Wrist vs chest strap HRM

realAlexaD

Which do you prefer? Which is more accurate? Which is more comfortable?

pierinifitness

Most of the time I use a chest strap because if the kettlebell training I do, keeping my watch unit elsewhere besides on my wrist.

TavistockToad

I've only ever had a wrist HRM (Garmin forerunner 225) it seems to do the job.

mburgess458

Everything I have read says chest straps are more accurate, but unless you really need accuracy for some medical reason the wrist type are probably accurate enough. I used a chest strap one while working out for years. I now have the wrist type. I prefer wrist because I can wear it all the time, more comfortable, gives me a resting heart rate through the night, and seems accurate enough as long as it’s not too loose.

scorpio516

I use something different, optical up my arm in a fleshy bit.

Chest straps are superior in almost every way to wrist. Chest straps are much more accurate. Chest straps battery last longer (years Vs days). But some people find them uncomfortable.

MeanderingMammal

realAlexaD wrote: »

Which do you prefer? Which is more accurate? Which is more comfortable?

What are you trying to measure accurately, and in what context? Do you mean for 24/7 tracking or only during exercise? What sort of exercise do you do?

AnnPT77

My wrist based tracker (Garmin Vivoactive 3) seems to measure my heart rate plausibly during daily life and some types of exercise, based on comparison with years of past experience with a chest belt HRM (basic Polar model) and doctor's office readings. Recent research/reviews suggests the better quality current wrist-based HRM read HR pretty accurately for most people, though skin color or arm hair, among other things, can affect accuracy.

For rowing (water and machine), I add a chest belt that pairs with it, because the nature of the arm movement during rowing makes it lose contact and give clearly false results.

It seems to be plausible for pace/speed/distance measurements based on its GPS, as compared with years of experience with a previous GPS device (Garmin Forerunner 205) and map-based estimates.

Its daily step counts seem plausible, but I have no cross-check (and don't care very much - not much a walker).

Its counts of stairs flights are wildly inaccurate (again, don't care).

Its sleep tracker is hilariously inaccurate (and research suggests these devices are pretty bad at that in general).

I don't expect the calorie estimates to be accurate, necessarily: It doesn't measure calories, it estimates them.

Essentially, they use the same demographic research as MFP or TDEE calculators do, then make further estimates based on arm movements, GPS and altimeter readings when the device has those, plus heart rate (which doesn't correlate exactly with exercise).

They come close on all-day or exercise calories for quite a few people, those who fall near the averages from the underlying research. They can be off for some people (high or low), and fairly far off for a few.

Mine estimates a few hundred calories daily on the low side for me, compared with a year of carefully logged experience during weight loss (food scale and all that) and 3 years of maintenance since. It's off by about the same percentage for me as is MFP and most TDEE calculators.

As far as comfort: I'm old (63) and have always worn a wrist watch (most recently a sports watch that was chunkier than this tracker), so I don't even notice the wrist-based device. It's very comfortable. I've worn a chest belt during exercise for around a decade, so used to that, too. I wouldn't enjoy wearing the chest belt all day, though: For me, it would get itchy. Fine for an hour or few, though. Some women find they interfere with bra-band in a way that hinders accuracy, comfort or both. (Post bilateral mastectomies, I don't wear a bra, so don't know.)

So, depending on what you want/expect, it could be a good purchase. I wanted sound heart rate and speed/pace data for rowing and other activities, and it's great for that. I use its exercise calorie estimates for most intentional exercise, figuring that (a) it's close enough for most things, and (b) I know that consistent estimates are more important than strictly accurate ones, as I also monitor and adjust calorie intake based on scale weight.

I do use the MFP database estimates for strength training, though: HRM tend to be truly terrible at estimating that.

dewd2

If I am running and want accurate numbers I'll wear my chest strap. For my daily logs (resting HRM and AVG HRM) my watch is fine. It gives me the info I need to know when I am over training (assuming I'm too suborn to recognize it). If I was still using the numbers for training purposes I'd wear the chest strap.

OldAssDude

I find that the Garmin OHR's are pretty close for me. I have A/B'd them many times with Garmin, Polar, and Suunto chest straps for running, power walking, and intervals. They are almost always within a few BPM of the chest strap, and average HR is normally withing 1 BPM (if not exactly) of the chest strap.

But...

There are several factors that can make them not work well.

skin color
tattoos
hair
arm swing

Also, if not worn snug enough. If you jiggle your arm, the device should not jiggle at all. If it does, it could cause spikes, drop outs, and/or cadence lock.

For gym based stuff like weights, or anything that requires a lot of arm flexion, I would use a chest strap or a separate OHR that goes on the fleshier part of the arm.

Duck_Puddle

I use both. Wrist HRM are reasonably accurate in detecting heart beats per minute for activities where there’s minimal wrist flexion and not a lot of significant changes in HR. Walking and most running are fine. Anything with abrupt and significant changes in HR, Biking, rowing. weightlifting, calesthenics, etc may not get such accurate readings.

Also, factors such as skin color, hair, etc can make wrist HRM unable to “see” effectively.

That’s for detecting heart beats per minute.

Whether or not measuring HR is valuable for your purposes is a whole different discussion (depending on what your proposes are).

FireOpalCO

As a female the type of top you are wearing will be a factor. Chest straps shouldn't be worn with sports bras containing underwire.

Mike1804

I have to use a chest strap. I’ve tried the wrist monitors and they just don’t give me the feedback I need. I can be at 90% and it will read 60%, then after 15 seconds jump to where it should be. The delay is extremely frustrating for me. My chest strap is far more accurate

cwolfman13

Chest strap is superior. my FitBit Charge 2 has wrist based monitor and it's ok for daily type of stuff, but tends to go a little wonky with actual exercise...I when I sweat it can drop off altogether.

a_candler

I used a Garmin chest strap for 2 years but I hated the bulk of the strap while doing floor exercises. I recently bought a Polar arm strap. I haven't used it enough yet to know if it's more/less accurate than the garmin, but I do love that it doesn't interfere with any of the exercises.