Fitbit blaze or other watch reviews? Owner opinions too...

TalQureshi

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

TalQureshi wrote: »

... doesn't a good HR monitor improve the accuracy? Or can any activity tracker do that well?

No. Using HR as a proxy for calorie expenditure assumes that there is a relationship between HR and calorie expenditure. That's true when one is discussing steady state exercise in the aerobic range, but not where you're talking about non steady state or non-aerobic range. Both of those will cause the relationship to break down and overestimate.

Other factors contribute to a loss of accuracy as well, hydration levels, other stimuli etc.

So essentially if I'm going for a 10km steady state run I'd accept an HR based calorie estimation as not particularly inaccurate. If I did much more than 10km I'd assume that the calorie estimate was probably over, and if I'd done sprint intervals in that session then the same thing, it's probably too high.

My worry is that the Moto 360 sport currently underestimates my calorie burn and I know this because I compared it for the same workout with a chest strap polar HR monitor.

You'remaking the assumption that the HR based estimate is better than your Moto. If you're using a Polar HR based estimate for something like Insanity I'd assume it's at least 50% over.

Roll two 10 sided dice and see how it compares to that as well... That's about as meaningful as using an HR strap.

Thanks for that info.

So considering my workouts and that I have the Moto 360 do you think there's any need in switching to another device? If so any recommendations?

Christine_72

I think unless you're into serious training then a HR monitor is a waste of time and money.

jgnatca

I'm looking too and I want to get something that I can use for quite a while.

My criteria; scratch the sleep pattern and heart rate. I want it to count steps and stairs accurately. Waterproof would be nice but not required. It should be attached to a social app like MapMyRun. And it should function as a watch too.

MeanderingMammal

TalQureshi wrote: »

So considering my workouts and that I have the Moto 360 do you think there's any need in switching to another device? If so any recommendations?

I'm not particularly familiar with the Moto360, but given that you've talked about running I'd veer towards the VivoActive or FR235. The Moto360 doesn't have GPS, which is a basic function as far as I'm concerned.

For Inanity and the like, just log them by time.

TalQureshi

Christine_72 wrote: »

I think unless you're into serious training then a HR monitor is a waste of time and money.

Hi Christine,

I do train daily, workout, box and swim. Just not sure what device to go with.

Need something that accurately updates fitness apps add mfp.

Currently the Moto 360 is really erratic with its synching and limitations in choosing work outs.

TalQureshi

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

TalQureshi wrote: »

So considering my workouts and that I have the Moto 360 do you think there's any need in switching to another device? If so any recommendations?

I'm not particularly familiar with the Moto360, but given that you've talked about running I'd veer towards the VivoActive or FR235. The Moto360 doesn't have GPS, which is a basic function as far as I'm concerned.

For Inanity and the like, just log them by time.

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

TalQureshi wrote: »

So considering my workouts and that I have the Moto 360 do you think there's any need in switching to another device? If so any recommendations?

I'm not particularly familiar with the Moto360, but given that you've talked about running I'd veer towards the VivoActive or FR235. The Moto360 doesn't have GPS, which is a basic function as far as I'm concerned.

For Inanity and the like, just log them by time.

Ok so Garmin seems to be the one to consider.

Btw I have the sport version of Moto 360 so it has GPS... The battery lasts about 3/4 of a day though... On an active day

jgnatca

https://www.wareable.com/fitness-trackers/the-best-fitness-tracker

It looks like unless I spend a lot more, I can get all I want except for the watch. I'm leaning towards Misfit Shine.

AnvilHead

TalQureshi wrote: »

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

TalQureshi wrote: »

Polar m600 vs Vivoactive HR vs forerunner 235

Personally I'd go for the 235. In general Garmin GPS is better than Polar and Garmin has more interoperability. Polar HR monitoring is slightly better than Garmin. Of the two it's more important to have good GPS and interoperability than HR, as HR is of much less importance. In practice whilst Polar does do HR slightly better, for most people the difference is meaningless anyway.

Of the two Garmins, they're in different ranges, the VivoActive HR is low end multi-application, the 235 is a mid range device largely aimed at runners. As a marathoner I'd go for the 235 from that selection.

What's really important for me is that it accurately works out calorie burn and HR for indoor style workouts like insanity, p90x or boxing.

Calorie expenditure is best estimated in different ways for different activities, your problem is those that HR is most useful for, are also those that other methods are reliable for as well. For something like running, GPS is probably as meaningful as anything else, and tat's where HR is most meaningful. Similarly cycling, rowing etc. For walking HR is meaningless.

Similarly for something like Insanity etc HR is a meaningless metric to measure, so it really doesn't matter what device you use, if you're interested in calorie expenditure.

The advantage that the 235 has is that you don't need to wear a chest strap, which is probably most relevant for boxing, I'd be surprised if you're allowed to wear one in the ring. That said, in that situation I'd be going for a Schoche Rhythm and leaving the head end on the edge of the ring.

Thanks for such detailed advice.

In terms of when you mentioned each is fine, if it's too work out calories burned, doesn't a good HR monitor improve the accuracy? Or can any activity tracker do that well?

My worry is that the Moto 360 sport currently underestimates my calorie burn and I know this because I compared it for the same workout with a chest strap polar HR monitor.

The 360 sort currently uses the Moto app to start a workout and it only lets me choose running as the workout type. It's the same for apps like strava... I'm thinking that's why it under values my calories burned, as it thinks I should be running in a forward motion as opposed to the various motions forced by insanity workouts.

Can the issue be cured by a better android app?

Here's an excellent read which explains what HRMs are/aren't good for, and why: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-21472

MeanderingMammal

TalQureshi wrote: »

Christine_72 wrote: »

I think unless you're into serious training then a HR monitor is a waste of time and money.

Hi Christine,

I do train daily, workout, box and swim. Just not sure what device to go with.

I think the point that Christine is making, and I rather agree with, is that for most people, most of the time HR is a relatively meaningless metric.

There are three pieces of HR data that are useful, Resting Heart Rate, Lactate Threshold and VO2Max. Of the three, the first is most meaningful to most people. As your fitness improves your RHR should reduce. And when you notice RHR increasing for a few days that's an indicator of something wrong; overtraining, overtired, illness. The latter two are useful to understand to frame training quality, but testing them can be difficult.

Training to HR can be useful for runners, cyclists, rowers etc as part of their training plan. It's not the only way to train, but it's one of the approaches. In that sense the vast majority of people who aren't training for specific performance improvement are collecting HR data for little more than the value of collecting the data.

If you're going to correlate it with other data and derive conclusions from it that then inform your training, then it's useful. A cyclist may collect GPS trace, pedal cadence, power output, HR and gear selection, then use all of that to inform their subsequent training.

As a runner it's possible to collect data around pace length, vertical oscillation, GPS trace, pace cadence, HR and use that to reach conclusions about what sort of session to do.

TalQureshi

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

TalQureshi wrote: »

Christine_72 wrote: »

I think unless you're into serious training then a HR monitor is a waste of time and money.

Hi Christine,

I do train daily, workout, box and swim. Just not sure what device to go with.

I think the point that Christine is making, and I rather agree with, is that for most people, most of the time HR is a relatively meaningless metric.

There are three pieces of HR data that are useful, Resting Heart Rate, Lactate Threshold and VO2Max. Of the three, the first is most meaningful to most people. As your fitness improves your RHR should reduce. And when you notice RHR increasing for a few days that's an indicator of something wrong; overtraining, overtired, illness. The latter two are useful to understand to frame training quality, but testing them can be difficult.

Training to HR can be useful for runners, cyclists, rowers etc as part of their training plan. It's not the only way to train, but it's one of the approaches. In that sense the vast majority of people who aren't training for specific performance improvement are collecting HR data for little more than the value of collecting the data.

If you're going to correlate it with other data and derive conclusions from it that then inform your training, then it's useful. A cyclist may collect GPS trace, pedal cadence, power output, HR and gear selection, then use all of that to inform their subsequent training.

As a runner it's possible to collect data around pace length, vertical oscillation, GPS trace, pace cadence, HR and use that to reach conclusions about what sort of session to do.

Hi again,

Thanks for the advice. In terms of running the data would be really useful to beat previous times, route times and monitor heart health/zones.

Really for running I just need it to tell me:
Times
Pace
Average HR
Times in each HR zone
Calories burned
My own records too e.g personal bests
Mapped runs

For workouts:
HR and average
Times in each zone
Accurate calorie burned

Optional:
Swimming lengths/times
Sleep

I'm thinking of buying the fore runner 235 after all the advice and YouTube reviews.

What do you think MeanderingMammal?

MeanderingMammal

The FR235 is a very capable device, as long as you recognise that for your workouts category nothing will give you an accurate calorie estimate.

If you want to add swimming to the list, then you're into the 920XT or the 735XT, both of which are probably significantly overspecified for your needs.

Given where you are I'd assume some trail running, since you've got the Peak District National Park on your doorstep. In the price range you're talking you're getting GPS derived altitude, but that's no big issue.

TalQureshi

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

The FR235 is a very capable device, as long as you recognise that for your workouts category nothing will give you an accurate calorie estimate.

If you want to add swimming to the list, then you're into the 920XT or the 735XT, both of which are probably significantly overspecified for your needs.

Given where you are I'd assume some trail running, since you've got the Peak District National Park on your doorstep. In the price range you're talking you're getting GPS derived altitude, but that's no big issue.

Thanks again, you've given me loads to think about.

The swimming isn't that important and I only swim every two weeks or so. Besides I agree for my style of workouts not sure I need something as pricey as the higher models. I probably wouldn't use 20% of the features.

Okay, looks like my mind is made up. Fr235 is the one

Now just need to find some good deals, I think Amazon are doing it for £200, let me know if it's cheaper anywhere else.

Tal

MeanderingMammal

I'd normally go to Wiggle, but it looks like it's 216 there, so Amazon is probably your best bet.

MiniMansell1964

Tomtom adventurer.

that is the answer

Hungry_Annie

successgal1 wrote: »

shredcamps wrote: »

Fitbit, much like GoPro did a great job with marketting and are the first name on most peoples lips.
before you buy a fitbit though google for the failure rate, i had 4 surges, and a charge HR, all had faulty straps.
i now use the tomtom Adventurer. a far better fitness watch in every way

I can't even imagine what a "faulty strap" is, though you're not the first person to mention it. Where exactly did it fail? Been wearing mine for over a year.

I've had almost almost every Fitbit made. I get excited for new ones and upgrade lol. The only "faulty" one would be the Charge. I only had it a short time as I upgraded to the Charge HR but my daughter and both sisters had replacements sent as all their bands fell apart. But that model has been discontinued. I have never had issues with any of mine. I've had the Flex, Zip, Charge, Charge HR, Surge, Blaze and now the Charge HR 2 and so far it's my favorite. The Surge was a bit bulky but it has built in GPS. No device is 100% accurate but it gives a ballpark idea.

TalQureshi

Hungry_Annie wrote: »

successgal1 wrote: »

shredcamps wrote: »

Fitbit, much like GoPro did a great job with marketting and are the first name on most peoples lips.
before you buy a fitbit though google for the failure rate, i had 4 surges, and a charge HR, all had faulty straps.
i now use the tomtom Adventurer. a far better fitness watch in every way

I can't even imagine what a "faulty strap" is, though you're not the first person to mention it. Where exactly did it fail? Been wearing mine for over a year.

I've had almost almost every Fitbit made. I get excited for new ones and upgrade lol. The only "faulty" one would be the Charge. I only had it a short time as I upgraded to the Charge HR but my daughter and both sisters had replacements sent as all their bands fell apart. But that model has been discontinued. I have never had issues with any of mine. I've had the Flex, Zip, Charge, Charge HR, Surge, Blaze and now the Charge HR 2 and so far it's my favorite. The Surge was a bit bulky but it has built in GPS. No device is 100% accurate but it gives a ballpark idea.

Hi,

Why do you like the charge hr2 the most? Just interested.

Thanks for your feedback

NorthCascades

singletrackmtbr wrote: »

I have a Fenix 3 HR and love it.

Yeah, that's another advantage skiing has over cycling: you use a better Garmin.

NorthCascades

TalQureshi wrote: »

Optional:
Swimming lengths/times

I could be wrong, but I think only the most expensive of the Forerunner line will do this. Meaning not the 235, but the 920XT. I'd go with the Fenix 3 instead, it's the same code base as the 920, but with more features, and better looks.