Trackers & accuracy: wrist-worn & HR vs clip for physical job
Options
kiela64
Posts: 1,447 Member
I made another post here a while back but it was much more convoluted and now I've narrowed things down a bit more, I'll pose the question more accurately. If you remember it, sorry for the repeat!
Background: I lost my old fitness tracker that was a clip, the Misfit Flash. I wore it on my waist/in my pocket typically. In my experience, it was fairly accurate at predicting my calories burned, once I figured out it was giving me a full TDEE rather than just "calories from exercise" as MFP claimed.
Since I lost it, I've been looking at replacements with the requirements that they track swimming/be waterproof because swimming is the safest activity for my problem knee, and I intend to return to the pool soon. I want one that will work with me as I improve on swimming, and in my experience I cannot focus and count laps, so an estimate of laps swam is a desirable quality. This is a cutting point, and I am not considering trackers without this feature.
The other cutting point was syncing with MFP.
This led me to 3 choices: the Misfit Shine 2 Swimmers Edition ($100), the Fitbit Charge 3 ($200), and the Garmin Vivoactive 3 ($300). [Although I looked at many Garmin devices, none of the others seemed to actually track laps etc despite being waterproof - if your experience counters this I am open to hearing it!] (Prices in CAD, because Canada). I knocked the Garmin off my list for being needlessly pricey for essentially doing the same things as the Charge 3 (although it looks much nicer, and if you disagree you are welcome to change my mind).
I had been planning to just make a decision between the 2, but a concussion has sidelined me so I've had more time to deliberate than expected. And I've found myself thinking about my work environment, where I burn the majority of my calories, and it's important that my device be accurate with steps.
Actual Question/TL;DR:
In my work day I push carts, I do a lot of lifting of small items, do repetitive tasks with my arms/hands, carry small items while walking, etc. All of these things make me wonder about the effectiveness of a wrist-based tracker. I worry that a tracker on my wrist would either overestimate my steps due to the increase in movement, or try to counter this and then underestimate because they think I am just standing still waving my arms around rather than continuing to walk about.
The downside of the Misfit Shine 2 is that it doesn't have an HR tracker and it, much like my original one, could be lost without noticing. The upside is that it can be worn on the waist and track steps without being confused by arm movements. The downside of the Charge 3 (and the Vivoactive 3) is that it is worn on the wrist and might misjudge my activity wildly. The upside is possibly HR tracking, not getting lost, and the Fitbit Community (well regarded in reviews I read).
My question is, are my concerns about wrist-based trackers valid? If you have a wrist-based tracker, do you feel that it is accurate if you are pushing carts/moving your arms a lot in your day? Do you find the HR function valuable?
Background: I lost my old fitness tracker that was a clip, the Misfit Flash. I wore it on my waist/in my pocket typically. In my experience, it was fairly accurate at predicting my calories burned, once I figured out it was giving me a full TDEE rather than just "calories from exercise" as MFP claimed.
Since I lost it, I've been looking at replacements with the requirements that they track swimming/be waterproof because swimming is the safest activity for my problem knee, and I intend to return to the pool soon. I want one that will work with me as I improve on swimming, and in my experience I cannot focus and count laps, so an estimate of laps swam is a desirable quality. This is a cutting point, and I am not considering trackers without this feature.
The other cutting point was syncing with MFP.
This led me to 3 choices: the Misfit Shine 2 Swimmers Edition ($100), the Fitbit Charge 3 ($200), and the Garmin Vivoactive 3 ($300). [Although I looked at many Garmin devices, none of the others seemed to actually track laps etc despite being waterproof - if your experience counters this I am open to hearing it!] (Prices in CAD, because Canada). I knocked the Garmin off my list for being needlessly pricey for essentially doing the same things as the Charge 3 (although it looks much nicer, and if you disagree you are welcome to change my mind).
I had been planning to just make a decision between the 2, but a concussion has sidelined me so I've had more time to deliberate than expected. And I've found myself thinking about my work environment, where I burn the majority of my calories, and it's important that my device be accurate with steps.
Actual Question/TL;DR:
In my work day I push carts, I do a lot of lifting of small items, do repetitive tasks with my arms/hands, carry small items while walking, etc. All of these things make me wonder about the effectiveness of a wrist-based tracker. I worry that a tracker on my wrist would either overestimate my steps due to the increase in movement, or try to counter this and then underestimate because they think I am just standing still waving my arms around rather than continuing to walk about.
The downside of the Misfit Shine 2 is that it doesn't have an HR tracker and it, much like my original one, could be lost without noticing. The upside is that it can be worn on the waist and track steps without being confused by arm movements. The downside of the Charge 3 (and the Vivoactive 3) is that it is worn on the wrist and might misjudge my activity wildly. The upside is possibly HR tracking, not getting lost, and the Fitbit Community (well regarded in reviews I read).
My question is, are my concerns about wrist-based trackers valid? If you have a wrist-based tracker, do you feel that it is accurate if you are pushing carts/moving your arms a lot in your day? Do you find the HR function valuable?
0
Replies
-
Regarding Garmin, I jumped right into the deep end if the pool. Fenix 5x.
I'm less familiar with the vioactive line. But the Fenix does track everything. Distance, intervals, SWOLF, time per 100m or yards.
Time per lap too.
A lot of the detail come from the Gamin Connect app.
So the Vio likely provides similar info via the app.
Garmin devices tend to stand up to more abuse too.0 -
Regarding Garmin, I jumped right into the deep end if the pool. Fenix 5x.
I'm less familiar with the vioactive line. But the Fenix does track everything. Distance, intervals, SWOLF, time per 100m or yards.
Time per lap too.
A lot of the detail come from the Gamin Connect app.
So the Vio likely provides similar info via the app.
Garmin devices tend to stand up to more abuse too.
From my understanding, nothing below the Vivoactive line in price point would track swimming laps (despite being waterproof). And the Fenix is so absolutely beyond my range. It looks great though! I actually read a few criticisms of the Vivoactive’s durability.1 -
In terms of wrist wear, you do have a higher risk of both false positives and missed steps in the situation that you describe. Given that you've got both under and over reading the I'd suggest that the effect is likely to net-off.
From a personal perspective, I don't rate the FitBit data quality or durability. They have improved the latter point, but it'll need a complete overhaul of their sensor package to improve the former. They're low end device compared to Garmin or Suunto. Note that I would be very sceptical of their claims to in-water HR tracking.
I use a Forerunner 735XT. Mid-range Tri device, and the swimming capability is good, particularly when paired with the HRM-Swim. The ability to look at stroke efficiency is a big deal for me.
2 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »In terms of wrist wear, you do have a higher risk of both false positives and missed steps in the situation that you describe. Given that you've got both under and over reading the I'd suggest that the effect is likely to net-off.
From a personal perspective, I don't rate the FitBit data quality or durability. They have improved the latter point, but it'll need a complete overhaul of their sensor package to improve the former. They're low end device compared to Garmin or Suunto. Note that I would be very sceptical of their claims to in-water HR tracking.
I use a Forerunner 735XT. Mid-range Tri device, and the swimming capability is good, particularly when paired with the HRM-Swim. The ability to look at stroke efficiency is a big deal for me.
Yeah, that's what I was worried about. That's why the Misfit appeals to me because of the clip, I can wear it on my waist and avoid all that.
Thank you for your input on Garmin and Fitbit. I'm more cautious of Fitbit now, in that case. The Forerunner looks great, but it's definitely above my pay grade and for someone with a lot more ability than me. I don't think I need an HRM strap, my workouts are not that intense. Maybe one day! I honestly need lessons, I tapped out at grade 7 swim lessons and I know my stroke is....unideal. I'm not sure a device could help me improve in that regard.0 -
sound like me. I am trying to find a new tracker. I am wearing a cheap one right now as my old fit bit broke after two years. I have been thinking about a new fitbit but then found out they have trouble connecting withe the Note 9...so those are completely out for me. I have been looking at Garmin but I can't decide which one. I had not seen the misfit you are talking about. I might check into that as I am not sure i want one on my wrist anymore.1
-
sound like me. I am trying to find a new tracker. I am wearing a cheap one right now as my old fit bit broke after two years. I have been thinking about a new fitbit but then found out they have trouble connecting withe the Note 9...so those are completely out for me. I have been looking at Garmin but I can't decide which one. I had not seen the misfit you are talking about. I might check into that as I am not sure i want one on my wrist anymore.
Yeah it seems to be the only one that doesn’t need to be a) wrist worn and b) charged every couple days. The draw backs are no HR, no watch display, and with my old Misfit at least it had trouble syncing with MFP consistently. As in it wouldn’t sync completely before I was ready to end my diary, and I couldn’t force sync. That was frustrating and part of why I wanted to look at the more popular brands. But it seems like Fitbit has the same issues, and I haven’t found a Garmin that meets my interests.0 -
I have and use a Fitbit (Ionic/Versa) and a Garmin (Fenix 5s). I use a fitbit because it’s the only system that connects to an incentive program through my health insurance. I use the Garmin because I train and value my training data.
Wrist HR info is near identical between the two. Step counts about the same (although the Garmin seems to do slightly better when holding things like a cart, and the Fitbit does slightly better in not counting things like stirring a pot when cooking-but as stated above, largely a wash overall). I also find the Fitbit community is head and shoulders above Garmin’s (if that kind of thing is important to you).
In all other possible comparisons, the Garmin is head and shoulders above a fitbit. The quality of the data, the ability to pass data to other apps/systems for more analysis, the training metrics supported, the ability to add more sensors (although I’m not sure how much the VA does-not all Garmin models support additional sensors or all the assorted types).
My Fitbit tells me how fast I ran (by mile), how many steps, how many calories I burned. It does so with reasonable accuracy. But that’s the end. And that info can go nowhere, you can’t look at things in more depth (like you can’t get average Hr by mile for example).
My Garmin tells me pace, HR, cadence, temperature, moving time, overall time, elevation, average & Max HR & pace by lap, and I can zoom in to get that data by minute-or overlay elevation charts on pace or HR, etc. And all that can go to Strava or training peaks or just exported for your own edification.
It had similar metrics for biking, rowing, swimming and every other sport known to mankind.
If you just want the basics and you really value the social aspect, Fitbit is a good match. A lot of people just want the basics and enjoy the social side and fitbit tends to be a more budget friendly option.
If you value training data and want to be able to use that data-then Garmin is far and away the best choice. By a landslide. But not everyone wants or needs training info to the nanosecond so maybe saving $100 is more important.
I will continue to use both. But if my health insurance incentive program starts connecting to Garmin, the fitbit is gone...
2 -
Duck_Puddle wrote: »I have and use a Fitbit (Ionic/Versa) and a Garmin (Fenix 5s). I use a fitbit because it’s the only system that connects to an incentive program through my health insurance. I use the Garmin because I train and value my training data.
Wrist HR info is near identical between the two. Step counts about the same (although the Garmin seems to do slightly better when holding things like a cart, and the Fitbit does slightly better in not counting things like stirring a pot when cooking-but as stated above, largely a wash overall). I also find the Fitbit community is head and shoulders above Garmin’s (if that kind of thing is important to you).
In all other possible comparisons, the Garmin is head and shoulders above a fitbit. The quality of the data, the ability to pass data to other apps/systems for more analysis, the training metrics supported, the ability to add more sensors (although I’m not sure how much the VA does-not all Garmin models support additional sensors or all the assorted types).
My Fitbit tells me how fast I ran (by mile), how many steps, how many calories I burned. It does so with reasonable accuracy. But that’s the end. And that info can go nowhere, you can’t look at things in more depth (like you can’t get average Hr by mile for example).
My Garmin tells me pace, HR, cadence, temperature, moving time, overall time, elevation, average & Max HR & pace by lap, and I can zoom in to get that data by minute-or overlay elevation charts on pace or HR, etc. And all that can go to Strava or training peaks or just exported for your own edification.
It had similar metrics for biking, rowing, swimming and every other sport known to mankind.
If you just want the basics and you really value the social aspect, Fitbit is a good match. A lot of people just want the basics and enjoy the social side and fitbit tends to be a more budget friendly option.
If you value training data and want to be able to use that data-then Garmin is far and away the best choice. By a landslide. But not everyone wants or needs training info to the nanosecond so maybe saving $100 is more important.
I will continue to use both. But if my health insurance incentive program starts connecting to Garmin, the fitbit is gone...
When I looked into the Garmin, the model you use is out of my price range. And while their data is good for running, I can’t run (busted knee) and for their lower end models they don’t even do what the Fitbit Flex 2 does - estimate laps in a pool. That’s where I would like data, otherwise the basics are good for me.
I’m not a highly fit person (the Fenix & Forerunner devices seem perfect for highly fit people - if i ever get there and a higher income bracket it’s on my list). I’m nursing injuries and working on recovery. My biggest calorie expenditure is my physical job, and I do need something that will track that accurately because days differ widely and my calories can be higher/lower by a lot and I’ve found it hard to tell without a device. And then I do want something that will estimate my swimming laps, because that’s an area I want to improve and see data, and it doesn’t look like the lower end Garmins are going to do that. Which is a shame. But yes saving several hundred $ is important in this case.0 -
I have a Garmin Vivofit 2 and swim. I love it. It is now over 3 years old and I finally had to replace the batteries 2 weeks ago. I track my laps with an actual lap counter since calories burned are based on time, speed, and your weight. It is just easier and more accurate (and cheaper) than any fitness tracker can be.
Steps counted are more accurate with a wrist worn, in my experience. Nothing will be truly accurate but I have actually physically counted my steps and compared them to my trackers and got the best/closest results with a wrist worn as opposed to a waist or bra worn. I sent back my Misfit and got the Garmin because the Misfit was so inaccurate. My first tracker was a Fitbit and the battery stopped holding a charge after about 16 months.1 -
I have accurate step counts on devices meant to be on body like Fitbit Zip, or combo like Vivoactive.
I've not tested the ability of wrist intended units to be worn on body, or body intended devices to be put in a wrist band.
Fitbit didn't give the wrist sensitivity options for the device intended for on body, so wearing on wrist means it's missing options designed to help it be more accurate.
But wrist worn pushing a cart just has been proved by so many to not see the step impacts, so it can't be accurate.
Same as any of them attempting to get "steps" on a bike - steps and distance seen has no bearing for calorie burn.
It would be like imagining the step-only device seeing a lifting workout has any possible chance of accuracy.2 -
I count laps by pushing a button on my Timex Ironman watch.0
-
But wrist worn pushing a cart just has been proved by so many to not see the step impacts, so it can't be accurate.
True, but you get extra steps counted when driving over a very bumpy road or some extra hand movements so it all seems to balance out in the end.
They are not intended to be perfect. They are to give you a good idea as to how much you move.
1 -
I've got a Fenix 3hr that does both lap and open swims. It's okay for counting laps, but does get out of synch some times. It was $440 at Costco, but seems pricier now (kinda odd).
If you can find a Vivoactive HR, it will do pool swim and is a smaller form factor than the VA3 or the Fenix line. My wife has one, but doesn't swim so I can't really comment on how good it is. But I'd trust it over a Fitbit just as I think Garmin has better build quality.
A VAHR can be had from Amazon.ca for ~$230. the VA3 is ~$290 at Costco, so not sure the older model is worth the savings.
1 -
But wrist worn pushing a cart just has been proved by so many to not see the step impacts, so it can't be accurate.
True, but you get extra steps counted when driving over a very bumpy road or some extra hand movements so it all seems to balance out in the end.
They are not intended to be perfect. They are to give you a good idea as to how much you move.
Exactly, plus the fact those steps are likely slow and easy and wouldn't have amounted to much calorie burn.
As far as calorie burn it's probably a minor blip to the weekly total anyway - so immaterial in the scheme of things.
Shoot, standing only is logged as BMR level burn, and you burn more standing than sleeping - but in the scheme the difference doesn't matter.
To those doing step contests - it bothers them to miss the cart steps though - that's usually when the complaint is heard.
That steps are balanced out with extra when driving doesn't matter to them - they want all they can get.0 -
I'm not sure if the fitbit charge 3 will track swimming, but it's going to be swim proof. I'd imagine they would have added swimming as an exercise.1
-
But wrist worn pushing a cart just has been proved by so many to not see the step impacts, so it can't be accurate.
True, but you get extra steps counted when driving over a very bumpy road or some extra hand movements so it all seems to balance out in the end.
They are not intended to be perfect. They are to give you a good idea as to how much you move.
Exactly, plus the fact those steps are likely slow and easy and wouldn't have amounted to much calorie burn.
As far as calorie burn it's probably a minor blip to the weekly total anyway - so immaterial in the scheme of things.
Shoot, standing only is logged as BMR level burn, and you burn more standing than sleeping - but in the scheme the difference doesn't matter.
To those doing step contests - it bothers them to miss the cart steps though - that's usually when the complaint is heard.
That steps are balanced out with extra when driving doesn't matter to them - they want all they can get.
Back when I worried about getting every step counted I would push the grocery cart one handed with the occasional finger or two of my left hand on the handle as a guide. Not important any more.1 -
I thought I'd just throw my 2c in. I had a fitbit alta hr for just over a year. And I loved it. I loved the social side and the steps/calorie burn. Then I got more active. The social side didn't matter as much and I stopped syncing the fitbit because it didn't matter as much. So I sold it. A week later I bought a garmin vivoactive 3 music. And I love it. I will never go back to fitbit.
I am a runner, so all the metrics matter to me. But the ability to use the watch for so many things - like swimming etc is really nice. I consider this one mid range as far as price goes and you get a lot for what you pay - everything the fitbit did and more.
I really like the way garmin connects with Mfp. The calories make a lot more sense to me, it actually seperate out the exercise and general extra calories so you can see exactly what its thinking. I think the overall way Garmin gives information is much better than fitbit.2 -
I thought I'd just throw my 2c in. I had a fitbit alta hr for just over a year. And I loved it. I loved the social side and the steps/calorie burn. Then I got more active. The social side didn't matter as much and I stopped syncing the fitbit because it didn't matter as much. So I sold it. A week later I bought a garmin vivoactive 3 music. And I love it. I will never go back to fitbit.
I am a runner, so all the metrics matter to me. But the ability to use the watch for so many things - like swimming etc is really nice. I consider this one mid range as far as price goes and you get a lot for what you pay - everything the fitbit did and more.
I really like the way garmin connects with Mfp. The calories make a lot more sense to me, it actually seperate out the exercise and general extra calories so you can see exactly what its thinking. I think the overall way Garmin gives information is much better than fitbit.
Thank you for this comparison! Have you gone swimming with the VivoActive3?
I'm not a runner, and it's highly unlikely I will ever be due to problematic knees, so a lot of running-specific features don't really matter to me. Otherwise I might consider an older/cheaper model of Garmin for that sync pattern, that sounds really useful!
But none of the models below vivoactive appear to track swimming (with any interesting data eg number of laps, I think they do it like my old Misfit Flash, a block of exercise with time and calories burned, which is okay but not exactly a step up for me).
I'm thinking the cheaper Misfit Shine 2 will probably be best for me. The only thing is that I won't be able to shed that frustrating late sync issue. But maybe that's still worth the savings.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 916 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions