Fitbit Charge HR vs Traditional HRM

_whatsherface

Hey guys,

I currently have a Polar Ft7 HRM and a Fitbit Flex. For the past 8 months or so, I have only been using the Fitbit Flex. I am now wanting to just convert to the Charge HR but was wondering (for those of you who have used both) If you feel it is as accurate as your traditional HRM in terms of HR AND calorie burned.

Any input is greatly appreciated.

LazSommer

If you want accuracy, get a chest strap.

ASKyle

What kind of activity are you wanting to measure?

Psychgrrl

The research I read--though I haven't read in the last six months, said the chest straps were far more accurate. That's why I bought the fitness tracker I did (Garmin Vivoactive). I only care about my HR when training, so it works well for me.

_whatsherface

Okay guys. Thank you.

I'd like to measure HR when at the gym.

BrianSharpe

_whatsherface wrote: »

Okay guys. Thank you.

I'd like to measure HR when at the gym.

Doing what at the gym? Most HRMs are only intended for uses (at least in respect to calorie estimates) when doing steady state cardio. If you're doing weights or HIIT they're not terribly useful.

For really in-depth reviews of heart rate monitors, GPS devises and all sorts of other toys check out a website belonging to DCRainmaker.

ASKyle

_whatsherface wrote: »

Okay guys. Thank you.

I'd like to measure HR when at the gym.

Doing what? Weights? Intervals? Steady state cardio?

NorthCascades

_whatsherface wrote: »

If you feel it is as accurate as your traditional HRM in terms of HR AND calorie burned.

It's not.

My girlfriend has a Polar H7 strap, and had a Fitbit Charge HR for months, but ultimately returned it as unsatisfactory.

For one thing, the chest strap measures your actual, current, instantaneous heart rate. The Fitbit (and I think all wrist-based HRMs) are a moving average. I had a Mio Fuse, it had the same thing as Beth's Fitbit HR: it takes longer to notice when your HR changes. When you start going up a hill, it lags behind and shows you not working very hard, takes a moment to catch up, whereas the chest strap is just instant. The Fitbit doesn't record your HR every second either, so she was working really hard for brief periods, and not able to find them in the recorded workout later, which was hugely disappointing and made it hard to track her progress getting more fit. Also, the Fitbit HRM just wasn't very accurate at higher HRs which means at higher exertion levels where you want it most.

For technology reasons, chest straps are more accurate than wrist sensors for HR. Chest straps can record "better" data (HRV) which is only a concern if you have software that can make use of it.

blues4miles

Chest straps are a lot more accurate.

However, an HRM is only good at calculating calories burned for steady state activities: walking, jogging/running, elliptical. And NOT good for weight lifting or even circuit training.