Garmin Forerunner 235

maaadde
maaadde Posts: 90 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
First off I'm not sure I'm posting this in the right subforum so I apologize in advance for that. Anyway - my question is if anyone else her uses a Garmin Forerunner, preferably a 235? I bought mine today and I love the idea of it but I'm not quite sure how to use it. Should I keep the automatic pulse reading on or is it just a waste of battery? Any other advice? It's all so overwhelming haha :flushed:

Replies

  • pondee629
    pondee629 Posts: 2,469 Member
    Are you really concerned about you pulse rate over the course of the day? Does it change that much without doing a workout? Why do you think you would want it on all day?

    I use my Garmin when I'm running. I don't see the utility in keeping it on all day. Easy enough to check your heart rate taking your pulse for 15 seconds and multiplying by 4. (some other equivalent equation).
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    Keep it on; you paid for the feature you might as well use it. The battery is rechargeable. After you've been using it for a few weeks you can decide for yourself whether it's worth having or not. If the thing seems overwhelming at first, just play with it, get used to it slowly. No need to tackle everything at once.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Specifically for HR the biggest benefit I've seen is in determining my Resting Heart Rate, which allows me to determine fitness improvements, and identify whether there is anything that informs my training.

    Knowing RHR, currently 50bpm, is helpful. If my RHR increases by 10bpm for more than a couple of days, there something wrong that needs addressed.

    Other than that, agree the point above, just use it and see how you find the data informing your decision making.
  • maaadde
    maaadde Posts: 90 Member
    That is true. I guess for similar reasons, I mainly want to keep the watch on all day long to use it as a step counter. Of course the biggest thing is I want to know my HR while exercising so that's a given but since I did quite extensive research before buying it and so many people were praising the watch and this specific feature too I just wanted to know how to properly use it and make use of the data :)
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Personally I don't use HR as a contemporaneous data point when I'm training. Pace when running or pace and cadence when cycling tend to be far more meaningful for my objectives. What is useful is being able to correlate HR with other characteristics in post training analysis; how did it respond to changes in elevation or pace/ cadence etc. Being able to compare it with mapping so that I can judge surfaces is also handy.

    Optical HR monitoring has some limitations while training, but it's good enough for most purposes, most of the time. I've got no aspirations to try out for Team GB, so the more sophisticated data from electrical sensing aren't particularly meaningful.
  • maaadde
    maaadde Posts: 90 Member
    I want to be able to know what my HR is while at different paces to kind of gauge how fit I am and see how it (hopefully) improves over time. I'd also like to know for my HIIT that I'm in a good zone etc. But I realize I might need to get a chest strap to get good results for HIIT training so perhaps I should have gone for the 230 instead :(
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    edited September 2016
    maaadde wrote: »
    I want to be able to know what my HR is while at different paces to kind of gauge how fit I am and see how it (hopefully) improves over time. I'd also like to know for my HIIT that I'm in a good zone etc. But I realize I might need to get a chest strap to get good results for HIIT training so perhaps I should have gone for the 230 instead :(

    If you've got time to check your HR when you're doing HIIT, you're not doing HIIT.

    Answering the how fitness is improving question is about analysing data after the fact, identifying trends and acting on that information.

    RHR is your most reliable indicator of improving fitness.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    maaadde wrote: »
    I want to be able to know what my HR is while at different paces to kind of gauge how fit I am and see how it (hopefully) improves over time. I'd also like to know for my HIIT that I'm in a good zone etc. But I realize I might need to get a chest strap to get good results for HIIT training so perhaps I should have gone for the 230 instead :(

    Does the watch calculate your running VO2max from your pace and HR? Mine has changed slightly (improved and degraded) over the past year or so. It's supposed to be one of the best indicators of cardiovascular fitness and in practice the measurement from my F3 has tracked pretty well with my fitness. In practice, this has been a better indicator than my resting heart rate, which is affected by non-fitness things. But just seeing my pace improve for a specific distance has worked very well too.
  • maaadde
    maaadde Posts: 90 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    If you've got time to check your HR when you're doing HIIT, you're not doing HIIT.

    Answering the how fitness is improving question is about analysing data after the fact, identifying trends and acting on that information.

    RHR is your most reliable indicator of improving fitness.

    I wasn't saying I'm doing tabata, but for HIIT I most definitely have time to glance at my watch during the 30-60 seconds I'm in either the fast or the slow parts of the workout. Why would you think that was impossible?

    I know I'll mainly use it for analyzing after but also then I think knowing my HR during the workouts, combining it with a note on how I felt, seeing if my results improve faster if I've had multiple workouts in a row with a higher HR etc. I don't find it an unnecessary feature at all, I do however wonder if I should have gotten the 230 instead or if I'll make use of the continuous measuring of my HR. Right now it says my RHR is 54 which I know it's not, I've never in my life checked my HR by any method for it to be below 63 so I don't know why it says that :/

  • maaadde
    maaadde Posts: 90 Member
    NorthCascades wrote: »

    Does the watch calculate your running VO2max from your pace and HR? Mine has changed slightly (improved and degraded) over the past year or so. It's supposed to be one of the best indicators of cardiovascular fitness and in practice the measurement from my F3 has tracked pretty well with my fitness. In practice, this has been a better indicator than my resting heart rate, which is affected by non-fitness things. But just seeing my pace improve for a specific distance has worked very well too.


    It does calculate my running VO2max, I haven't been able to go out for a run today yet but I was thinking I will tomorrow to do it. Pace improving for a specific distance feels like an obvious indication of improved fitness!
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    maaadde wrote: »
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    If you've got time to check your HR when you're doing HIIT, you're not doing HIIT.

    Answering the how fitness is improving question is about analysing data after the fact, identifying trends and acting on that information.

    RHR is your most reliable indicator of improving fitness.

    I wasn't saying I'm doing tabata, but for HIIT I most definitely have time to glance at my watch during the 30-60 seconds I'm in either the fast or the slow parts of the workout. Why would you think that was impossible?

    I think we're in the same place then, long threshold intervals.

    The optical pickup is sensitive to wrist positioning, and does have some potential lag compared to electrical pickup. What I would say is, and alluded to upthread, that lag isn't significant enough to make a material difference to your decision making. If you were doing 10-20 second intervals above 95% MHR then the <1sec lag between the two might be meaningful.

    The reality is that you can pair any Garmin ANT+ Chest strap with the 235 if you think it's useful to you.
    I know I'll mainly use it for analyzing after but also then I think knowing my HR during the workouts, combining it with a note on how I felt, seeing if my results improve faster if I've had multiple workouts in a row with a higher HR etc. I don't find it an unnecessary feature at all, I do however wonder if I should have gotten the 230 instead or if I'll make use of the continuous measuring of my HR. Right now it says my RHR is 54 which I know it's not, I've never in my life checked my HR by any method for it to be below 63 so I don't know why it says that :/

    The Garmin platform builds the indicated RHR over a rolling average, so it'll take 2-3 weeks to stabilise. The one criticism I'd make of the process is that it uses lowest measures through the course of the day, so it doesn't understand that whilst I might have two hours of low HR that's not resting, it's merely passive while I've been in a meeting or writing.

    Taking your RHR and VO2Max together can be useful, particularly if you're in race preparation and doing work on maximising VO2Max for competition. What is missing from that information is an appreciation of Lactate Threshold. The VO2Max approximation is more limited that on the higher end Garmins which do use more data. The Garmin Run HR strap collects more data types, but the 235 can't use all of them.

    The reality is that we al make choices on the kit we use based on our need, our budget and availability. The 235 is a good piece of kit. It's a third of the price of the ones that can use all of the data, so the question becomes whether that greater precision is worth the additional cost?

  • squarewheels66
    squarewheels66 Posts: 25 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    The reality is that you can pair any Garmin ANT+ Chest strap with the 235 if you think it's useful to you.

    I couldn't get the ANT+ chest strap from my Edge 500 to pair with my 230. Don't know why maybe the battery is a but low but it works OK with the Edge. I had a hunch it wasn't going to work so I was glad I ordered with chest strap.

    I got 230 because I wasn't satisfied that wrist based HRM was worth the extra (also take watch off for elliptical and bike). I use it to keep HR down during long/recovery workouts.

    Really pleased with it - I was a but overwhelmed at first but its actually pretty straightforward. Garmin Connect is a little flaky but the ability to store and analyse data and customise workouts is impressive
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    The VO2Max approximation is more limited that on the higher end Garmins which do use more data. The Garmin Run HR strap collects more data types, but the 235 can't use all of them.

    For example...?
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    squarewheels66 wrote: »
    I got 230 because I wasn't satisfied that wrist based HRM was worth the extra (also take watch off for elliptical and bike). I use it to keep HR down during long/recovery workouts.

    There are undoubted issues with wrist worn HR. For running in cold/ wet weather you either read HR or you see the screen, and for cycling you can't read it. That's more of an issue for the 735XT as a multisport device, whereas the 235 has lmited multisport capabilities. The originator has already bought the device so as a question of whether to switch it off or not seems a bit moot.

    Personally I use a VivoSmart to broadcast HR, unless I'm on my turbo trainer when I'll use a chest strap. I find the chest strap shreds my chest after about 90 minutes of running, although I've been contemplating upgrading to a 630 and Garmin HRM Run.

    I have been very sceptical of the always on nature of opticals in the past, but I can see some benefits from them. As they're now comparable from a pricing perspective to decent quality chest strap devices nowadays they're probably as accurate and precise as the vast majority of people need.
  • squarewheels66
    squarewheels66 Posts: 25 Member
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    For example...?
    The running chest strap has an accelerometer which measures running dynamics like bounce, ground contact time, stride length - not sure what I would do with this information - only available on the top end watches
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    edited September 2016
    squarewheels66 wrote: »
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    For example...?
    The running chest strap has an accelerometer which measures running dynamics like bounce, ground contact time, stride length - not sure what I would do with this information - only available on the top end watches

    There is a materiality, in relation to the VO2Max approximation, around sample frequency, and certain aspects of frequency deviation and strength that the Fenix3, 735XT and I think the 630 can process but the 235 can't. In practice the 235 can make an approximation based on optical data that'll be no different from that it'll make from electrical collection.

    Is it worth paying three times the cost for? Well as upthread, I'm not planning on trying out for Team GB...

    fwiw I do see some value in the running dynamics, particularly cadence and vertical oscillation that are trainable for the more serious runner and can improve running efficiency somewhat. That said I'm thinking about the type of runner who is doing a marathon once a month as the person who'd benefit from that.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    squarewheels66 wrote: »
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    For example...?
    The running chest strap has an accelerometer which measures running dynamics like bounce, ground contact time, stride length - not sure what I would do with this information - only available on the top end watches

    Yeah. I don't think that's what M&M means, but the comment was pretty vague, it could have referred to anything, so who knows?

    I do find the 'vertical ratio' metric somewhat useful. I can tell in realtime while I run that I'm spending too much energy bouncing up and down and not getting enough forward motion for my energy. I run faster when I pay attention to these parts of my form. But it takes concentration, at least in the short term.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    There is a materiality, in relation to the VO2Max approximation, around sample frequency, and certain aspects of frequency deviation and strength that the Fenix3, 735XT and I think the 630 can process but the 235 can't. In practice the 235 can make an approximation based on optical data that'll be no different from that it'll make from electrical collection.

    What aspects of frequency deviation and strength do the higher end watches process that the 235 can't, specifically? In plain English, what are you referring to?

Categories