Fitbit Choice

WynterDreaming

So a quick search and I can't find a concrete answer so I thought I would reach out to the community.

I am looking to invest into a fitbit in the near future. I've heard good things about them so I decided to look into it. Looking through the available models and taking their price points into account, I've narrowed it down to the Charge and the Charge HR.

Now here is the thing. The Charge HR boasts a 40$ price jump, when the only feature it has over the other is the heart monitor. In your opinions, is the extra $40 worth it for that feature alone? Or if my exercise picks up in the coming months and I go with the regular Charge, am I just going to end up upgrading to the HR anyways?

SlowPath2Fit

I can't answer this question on the Fitbit. I had a Garmin Vivosmart. It broke. They sent me the Vivosmart HR as a replacement. I love the additional HR feature. It is worth the money for that feature.

wolf0213

I would go with the HR. It is always good to see where your heart rate is during exercise. It also helps get a more accurate calculation of calories burned. I have a polar HR monitor and I wear it when I exercise so I know where I'm at in each fitness zone. I feel that the HR piece is worth the extra money.

CincyNeid

I have the VivoSmart HR at the moment, and the VivoActive HR is on the UPS truck on it's way to work.

I like having the Heart Rate Monitor. It's narrower guesstimate when it comes to Calories Burned. Plus it's nice to see your Resting HR to know if your diet and/or exercise is working. A resting heart rate should be between 60-100 BPM for most adults. The beater your heart condition the lower that will be. Plus while you're running/cycling it will give an idea to your HRTH [Heart Rate ThresHold] So you can get a good picture of how strong your heart is.

I say that as a generalization. I would always talk to your medical professional about your personal situation in regards to heart health...

capaul42

I prefer my Charge HR over the regular one. Keeping an eye on my hr during exercise was key selling point for me as I have low blood pressure and vaso-vagal syncope.

I've found it to be more and more accurate the longer I wear it (only take it off to charge it when I shower).

heatherheyns

I like the heart rate feature for resting heart rate. The readings during exercise are often off, so don't expect to use it for "zone" training. That is what the lawsuits are for, that they are usually under reporting heart rate during exercise, and I've found it to be true by a good 20-30 which is a large amount if you're pushing for, say, 90% of your max. However, seeing my heart get stronger by watching the resting drop from the 80's to the low 60's is huge motivation for me, so I see that as being very useful.

bizygirl1

I pay attention to the HR feature a lot with my Blaze

Sued0nim

I would not get a 24 hour wearable heart rate monitor because they are next to pointless

HR conversion to calories is for steady state cardio only (jogging, running, rowing, cycling) ...apart from on the very high end where they say the tech has advanced ..the rest of the time it converts to the pedometer (or possibly satellite mapping) features

So really you'd be paying to buy into a marketing scam of the highest order

HR is not equal to calorie burn during HIIT, weight training, yoga, callisthenics, Pilates, cross fit etc etc etc

HR gives a calorie estimate for steady state due to an algorithm based on oxygen uptake in a lab under specific conditions eg up to lactate threshold

Anyhow...won't change anybody's minds but that's the facts

Ready2Rock206

I just have the regular Charge. When I was deciding which one to purchase I heard the HR part can be inaccurate. I also have a low heart rate anyway so I didn't think it would be useful info for me.

BklynFitGuy

I've had a flex for a few years. Great results, no issues. It just lacks some of the features of the others.

Sued0nim

Sorry just to add I'm a Fitbit zip wearer (cos I can clip it to a pocket, waistband or bra and wear bracelets)

And I own a Polar FT4, which has a chest strap which I will wear for specific workouts and enter manually into Fitbit to override any steps during that time

jawsd54

I used to have a Jawbone, but when I saw my heart rate was only reading near the mid 80s when partaking in heavy cardio, I returned it and decided that if I want to have a decently accurate activity tracker, might as well go all in.

I picked up the Charge HR and really like it so far! (Been using it for a couple of months) Yes the calorie adjustment is kind of wonky, as well as the calorie adjustment to your MFP daily value, but I do believe it is giving me the proper data that I am looking for (mostly step count and heart rate)

In my opinion, you have to look at an activity tracker as an investment. If you're truly serious about getting more active, don't hesitate in spending a little more $$. It'll only motivate you to actually get up and out more often.

mph323

It depends on what you are using it for. I have an HR and use it to monitor my resting heart rate (watched it go from mid-90s to mid 70s over the last 6 months as activity increased). I've checked it against taking my pulse manually and it's pretty dead on accurate for me. I wouldn't use it to monitor activity intensity or calorie burn, it's just not that accurate during exercise.

Sued0nim

mph323 wrote: »

It depends on what you are using it for. I have an HR and use it to monitor my resting heart rate (watched it go from mid-90s to mid 70s over the last 6 months as activity increased). I've checked it against taking my pulse manually and it's pretty dead on accurate for me. I wouldn't use it to monitor activity intensity or calorie burn, it's just not that accurate during exercise.

That's a valid use ...recovery times is interesting to track as well

candaceph

I had a Charge HR and really liked it until the button fell off a month out of warranty. FitBit did give me a 25% off another device so I selected the Blaze which I just got today - too early to see if I like it. I selected the Blaze because it has the option to select what type of activity you are doing (cycling, running, weight training, etc.). I don't know it that's a big deal to anybody but the price was right for me. I also had a Vivosmart HR for about a week until the touchscreen went bad.

IllustratedxGirl

FYI fitbit is going to be coming out with a new Charge HR. I discovered this because REI had stopped purchasing them, and they gave this to me as the reason. I purchased an Alta at REI and will return it for the Charge HR when the new version is released.

Christine_72

I have the fitbit Alta, it is not a HR monitor. The only exercise I do is walking, so a Heart rate device would be pretty useless for me.

WynterDreaming

Thank you everyone, for the opinions and information!

fr33sia12

I've been wanting a Fitbit charge HR for a while but could never justify spending that much money on one. I had a search on Amazon and found a very similar device for a quarter of the price. It does everything a Fitbit does and seems just as accurate.

roxyspitfire53

I have both a Fitbit flex and charge HR. I like both, but the Heart rate on the charge HR is priceless. Living in the South it gets warm and I tend to run high. If I get to 155 or 160 then I know to slow down or stop for little bit

NurseKristi81

I had the Charge HR for 6 months and loved it so much I just went and got the Blaze! For both my husband and I:)
I love the competition aspect of it, but then again I am very competitive