
What should I get???? I went down the rabbit hole of dcrainmaker.com and my mind went
.Desires: accurate heart rate monitor (I guess chest straps rule here) with a watch to display info. I don't want to have to carry my phone during workouts. I don't need GPS, or music. Mainly will be used for running, biking and maybe at some point swimming (and skiing!!) I'd like something for both myself and my hubby, so more budget friendly (don't need the top tiers).
Thanks my interweb friends!
Last edited:
I would get a Garmin Fenix (I have the 6S). Chest straps aren't that great while running or swimming, and I think the wrist based measurement on my Fenix is pretty good.Ok, I'm resurrecting this post bc now it's my turn to ask:
What should I get???? I went down the rabbit hole of dcrainmaker.com and my mind went
Desires: accurate heart rate monitor (I guess chest straps rule here) with a watch to display info. I don't want to have to carry my phone during workouts. I don't need GPS, or music. Mainly will be used for running, biking and maybe at some point swimming. I'd like something for both myself and my hubby, so more budget friendly (don't need the top tiers).
Thanks my interweb friends!
I got a second hand Garmin Fenix 5x Plus almost a year ago. It just died a few days ago.Ok, I'm resurrecting this post bc now it's my turn to ask:
What should I get???? I went down the rabbit hole of dcrainmaker.com and my mind went
Desires: accurate heart rate monitor (I guess chest straps rule here) with a watch to display info. I don't want to have to carry my phone during workouts. I don't need GPS, or music. Mainly will be used for running, biking and maybe at some point swimming. I'd like something for both myself and my hubby, so more budget friendly (don't need the top tiers).
Thanks my interweb friends!
Loved the wrist HRM and OX sensor. GPS seemed 10-15% off compared to my wahoo devices (bike).
Just received and started to use a Coros Apex. Hoping for better usability, accuracy, and reliability. Of course, it's a little early to tell.
My use cases include: skiing (duh), biking, tennis, strength training, and tracking steps. Also, strava integration is necessary for device independent db (aka bragging rights ;-).
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2017
- Posts
- 1,578
Hmm.... those are both pricey especially for 2. Is it definitely , "get what you pay for? Should I stay away from Fitbit et al? We have android phones, not interested in apple watches.
So, watch HRM accuracies are "good enough "? We don't have any serious health related concerns needing to be monitored.
Coros Pace/pace 2- any experiences? That price range is a little better.
So, watch HRM accuracies are "good enough "? We don't have any serious health related concerns needing to be monitored.
Coros Pace/pace 2- any experiences? That price range is a little better.
@Tony S to the white courtesy phone.
Do you want the watch to tell you how far you ran or rode? You'll need GPS for that.
If you only want to track the activity time (not distance) and see your heart rate, one of the old-school heart rate monitor watches will do that on the cheap.
Ok, I'm resurrecting this post bc now it's my turn to ask:
What should I get???? I went down the rabbit hole of dcrainmaker.com and my mind went
Desires: accurate heart rate monitor (I guess chest straps rule here) with a watch to display info. I don't want to have to carry my phone during workouts. I don't need GPS, or music. Mainly will be used for running, biking and maybe at some point swimming (and skiing!!) I'd like something for both myself and my hubby, so more budget friendly (don't need the top tiers).
Thanks my interweb friends!
I've had, and still have, a Garmin Vivoactive 3 since Xmas 2017 now. The new model is the Vivoactive 4 or 4s (s means smaller). I would recommend those. I get 3-5 days of battery life (3 days-ish when using GPS). Lower cost than a Fenix.
Thread Starter
TS
If you're not looking at GPS or music, I would look towards "fitness watches" more than "smart watches". I think the Fenix is way overkill for what you're asking of it. I would think some of the Garmin Forerunner or Vivoactive models might suit your needs. Most watches seem to only need a phone for GPS (if the watch is not GPS enabled), or for alerts that come from your phone (text messages, alarms, etc.). If you don't care about either of those things, I'm not sure you would have to worry about the need to have your phone on you. Garmin has a pretty solid "Compare" tool on their website when you go into the shopping. I used it pretty extensively when trying to figure out which way I wanted to go. Sorry, can't give any specifics on Fitbit, but I'm sure they have some models that would fit your needs without being overkill.
Okay, I'm apparently getting even more forgetful than ever, because I have no recollection of posting here about actually buying a Coros. I must have, though, because Plai is correct: I do own one. Not sure I can contribute much to the discussion to @socalgal's case though.
I got one in the late fall or early winter when I found myself doing a little running because some of my other activities were out of reach for various reasons. I am neither a serious runner nor a serious electronics guy. My basic need was for something lightweight to record a gps track so that I did not have so carry my bulky, heavy, prone-to-empty-battery phone on runs. For that specific use case it has been very satisfactory and I would recommend it for people who have the same need. It's best feature is battery life. It's so good that it's actually a problem because I forget that it even HAS a battery and needs to be charged. Once a week is more than enough the way I use mine. It does eat through a little more power if I run the GPS all day - when skiing, for example. Still, I never worry about it running out of charge in a single day, as is almost guaranteed to happen with my phone in that circumstance. To me that makes it worth the price of admission.
The heart rate sensor is just as unreliable as everyone up thread has reported. (This is not specific to this watch or this brand.) Too bad, because I'd love to have those data available. (Chest strap too much hassle, plus I was burned by the Wahoo Tickr I own that is a complete POS. Worked great when it succeeded in talking to the phone, which was only about 40% of the time. Therefore useless.) The other thing that seems completely non-functional is the elevation tracker. I've reset and calibrated it about six times and ... it just doesn't work. I live at 160' above MSL. I'll go for a 5k run down the street. Get back and it tells me my elevation is MINUS 1,800'.
I'm not stressing about either of these because the first one is more less a known issue with all watches and the second one I just don't care that much about at the moment.Connection to the phone app has been pretty reliable. The phone app auto-uploads activities to Strava, or whatever app you use. This has been seamless, which is nice (but see below).
When I was shopping I ruled out Fitbit devices, rightly or wrongly, because the net is overflowing with reports of longevity / durability issues with them.
The place where my research failed me has to do with "activity types." As the winter has progressed most of my workouts have been on xc skis. I'm forced to record these as "runs" (or some other activity that the watch knows about). Therefore when the activity is uploaded to Strava it appears as a run, and I have to quick go in and edit it so that it has the right activity type with the right segments, etc. Same with alpine skiing. Sure would be convenient to be able to just select "nordic ski" as the activity type from the get-go. Apparently that is a feature, but only on Coros's more expensive models, naturally.
DST seems to have been too much for the Apex :-(. Taken at 1 hr forward. Had to adjust time manually.
May have been my problem. Had Alaska TZ instead of Pacific.
Same deal with Garmin watches. The more you spend, the more "activity types" are supported. Or, you can also just record an activity as a run then switch it to something else after it's uploaded to Garmin connect.
For skiers like us, though, it might be worth spending more on a Garmin that includes skiing as an activity.
The skiing activity has the additional feature of automatically pausing the activity while you are riding the lift, so that time and distance aren't included in the totals. It's nice to have skiing as an activity on your watch so that 1) you don't burn the battery on your phone with a ski app, and 2) skiing activities are stored in the same system as your other activities.
Looking through my Vivoactive 3, here's a list of activities that are built-in:
Bike
Bike Indoor
Walk
Ski
Snowboard
Navigate
Strength
Run
Treadmill
Indoor Track
Walk Indoor
Floor Climb
Pool Swim
Cardio
Elliptical
Stair Stepper
Row
Row Indoor
Golf
XC Ski
SUP
Yoga
And Create to make your own.
So no, you don't need to spend a lot to get a lot of built-in tracking
Bike
Bike Indoor
Walk
Ski
Snowboard
Navigate
Strength
Run
Treadmill
Indoor Track
Walk Indoor
Floor Climb
Pool Swim
Cardio
Elliptical
Stair Stepper
Row
Row Indoor
Golf
XC Ski
SUP
Yoga
And Create to make your own.
So no, you don't need to spend a lot to get a lot of built-in tracking