FitBit Charge HR vs. FitBit Force
buh_bye_flab
Posts: 9 Member
Hi! I just switched from my Force (falling apart, never got the rash though!) to the Charge HR. If anyone out there has made the same switch as me, have you noticed your calorie burn has jumped quite a bit, even if your activity intensity is the same? In my case, my steps are lower but the calorie burn is more, even though the intensity was not increased. For example - on Friday I walked 14,995 steps and burned 812 calories. I was still using my Force. I switched over to the Charge HR on Saturday and walked 14,877 (sat) and 11,575 (sun) and my calorie burns were 1,267 and 1,239 respectively. All those steps are walking steps, though Sat I did do a 2 mile hike. I'm wondering if I'm over thinking things or if the Charge HR might be setting me up for some unrealistic expectations. I have my negative adjustments turned on.
I'm sorry if this is posted in an incorrect place - I dug through a few of the boards with Charge HR's but I haven't seen anyone bring this topic up. Thanks for reading/any advice! Happy FitBiting!
I'm sorry if this is posted in an incorrect place - I dug through a few of the boards with Charge HR's but I haven't seen anyone bring this topic up. Thanks for reading/any advice! Happy FitBiting!
0
Replies
-
I want to get the Charge HR or the Surge HR...but a co-worker is discouraging me until they work out the bugs...she said it is miscalculating HIGH on burns. I read somewhere else that it is NOT accurate on weight lifting because of the pressure on your wrist when lifting. I DO NOT have research to back any of this up...I just don't want to spend $250 on something that may not be what I am expecting...
I am HOPING for some awesome replies!0 -
Hmm, thanks for that! I do like the Charge HR better than the Force already - it hasn't fallen off my wrist once
I'm hoping for more awesome replies too! 0 -
I have a Flex, and ordered a Charge HR on Jan. 6. Fitbit says it won't ship 'til the end of March. So you probably won't get a whole lot of replies for a while.0
-
I'm still in the collecting data phase. I've only had the surge for 20 days, but I'll look the numbers over in a little bit and see what I can tell you.
edit:
Observed (based on intake vs loss for 20 days): 2552
Average from Surge: 2505
The observed could be off based on inaccuracies in my own logging between eating out and my own errors when weighing my food at home.
Now this is only for 20 days, so while it looks fairly accurate for me right now the error margin could grow, but only time will tell.0 -
buh_bye_flab wrote: »Hi! I just switched from my Force (falling apart, never got the rash though!) to the Charge HR. If anyone out there has made the same switch as me, have you noticed your calorie burn has jumped quite a bit, even if your activity intensity is the same? In my case, my steps are lower but the calorie burn is more, even though the intensity was not increased. For example - on Friday I walked 14,995 steps and burned 812 calories. I was still using my Force. I switched over to the Charge HR on Saturday and walked 14,877 (sat) and 11,575 (sun) and my calorie burns were 1,267 and 1,239 respectively. All those steps are walking steps, though Sat I did do a 2 mile hike. I'm wondering if I'm over thinking things or if the Charge HR might be setting me up for some unrealistic expectations. I have my negative adjustments turned on.
I'm sorry if this is posted in an incorrect place - I dug through a few of the boards with Charge HR's but I haven't seen anyone bring this topic up. Thanks for reading/any advice! Happy FitBiting!
So those are the MFP calorie adjustments then - not what you burned in total for the day?
Not all steps earn the same calorie burn either, based on impact it changes the distance estimated which changes the calorie burn.
And then for exercise level stuff, the HR device is using HRM formula for calorie burn, not steps.
So forget the steps, what distance was it for both days with almost equal steps?
And what was total daily burned by Fitbit, not adjustments on MFP?0 -
heybales - correct, the numbers I originally listed are the MFP adjustments.
The data straight from my FB dashboard is this:
Friday: 14,995 steps, 6.75 miles, 2,905 calories burned (Force)
Saturday: 14,877 steps, 6.68 miles, 3,360 calories burned (Charge HR)
Sunday: 11, 575 steps, 5.20 miles, 3,332 calories burned (Charge HR)
After reading your comments, it seems like I'm comparing apples to oranges! Perhaps with the heart rate monitor, the Charge HR will be more accurate than the Force was.
Thanks for your help!0 -
Yep, because even in those calories burned, some were indeed by HR if it went high enough, or you hit the button to start a workout record.
That's where the non-HR devices can't tell if you are doing more effort with incline.
In fact going up a hill is usually slower and shorter steps though more effort, Fitbit will read that is easier calorie burn, exactly opposite.
And it's not balanced out by going back down.0 -
On the other hand, if you happen to be like me and have a higher than normal heart rate then the Charge HR might be overestimating calories and the non-HR devices might be more accurate. That is the case with me, my resting heart rate is around 100 (I have medications that cause it to be high). If I use a heart rate monitor it gives me something like 500 calories in an hour long yoga class when I know I'm not working hard enough for that. Because of my high heart rate I did NOT want a tracker that uses my heart rate because I knew it would overestimate for me.0
-
I switched from Flex to HR Charge for the same reason that Heybales mentioned is the difference in devices. The HR monitor does a better job at figuring out your actual burn (though still an estimate), than counting steps converted to calorie burn. You should see an increase, if you're working hard!
Hope this helps and good luck with your goals!0
This discussion has been closed.