Basis Peak ... best tracker?

Options
jewol
jewol Posts: 74 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I have a Fitbit One, but would like to buy a tracker that measures heart rate (to better judge exercise intensity). I'm also interested in a device that provides better insight into the quality of one's sleep. I've heard that the Basis Peak does all of that and more. I would like to hear from people who use it. Are you happy with it? Is it all it's cracked up to be?

Replies

  • bio79
    bio79 Posts: 22 Member
    Options
    I have one, got it at the beginning of December and I really like it :)

    it has a heart rate monitor 24/7
    its waterproof - you can swim with it
    it has the 3 axis acelerometer
    and measures perspiration and body temp
    it does measure sleep stuff also

    there are some things they do need to work on - like if you are watching tv for a bit it will register that as sleep. and if you want to use the data with my fitness pal you currently need to add it manually but they have indicated that functionality may come in a future update. I also think there is more they can do with all of the data but that may also come later :)

    sometimes it won't sync but then you just have to unpair it and re-pair it to the phone, take 2 mins :)

    I really like mine and would recommend it :)
  • jewol
    jewol Posts: 74 Member
    Options
    Thank you for the feedback; it's good to hear from someone with first-hand experience. At the moment, I have a Fitbit One which has served me well. But I want to go to the next level and get better data. I'm trying to decide among the Peak, the Fitbit Surge, Fitbit Charge HR, and the Polar 400 -- all of which seem to have their trade-offs. I'm most interested in accurate sleep data and data on heart rate during intense workouts. One early review said the Surge is great for measuring pedestrian activities and sleep patterns, but erratic on high intensity workouts. The Peak sounds as if it provides solid workout data, but, as you noted, is less precise on sleep data. I'm less familiar with the Polar 400, but my understanding is that it requires a HR strap for heart rate data -- a device I've never cared for. Still, I've heard the 400 is very accurate and a quality device. So, at this point, I'm still trying to decide …

    Thanks again for offering your perspective.

    -John
  • Kontxesi
    Kontxesi Posts: 86 Member
    Options
    If sleep data is one of your top priorities, the think the Peak is your best bet. My sleep doctor did a test of several different monitors, and it's what he recommends. I'll be getting one soon.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-christopher-winter/sleep-tips_b_4792760.html
  • veloman21
    veloman21 Posts: 418 Member
    edited January 2015
    Options
    I think it depends on what kind of exercise you are doing. The Peak appears to be very good at measuring heart rate while sleeping, so if you have a heart condition or want to continuously monitor your heart rate for health reasons it may be a good choice.

    However, as a fitness watch it is sorely lacking in a number of areas.
    1. Optical HRM's cannot measure beat to beat variation (HRV/RR) which is a significant parameter used by calorie calculating algorithms employed by Garmin, Polar, Suunto et al. Just counting BPM is not a very good indicator of calorie burn.
    2. Optical HRM's are negatively affected by incident light which means they have to be worn very tight to block outside light (uncomfortable to many). Also flexing, twisting of the wrist can introduce false readings.
    3. Skin pigmentation and hair can affect heart rate readings. I have olive complected skin and dark hairy arms, probably the worst combo for optical sensors.
    4. If you perspire a lot during workouts, sweat running between the sensor and the skin can skew readings.
    5. The Peak does not record distance. Most of my workouts are running or cycling so not knowing distance is an epic fail for me.
    6. No built in GPS, so even if the Peak were to one day display distance it would not be very accurate at all.
    7. No way to export any of the data from the Peak so you are stuck with their data presentation. (Not ideal). Polar allows exporting in .GPX or .TCX formats
    8. Basis does not offer a public API and does not sync with MFP or other web apps (a pain). Polar recently provided a public API and has announced that they will partner with MFP in the next week or two and provide continuous automatic syncing. They also will be providing text, call and email notifications to the watch from iOS and Android devices.

    I have been a Garmin fan and own Garmin 310XT, an Edge 500 cycle computer, a VIRB action camera and a Vivofit activity monitor. Garmin makes excellent devices but their software isn't the best. All that said, I just bought a new running watch/activity monitor but I went with Polar M
    400. I thought about waiting for the new Vivoactive from Garmin which looks very interesting but opted for the Polar and am very happy with it.

    You do have to use a separate HR strap with it for the best accuracy when working out but to me that is a small inconvenience. In daily activity mode the battery last 3-4 weeks which is great but like all GPS devices, if you turn GPS on for runs/rides battery life degrades quickly, about 8hrs max on the M400.

    The Polar is nicely made, the display is very sharp and can be seen in all light conditions. It is light and very comfortable to wear 24/7 and can be synced to the web app wirelessly via bluetooth which is very convenient.

    Check out these two reviews from one of the most respected online reviewers.
    dcrainmaker.com/2014/09/activity-tracker-review.html
    http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2014/12/basis-depth-review.html

  • jrmalice
    jrmalice Posts: 23 Member
    Options
    I purchased my peak a few weeks ago and really like it. I wanted an apple watch but wanted to see if I would actually wear one without spending a stupid amount of money... Now that I realize that I would commit to wearing one, I don't want to give up the feature set.

    Battery life... 4+ days, and I wear it more than 20 hours a day (I take it off to shower and occasional to let my wrist "breathe."

    Constant heart rate monitoring and nice presentation in their app.

    Sleep tracking (Although not perfect) is better than anything else I've seen.

    Integration into apple health is good for me (if you're droid or non-smartphone this is not a deal.)

    I'd recommend getting one of you're still on the fence.
  • jdfitzctb
    jdfitzctb Posts: 10 Member
    Options
    I tried the Basis Peak in place of a Fitbit Charge HR. The calorie counts were high but the inability to edit any activity was the deal breaker. I rode my bike trainer for 45 minutes bent over like a normal bike outside and mimicking the movements and it only recorded at 18 minute general work out. Once that's done there's no way to edit it unlike a Garmin or delete it and add a correct log like a Fitbit. Over a 3 day period wearing the Fitbit Charge HR on 1 arm and the Basis Peak on the other the step counts were similar but the calorie count on the Basis was at least 800 higher. It definately has better sleep tracking, but what good does "skin" temperature and persperation tracking do if you're not given any base line or way to interpret it? It's nice that it's waterproof and is more comfortable than the FB...but even though I got it on sale for less than $100 I'm returning it. I'm also confused as to why they would partner with Runtastic to have their band be recognized as a HRM in their app, when Runtastic doesn't factor HR data into their calorie computation!

Categories