Fitbit vs HRM

CaLaurie

I use both a Polar FT7 and a Fitbit Zip. Combo is great. If you aren't interested in monitoring sleep, the Zip is a relatively inexpensive option. I find its greatest worth is the motivation - I WILL make those 10,000 steps EVERY DAY!!! Polar's "soft strap" is very comfy, BTW.

ChrissieP80

I find FitBit is good for:
running and walking (including on the treadmill)
daily non-exercise activity (e.g. cooking/cleaning/looking after kids - surprisingly active activities)

It is not so good for
swimming (because you can't take it with you into the pool)
ice skating
weight lifting (but neither is a HRM)
going on the travelators (walking escalators on a slope - it thinks you are climbing stairs)

bluefox9er

A FitBit is a glorified pedometer. It doesn't know the intensity of your movements just that you're moving. At least a HRM is using your HR as an indicator of effort.

No, this is totally wrong.

I don't know what "intensity" means and I doubt if you could offer a realistic definition of what you mean either. The Fitbit records acceleration in 3 dimensions. It also knows your mass. It can rather accurately calculate energy expenditure using acceleration and mass. There's a reason it works so well for people.

Good to know. I bought both. Haven't recieved the flex and the polar is on the way. I'll prob end up keeping both then. The flex sounded too cool not to order.

FWIW, I wear my Fitbit all the time and I'm rather active. I play a lot of tennis and raquetball, lift 3 times a week, etc. On the treadmill, the Fitbit gives virtually identical calorie burns as the treadmill itself. The Fitbit shows me burning ~400 calories an hour during a typical singles tennis match, which 'feels' about right to me given my level of exertion. A 2-hour racquetball session gives me around 750. These are fairly intense activities and the Fitbit seems spot-on all the time.

i ran 20 miles today. I "felt" like I had burnt 6,000 calories. My HRM said only 2,200.

You're pretty bad at estimating your own calorie burn then aren't you

which is exactly why I use something that is engineered specifically to take the guess work away from me..

jonnythan

A FitBit is a glorified pedometer. It doesn't know the intensity of your movements just that you're moving. At least a HRM is using your HR as an indicator of effort.

No, this is totally wrong.

I don't know what "intensity" means and I doubt if you could offer a realistic definition of what you mean either. The Fitbit records acceleration in 3 dimensions. It also knows your mass. It can rather accurately calculate energy expenditure using acceleration and mass. There's a reason it works so well for people.

Good to know. I bought both. Haven't recieved the flex and the polar is on the way. I'll prob end up keeping both then. The flex sounded too cool not to order.

FWIW, I wear my Fitbit all the time and I'm rather active. I play a lot of tennis and raquetball, lift 3 times a week, etc. On the treadmill, the Fitbit gives virtually identical calorie burns as the treadmill itself. The Fitbit shows me burning ~400 calories an hour during a typical singles tennis match, which 'feels' about right to me given my level of exertion. A 2-hour racquetball session gives me around 750. These are fairly intense activities and the Fitbit seems spot-on all the time.

i ran 20 miles today. I "felt" like I had burnt 6,000 calories. My HRM said only 2,200.

You're pretty bad at estimating your own calorie burn then aren't you

which is exactly why I use something that is engineered specifically to take the guess work away from me..

Indeed. What do you think a Fitbit would have said?