Charge HR AND One

WarmDontBurn

If you are or have been using both are you finding a huge difference?
I am pretty new to the HR (just got it yesterday) and I have begun the comparison between the 2 -- Steps and miles are a bit off but calories seem pretty accurate. I will know much more tomorrow and after a few days but wanted to see how everyone else that had both were doing!

I am thinking that the off steps/miles are adjusted by using the HRM? Which means it is pretty on par with my One -- time will tell I guess.

NancyN795

I had a One, now have a Charge HR. I didn't do a side-by-side comparison, but have not noticed a dramatic difference in steps or calories. They do "Active Minutes" differently, and I have noticed a big difference there.

glassyo

Well, you know my story.

It sounds like you're having better luck so far so yay!

WarmDontBurn

Well day 1 is over and here is where I am at

Charge HR
Steps -- 17316
Calories Burned -- 2553
Steps -- 5
Miles -- 7.34


One
Steps -- 20533
Calories Burned -- 2293
Steps -- 8
Miles -- 8.73

The only thing making me uneasy is the calories burned -- 260 plus a 500 calorie deficit leads to a pretty big deficit.

heybales

Wow, 1.39 miles off with those less steps, but more calories estimated with shorter distance.

Was some of this a workout then where the HR formula for calorie burn was used?

Can you go make an activity record for both for that workout time, and see what the stats are for just the workout, steps, distance, calories, avgHR?

vjessup

I've had my Charge HR for a week now. The steps/miles are consistently lower by about 30% on my known 3 mile walk. Fitbit tech support advised me to perform a restart, which I did with no difference in accuracy. The calories burned appear to be more accurate than the step count, but I question the validity of all the data since this device is a "step based" activity tracker. I reported back to tech support and three days later I'm still waiting for their response.

WarmDontBurn

The 2 activities were just the treadmill -- set to 3.0mph for an 1.5 hours in the morning and 1/2 hour in the evening.

Charge HR Reading --



One Reading --



Not exactly sure where it says Average HR though.

SKME2013

Can't you just walk around with both devices and count your steps and then compare? You could do 200 steps by counting them and then compare?

WarmDontBurn

I am not to concerned about the steps though -- it is calories burned at the end of the day when I am creating a deficit to lose weight that is the issue.

WarmDontBurn

Oddly enough right now my calories burned are less then 50 calories apart.
Maybe a fluke? Also today during my "walk" I put the HR into exercise mode (the One I did not) and it seems pretty on par with yesterday.

heybales

So the Charge HR stride distance is off.
Is one set to default, the other you manually set?

Because 3 mph for 1.5 hr should be 4.5 miles with those 7611 steps.

I wouldn't do the math with those step figures of the Charge though, because they are obviously off, under reported.

And since steps equal distance with time equals pace with weight equals calories burned - yes, steps do matter actually to your concern about calories.

WarmDontBurn

I have never added stride length on either device.

WarmDontBurn

Here is today so far -- I haven't changed anything at all but it seems better?

One --



Charge HR



I used exercise mode on the HR both times but only on the One in the afternoon -- only thing I did any different today and at the moment it is

HR
Steps 16.918
Miles - 7.17
Calories Burned -- 2053

ONE

Steps - 19409
Miles - 8.23
Calories Burned - 1961

heybales

Only thing exercise mode does is set a block of time so the stats can be viewed outside just being buried in the daily stats.
Also called Activity Record if you were to do it manually on the website after the fact and wanted to view the stats.
On the Charge it also says to start using the HR formula in case the HR wasn't high enough with steps to start it automatically.

Still such a big difference in steps during the workout. Are they positioned near the same place?
If not, do you hold the treadmill bars?
Do you give yourself a little more bounce in the steps, almost skipping?

So it appears your One could be improved by manually entering a stride length.
If that was same 3 mph pace the entire time, then the following applies.

4.5 miles x 5280 ft per mile / 10174 steps = 2.34 decimal ft.
2 ft
0.34 x 12 = 4.1 inches
That could be entered in your web account View Settings - Settings - Stride length.

WarmDontBurn

heybales wrote: »

Only thing exercise mode does is set a block of time so the stats can be viewed outside just being buried in the daily stats.
Also called Activity Record if you were to do it manually on the website after the fact and wanted to view the stats.
On the Charge it also says to start using the HR formula in case the HR wasn't high enough with steps to start it automatically.

Still such a big difference in steps during the workout. Are they positioned near the same place?


The devices? My One is clipped to the left side of my bra and I wear the HR on my left hand (non-dominant)

If not, do you hold the treadmill bars?
Normally yes --- since the HR not at all -- I am very, very aware so make it a point to only hold on with my right hand if needed.

Do you give yourself a little more bounce in the steps, almost skipping?
No skipping -- I put on a movie so I watch that while I walk -- Just to keep me moving and log some steps!

So it appears your One could be improved by manually entering a stride length.
If that was same 3 mph pace the entire time, then the following applies.

4.5 miles x 5280 ft per mile / 10174 steps = 2.34 decimal ft.
2 ft
0.34 x 12 = 4.1 inches
That could be entered in your web account View Settings - Settings - Stride length.

So change my One and see if that helps for tomorrow?
My HR seems more accurate?

I appreciate the help so very much -- Hopefully I can get it right with your help!


and just to be sure I change the stride in the One to 2ft 4.1 inches?

heybales

I'd trust the One step count more, unless it's getting extra bounces in there.

I think it would be worth a bank of envelope test at the treadmill to make some notes.
During workout, step off and note the step numbers of both.
Step on and walk 100 right foot impacts, that's 200 steps total.
Step off again and write down new numbers.
Finish workout while you contemplate which is so badly off, and perhaps why.

Very strange step off that much, but it does explain the distance being off.

WarmDontBurn

HR - 17,423 start
- finish 17,575
-152 steps

2nd time around
-17575 start
-17752 finish
-177 steps

One - 19,892 start
- 20,091 finish
- 199 steps

2nd time around
20,091 start
20,292 finish
- 201 steps

heybales

That's what I thought, One more trustworthy with steps.

Wow, about 12 and 25% error on Charge HR, that's pretty big.

Just throwing out some reasons why the impacts may not be seen with the Charge while the arms are swinging.

Very serious arm swinger, like military style almost, although the steps are normal steps.

Unweight the arms at top of swing just as foot is impacting.

Sensitivity settings aren't correct.

Probably more I can't think of. Though detecting impact while arm is swinging is the challenge, I don't think I've seen it that bad.

WarmDontBurn

So take back the HR and stick with the One then?!

heybales

I'd call support first with your findings, there may be a hard reset that can help, perhaps defective unit, ect.

WarmDontBurn

Appreciate it so very much -- thank you again for taking the time to help me.

WarmDontBurn

They just said set stride length, running stride and reset it afterwards.

Wondering if the equation you gave me for stride works? 2ft 4.1 inches if I plug that in my HR.

WarmDontBurn

I think I officially give up -- if the One is the more accurate then why stress over the HR

Today mess

HR




One

heybales

WarmDontBurn wrote: »

They just said set stride length, running stride and reset it afterwards.

Wondering if the equation you gave me for stride works? 2ft 4.1 inches if I plug that in my HR.

It should not help - because the Charge was missing a healthy amount of steps. So it would still be off big time.

You could accept the fact it is going to miss steps, and then calculate stride length as I did above with the reduced steps it sees.

But I'd be concerned that it is only during the walking workout it's missing it that bad, but during normal activities it's much better.

So now you'd be using a bogus stride length trying to correct an low seen step count that should not actually apply during daily activities.

Me, I'm curious, I'd count some steps walking around doing normal things, just to see.
I also spent like 2 months proving out the sensors on the BodyMedia didn't work worth squat, well, for me, but I doubt for anyone as good as they claimed they did.

WarmDontBurn

I am over it! I gave it to my husband last night and if it isn't his thing (he wants to track sleep) it's going back!

Just want to clarify 1 thing though -- I read in another post (glassyo's actually) where it was discovered the One was not very accurate -- would you say based on the info I provided the One is as accurate as it can be?

evilunclematt

I might be wrong, but I don't know how much "steps" really factors in to measuring caloric burn. We burn more calories by increasing our activity, which in turn raises our heart rate. The Charge HR measures the heart rate, and quite accurately, I might add. So, despite some of the disparities between mileage, steps, etc... the device that accurately measures one's heart rate is most likely (in my opinion) to give you an accurate assessment of daily calorie burn. Obviously, getting in steps IS activity, but in the grand scheme of things, if my Flex tells me that I got in 10,000 steps and my Charge HR says I got in 9,000, I'm going to trust the Charge HR's assessment of my calorie burn, more than worrying about a possibly inaccurate step-count. That is, unless I'm in a step-war with my FitBit friends.

All that said, I did notice that since I changed from a Flex to the Charge HR, MFP starts me out early in the day with a positive calorie add to my activity, but as the day progresses, it slowly goes back to zero, and then eventually starts pulling calories off of my daily total. This was a bit off-putting at first, but then I realized that it's basically assuming that around 7 or 8 AM, I'm just a bum because I haven't done much. But by the end of the day, it's actually pulled my calories down by whatever I've done (gymmed, etc...), so it ended up making sense. Of course, you have to have the Negative Calorie Adjustment activated on your account.

NancyN795

evilunclematt wrote: »

I might be wrong, but I don't know how much "steps" really factors in to measuring caloric burn. We burn more calories by increasing our activity, which in turn raises our heart rate. The Charge HR measures the heart rate, and quite accurately, I might add. So, despite some of the disparities between mileage, steps, etc... the device that accurately measures one's heart rate is most likely (in my opinion) to give you an accurate assessment of daily calorie burn. Obviously, getting in steps IS activity, but in the grand scheme of things, if my Flex tells me that I got in 10,000 steps and my Charge HR says I got in 9,000, I'm going to trust the Charge HR's assessment of my calorie burn, more than worrying about a possibly inaccurate step-count. That is, unless I'm in a step-war with my FitBit friends.

All that said, I did notice that since I changed from a Flex to the Charge HR, MFP starts me out early in the day with a positive calorie add to my activity, but as the day progresses, it slowly goes back to zero, and then eventually starts pulling calories off of my daily total. This was a bit off-putting at first, but then I realized that it's basically assuming that around 7 or 8 AM, I'm just a bum because I haven't done much. But by the end of the day, it's actually pulled my calories down by whatever I've done (gymmed, etc...), so it ended up making sense. Of course, you have to have the Negative Calorie Adjustment activated on your account.

My understanding - based on what heybales has said and the fact that it makes sense - is that the Charge HR (and, I assume, the Surge), still computes calories based on steps when your heart rate is below the "Fat Burn Zone" or it isn't detecting a lot of steps. This prevents it from attributing a lot of calorie expenditure to your high heart rate when you're actually just watching a horror flick. This is also why you need to enter activities like weight lifting manually. Your heart rate is up, but you're not taking a lot of steps.

So, my understanding is that steps, not heart rate, are used most of the time to calculate calorie burn. However, the Charge HR is probably more accurate on calorie burn when doing exercise such as walking, running, dancing, etc.

WarmDontBurn

heybales wrote: »

So the Charge HR stride distance is off.
Is one set to default, the other you manually set?

Because 3 mph for 1.5 hr should be 4.5 miles with those 7611 steps.

I wouldn't do the math with those step figures of the Charge though, because they are obviously off, under reported.

And since steps equal distance with time equals pace with weight equals calories burned - yes, steps do matter actually to your concern about calories.

evilunclematt wrote: »

I might be wrong, but I don't know how much "steps" really factors in to measuring caloric burn. We burn more calories by increasing our activity, which in turn raises our heart rate. The Charge HR measures the heart rate, and quite accurately, I might add. So, despite some of the disparities between mileage, steps, etc... the device that accurately measures one's heart rate is most likely (in my opinion) to give you an accurate assessment of daily calorie burn. Obviously, getting in steps IS activity, but in the grand scheme of things, if my Flex tells me that I got in 10,000 steps and my Charge HR says I got in 9,000, I'm going to trust the Charge HR's assessment of my calorie burn, more than worrying about a possibly inaccurate step-count. That is, unless I'm in a step-war with my FitBit friends.

All that said, I did notice that since I changed from a Flex to the Charge HR, MFP starts me out early in the day with a positive calorie add to my activity, but as the day progresses, it slowly goes back to zero, and then eventually starts pulling calories off of my daily total. This was a bit off-putting at first, but then I realized that it's basically assuming that around 7 or 8 AM, I'm just a bum because I haven't done much. But by the end of the day, it's actually pulled my calories down by whatever I've done (gymmed, etc...), so it ended up making sense. Of course, you have to have the Negative Calorie Adjustment activated on your account.

I thought the same and that is why I wanted to love the HR because I figured based on the HR is would be more accurate.

I assumed that steps didn't matter -- only calorie burn but as I bolded from a previous response that does not appear to be the case.

I can look back for about 16 weeks and see that my burn has never been over 2577 and average is about 2248 -- So yesterday's 2800 burn by the end of the day leaves me uneasy. I also in those past 16 weeks used my Polar FT4 hrm as well during some walks -- so if HR is the factor is should have read higher those days too.

heybales

evilunclematt wrote: »

I might be wrong, but I don't know how much "steps" really factors in to measuring caloric burn. We burn more calories by increasing our activity, which in turn raises our heart rate. The Charge HR measures the heart rate, and quite accurately, I might add. So, despite some of the disparities between mileage, steps, etc... the device that accurately measures one's heart rate is most likely (in my opinion) to give you an accurate assessment of daily calorie burn. Obviously, getting in steps IS activity, but in the grand scheme of things, if my Flex tells me that I got in 10,000 steps and my Charge HR says I got in 9,000, I'm going to trust the Charge HR's assessment of my calorie burn, more than worrying about a possibly inaccurate step-count. That is, unless I'm in a step-war with my FitBit friends.

All that said, I did notice that since I changed from a Flex to the Charge HR, MFP starts me out early in the day with a positive calorie add to my activity, but as the day progresses, it slowly goes back to zero, and then eventually starts pulling calories off of my daily total. This was a bit off-putting at first, but then I realized that it's basically assuming that around 7 or 8 AM, I'm just a bum because I haven't done much. But by the end of the day, it's actually pulled my calories down by whatever I've done (gymmed, etc...), so it ended up making sense. Of course, you have to have the Negative Calorie Adjustment activated on your account.

Look at your Fitbit daily graph of calorie burn, the 15 or 5 min increments better.

See the lows that are all the same as while you are sleeping?

That's the calorie burn you are given with no steps seen. That's BMR level burn, calculated from gender, age, weight, height.

Except for the HR types seeing an increased HR high enough with higher steps auto-turning on HR calorie burn formula, or you hitting the button on the device to start a record - all calories burned above sleeping is based on steps.
Your hour workout may not be.

Look at your stats, most folks burn more in daily activity than exercise.

And regarding HR accuracy - do you have a means of checking when it's really a good workout and calories burned are higher?

Oh, the reason why your calories do that in the adjustment during the day?
Your prior device probably had calorie estimation disabled, the new device new account doesn't have that option in same place.

You can read about that in the FAQ in the stickies of this group.

panamagrl

It's interesting, because I've worn both a One and Charge HR 24/7 since January and I've found the Charge to be an average of 2k steps/day higher than the One. My sense was the Charge was awarding too many steps for arm movement, I wore it one day when casually folding clothes for a while and earned thousands of steps on the Charge and just a few hundred on the One. I have more faith in my One results, although I may be wrong.