FitBit....worth it?

kwrecks

Hey everybody - I have recently started going to the gym (again). A few years back, I was trying to get into running and I got a Garmin to help keep track of my heart rate and calories burned. Now that I'm back at it, I am doing more weights and cardio mixed, and not running. I have been interested in a fitbit, but I'm wondering if it's worth getting. I have the Garmin to track my calories burned, and I have mfp to track my food....is it worth getting a fitbit if I already have mfp and the hrm?

What are the pros and cons of a fitbit?

Thank you!

sugarfree123

I would suggest checking into the Garmin Vivofit. It runs circles around fitbit. No pun intended. You can see your info on your wrist anytime. It will sync with your garmin heart rate monitor. THE BATTERY LASTS A YEAR! Keeps track of calories, steps, sleep and milege. It syncs with MFP.. Increases your goal slowly each day. If you sit to long, you get a nasty red line until you get up and move around. Not to mention, it has the date and time handy. And it is waterproof, I wear it in the shower. My only complaint is that it does not have a backlight. I love it.

sugarfree123

FYI, I have owned a fitbit in the past.

JJMorrocco

This is the one that Costco offers??

wolverine66

i have a fitbit, but only a fitbit and the app. It tracks the steps and sleep and mileage and what not. some also double as watches. apparently the fitbit coming out in January is also an HRM. but anyway, I do like mine with the way I use it. But it seems you have a few other things to consider simultaneously

redwoodkestrel

I absolutely LOVE my Fitbit, but that's because most of my exercise is step-based. I've lost almost 90 lbs since January, tracking my intake on MFP and my calories burned with my Fitbit and syncing the two.

However, it sounds like much of your exercise is NOT step-based, in which case if you want to track calories burned, a Fitbit is probably not ideal for you... unless you just want to see how many steps you're taking throughout the day and potentially use it to motivate you to move more.

Sounds like your Garmin is a HRM which is probably best, though those really only track accurately during steady-state cardio, so it likely wouldn't give you an accurate read for weight lifting.

LucasEVille

Wait. The new Fitbits come out next year and trounce all the competition. (This is coming from a Jawbone owner).

RockWarrior84

LucasEVille wrote: »

Wait. The new Fitbits come out next year and trounce all the competition. (This is coming from a Jawbone owner).

I will wait to see the reviews on the new ones to see if they are worth the extra money for new features. I have the flex, I am curious how accurate the new HRM will be on the new ones.

simplydelish2

I had a fitbit flex - it is now resting in the landfill. IMO, a total waste of money. It wasn't accurate in measuring steps or stairs, didn't measure anything else. Sleep tracking - not even worth it.

I have read about some that measure your heart rate - I think I'd go that direction.

sus49

I have the most basic fitbit. I use it ONLY as a cheering mechanism. I really like the HURRAYS on the website when I meet my distance/step/calorie burning goals. It helps me keep on track but I do not think it is great.

It does NOT count my 3/4 mile swim... It's suggested calorie in take is so low that I gain weight if I follow it. Granted my problem is a slowed down metabolism so it might not apply to you.

For the second time since I bought it last May the battery died and I bought another one because like I said, I find it helps me to TRACK ON MFP but it is MFP that I have found the most helpful. And it is MFP that I use to determine my true calorie burn and the amount of food I should eat.

hrcc2000

The fitbit flex was a waste of money IMO. If i sat in my rocking chair and rocked, it counted steps.

brianpperkins

simplydelish2 wrote: »

I had a fitbit flex - it is now resting in the landfill. IMO, a total waste of money. It wasn't accurate in measuring steps or stairs, didn't measure anything else. Sleep tracking - not even worth it.

I have read about some that measure your heart rate - I think I'd go that direction.

The Flex doesn't count stairs ... not designed for it at all. It only counts steps and tracks restlessness during sleep.

If a Fitbit is worth it or not depends on what you want to track. If you're interested in using step based activity to become more active, it can help track that for you. They aren't good for lifting (I can't think of any tracker that truly is), they don't track cycling well ...

DevilsNegu

I love my Fitbit one. Tough getting 10k steps in though ugh!

Edie30

Fitbit is a good start, I really enjoyed mine for a while. Eventually you might move on the other things but it's a great start :-)

kwrecks

Thanks everyone. I am trying to do a bit of step based work outs, as well as weights. I have been taking a strength and burn class (cardio and weights), and a step class (also with weights) and then I do one circut type workout a week. I have been wearing my HRM because I am trying to figure out a way to accurately track my calories burned, because MFP always seems a bit higher than I think it should be.

SnuggleSmacks

brianpperkins wrote: »

simplydelish2 wrote: »

I had a fitbit flex - it is now resting in the landfill. IMO, a total waste of money. It wasn't accurate in measuring steps or stairs, didn't measure anything else. Sleep tracking - not even worth it.

I have read about some that measure your heart rate - I think I'd go that direction.

The Flex doesn't count stairs ... not designed for it at all. It only counts steps and tracks restlessness during sleep.

If a Fitbit is worth it or not depends on what you want to track. If you're interested in using step based activity to become more active, it can help track that for you. They aren't good for lifting (I can't think of any tracker that truly is), they don't track cycling well ...

The Bodymedia measures parameters besides just steps, like changes in skin temperature and moisture, so it can measure intensity...meaning, it's better for non-step activities than any of the other trackers. Still not 100% accurate, but it can tell the difference between sitting at the computer and doing bicep curls.

Edie30

I've found HRM most accurate so you could just stick to that. Mfp totally overestimates! Don't believe a word! Fitbit is fun though :-)

SnuggleSmacks

Edie30 wrote: »

I've found HRM most accurate so you could just stick to that. Mfp totally overestimates! Don't believe a word! Fitbit is fun though :-)

A HRM is only accurate with steady-state cardio. You rarely lift fast enough or with enough steady rhythm to keep your heart rate elevated to the point that a HRM will work with any degree of accuracy.

Gr8ChangesAhead

it is a glorified pedometer and calorie count is way off. Mine is sitting on a shelf

indianwin2001

I use the Garmin 15--It is a HRM and activity tracker in one watch--Works great and syncs to MFP

kwrecks

So my HRM is off, too? When I do my class I know my heart rate is up. I have the Garmin FR70 and I know that it's made for running but there is a "General" setting too. I've been using that. I know my heart rate is up and I know I'm working hard. So is the calorie count that it's giving me wrong?

SnuggleSmacks

kwrecks wrote: »

So my HRM is off, too? When I do my class I know my heart rate is up. I have the Garmin FR70 and I know that it's made for running but there is a "General" setting too. I've been using that. I know my heart rate is up and I know I'm working hard. So is the calorie count that it's giving me wrong?

Here's some info about using a heart rate monitor during weight lifting.

Edie30

SnuggleSmacks wrote: »

Edie30 wrote: »

I've found HRM most accurate so you could just stick to that. Mfp totally overestimates! Don't believe a word! Fitbit is fun though :-)

A HRM is only accurate with steady-state cardio. You rarely lift fast enough or with enough steady rhythm to keep your heart rate elevated to the point that a HRM will work with any degree of accuracy.

I only used an HRM for running... Not lifting :-)

SnuggleSmacks

Edie30 wrote: »

SnuggleSmacks wrote: »

Edie30 wrote: »

I've found HRM most accurate so you could just stick to that. Mfp totally overestimates! Don't believe a word! Fitbit is fun though :-)

A HRM is only accurate with steady-state cardio. You rarely lift fast enough or with enough steady rhythm to keep your heart rate elevated to the point that a HRM will work with any degree of accuracy.

I only used an HRM for running... Not lifting :-)

Cool. You didn't specify in your original post so it was read in the context of the discussion, which by then had turned to tracking during lifting.

Edie30

Aha :-)