Tell me about your Fitbit or other fitness tracker

oatmealeater

Hello,
Can someone give me advice about the best fitness tracker for my basic needs.

I would like to keep track of how often I exercise (either walking, running, doing Zumba, or just jumping around with my kids) in an effort to just be more active. I'd like something more advanced than a pedometer, but I'm not interested in any sleep tracking, GPS or "smart-watch" type features.

I've been looking for heart rate tracking features because I thought they might be best at showing more active periods, but reading some reviews has made me unsure of how effective this would be.

I'd like a good app that can show me how active I've been over time so that I can actually see whether I'm getting better at fitting little bursts of activity into my day. (This is probably the only way I'll realistically manage to get more exercise in.)

Can someone give me some advice? Is there a Fitbit out there for me?

Thanks!!!

livingleanlivingclean

I would also be interested in hearing opinions too - I've read a few reviews, but never been that interested in getting one before, so information has kind of gone in one ear and out the other!

I would like something that tells me about my calorie burn and how much I move - my main exercise is weight training, but I've been trying to make the effort to be more active in my general day. I do go for jogs/walks a few times a week just so I don't feel like I'm completely sedentary!
I understand accuracy would be difficult, but a few tips as to what features would get me the best results would be appreciated.

(sorry for crashing your thread @oatmealeater!)

MeanderingMammal

oatmealeater wrote: »

...walking, running....

Pretty much any pedometer on the market will work for those. Subject to how much running you do a GPS is best for that. Personally I wouldn't touch the FitBit GPS devices.

Zumba, or just jumping around with my kids

Nothing on the market will give you a meaningful measure of that.

I've been looking for heart rate tracking features because I thought they might be best at showing more active periods, but reading some reviews has made me unsure of how effective this would be.

Always-on HR has no value for most people. The only item of meaningful data is Resting Heart Rate, which is a long term metric to indicate improvements in aerobic capacity.

With that in mind you're driven largely by price point. Personally I'd recommend Garmin devices, but FitBit are perfectly adequate for most casual use.

Katus130

I’ve had my Fitbit Alta hr since August and overall I really like it. I’m a data nerd so I really like being able to see the changes over time.

The only gripe I have about it is that it doesn’t track my figure skating as ‘active’ minutes even though my heart rate is in the very low end of the cardio zone. Not sure why.

rememberyourgoal2017

I’ve just bought a Fitbit Charge 2. My favourite bit at the moment is constantly seeing how many steps I’m up to and the reminders if I’ve been sat too long (it vibrates and tells me to get up). Even now I’m below my steps goal so think I’m going to take the dog out for a walk. I’m hoping to see more activity on it when I’m back at work after the new year x

Purplebunnysarah

I have a Fitbit Blaze. I like it, use it for running and such. It's not fully compatible with my new phone so I don't bother with the GPS. I use Strava to actually track my mileage. Fitbit is just the means to import that data into MFP for calorie adjustment purposes.

I will probably look for a more useful running watch in a year or two.

Duck_Puddle

I wear a couple of Fitbits, a Garmin Fenix5 and a Polar m400 right now. One of the Fitbits is newer so I’m wearing both as a comparison point. I wear all of them because I like the different ways they all measure and account for activity.

For workouts, all of my various devices and apps measure approximately the same (within 10% of each other and any online calculators). I do not ever eliptical nor do I do classes and rarely do things where I need to qualify my level of exertion. So from a workout only standpoint, any of the trackers are fine (for me).

From a day-to-day Activity tracking standpoint, step counts vary wildly from device to device, but overall TDEE calculations are consistent. Meaning my Fitbits could say 15k steps, my Polar 22k steps, my Garmin 12k steps but all will estimate a TDEE around 2100. I’m assuming they all have an algorithm to guesstimate “false steps” (as they are worn on the wrist) and that’s how they all arrive at approximately the same calorie burn. I am mostly concerned with TDEE guesstimate, so the actual step counts are of little value to me. For me, the TDEE estimates are all fairly accurate (some higher, some lower, but nothing so far off that it’s not a workable estimate that’s far better than a wild stab in the dark). The step counts, although different from device to device for the same day, are consistent for the particular device. Meaning that Polar will always estimate 22k for a day like that, Fitbits always 15k, Garmin 12k. So you can use any of the devices to gauge today’s level of activity against yesterday’s, but the actual step count may have no actual relation to the number of steps you actually have took (or if you go for a walk with a friend who has a different device-you may have wildly different numbers).

I wear all of them because they all account for activity in different ways. Fitbit reminds me to move a certain amount each hour, tracks “active minutes” and makes challenges and competitions easy.

Garmin has a “move bar” that reminds you to keep moving throughout the day. Garmin also sets your step goal based on what your activity actually is. So if you run 30 miles a week, your step goal will be based on that. If you work at home and get maybe 2k steps a day, your step goal will be based on that.

My particular Garmin has a ton of features for tracking my training levels/status/fitness/VO2max/lactate threshold estimates/“stress”/etc. Those features probably aren’t all that important to you if you’re not a runner/endurance athlete actively working to improve those metrics (and race times)

Polar breaks down activity into assorted levels of intensity-so your activity goal can be met through any combination of moderate or vigorous activity. Polar also tracks my “training load” by including my day to day activity along with purposeful workouts. So while building a patio or moving isn’t a “workout” it’s activity that stresses the body and my polar accounts for that in overall training load and recovery status.

All of my devices except my Polar have all day heart rate. I do track my resting HR over time for fitness and recovery status. I occasionally glance at it during the day but don’t do much else with it. For workouts, I find the wrist optical heart rate to be adequate for low intensity steady state cardio where the wrist is in a straight position. So it’s fine for walking and running. Not so great for biking. Also not great for weightlifting, variable or higher intensity, things with lots of wrist/hand movements (like burpees). These are known issues with wrist optical HRM though-along with potential issues depending on skin tone and amount of hair.


But-hit or miss HR doesn’t seem to affect the workout calorie estmates (as I do a lot of the same workouts and the burns are fairly consistent whether the device thinks my HR was 74 or 174 while I was doing burpees). My guess is that they dont use HR as a primary calorie burn determinant (which makes sense). I would not rely on the wrist HR for anything to do with training. I wear a chest strap for all of that (I do quite a bit of HR based training).


I work at home and without the prodding of a device, would get no more than 3k steps a day, sometimes less (except for my runs). My workouts include running (that’s my primary goal-the only thing I really work to improve), weightlifting, stuff that I suppose would be classified as “circuit training” and occasional high intensity (very short, max effort). I don’t elliptical, or Zumba, or any do classes so I don’t know if that matters.

I find the trackers DO encourage me to move more. And I’ve also learned that my TDEE varies wildly because of what happens in the 23 hours a day that I’m not working out. The trackers have helped me to quantify that and because I’m old, short and sedentary, they have helped to quantify just how much I should actually be eating (or not). I do lose (or gain) in accordance with the TDEE guesstimates of these devices (although somefind they measure high of low).

As always - YMMV but I have found my trackers to be invaluable.

WandaVaughn

GULP! I got my belated Christmas gift- a Garmin Forerunner 25. Now I've got to figure it out!

wizzybeth

I adore my Fitbit One. I can't stand to wear anything on my wrist or ankle so it's perfect for me. I clip to my bra or my pants pocket or waistband. It recognizes marching in place so it works while on the treadmill or elliptical. It is not loaded with bells and whistles but has enough for what I need.

Davidsdottir

Had various Fitbits over the last five years. They all had issues after a year. Just switched to the Garmin Vivoactive 3.

alessermern

oatmealeater wrote: »

Hello,
Can someone give me advice about the best fitness tracker for my basic needs.

I would like to keep track of how often I exercise (either walking, running, doing Zumba, or just jumping around with my kids) in an effort to just be more active. I'd like something more advanced than a pedometer, but I'm not interested in any sleep tracking, GPS or "smart-watch" type features.

I've been looking for heart rate tracking features because I thought they might be best at showing more active periods, but reading some reviews has made me unsure of how effective this would be.

I'd like a good app that can show me how active I've been over time so that I can actually see whether I'm getting better at fitting little bursts of activity into my day. (This is probably the only way I'll realistically manage to get more exercise in.)

Can someone give me some advice? Is there a Fitbit out there for me?

Thanks!!!

I have the Fitbit HR. Have had it for my whole weight loss journey. I started at 282 lbs and am currently 180. I LOVE it. I use it to see how many calories I burn when I workout. It keeps track of sleep, calories burned, steps, heart rate ( it's pretty right on with the HR, I have compared it with my other HR monitor that straps on to my chest with the watch on my wrist and they are neck and neck with the HR). The only thing that I don't like about it is that it's not waterproof. The vivo active HR does all the same things and it's waterproof so you can wear it while you are swimming.

dutchandkiwi

For the basics a basic will work.
I had a fitbit charge HR for about 18 months and that worked well for everything you describe and it got me going but the band kept developing blisters
These days I have a Garmin Vivosmart 3 for daily use and I can see it being a little more advanced in many ways. I prefer the Garmin app to the fitbit app. I switched to Garmin as we already had other Garmin stuff and my husband had a runningwatch by Garmin.
I now also have a Garmin Forerunner 235 which I solely use for activities as I find it too large for all day wear, but much better for activity tracking than the Vivosmart (GPS and some other things) however this latest one came 2.5 years after my first fitbit So my taste and requirements also evolved

oatmealeater

Thanks for all your help guys! I ended up getting a fitbit flex, which is the most basic model, I think. Since this is my first foray into the fitness tracker world, I'll try it out for a few months and see if I want to upgrade later.