It's A Fitness Watch... It's An Activity Tracker... It's A GPS Watch... It's A Polar M400

OldAssDude
OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
edited November 2024 in Health and Weight Loss
I started this whole quest just wanting an activity tracker to count my steps, motivate me to move more, and eat better. I started with the Jawbone UP24, went through a couple of the Fitbits, a Garmin Vivoactive, and just recently a Basis Peak (which I had high hopes for, but turned out to be a disappointment).

As I expanded to more than just tracking my steps and eating better, to doing actual exercise sessions, I moved up to the Fitbit/Garmin products because they had more options for exercise and heart rate monitoring. They were limited however to only certain types of exercises that you can record.

I started looking for something that could be more flexible with the type exercise that could be recorded, and came across the Basis Peak. It boasted that it can automatically go into activity mode because it sensed that you were exercising and what activity you were doing. It also boasted 24/7 heart rate monitoring and very accurate calories burned. It turned out to be a big disappointment across the board after only one day of using it.

I started looking at the Polar products and found the M400, so I did a little research on it. Turns out you can setup pretty much any custom exercise you want, and upload it directly to the watch. And not only that, but you can set them to use the HRM, GPS, and customize the screens that you see on the watch to display what you want to see while you are doing the exercise. You can add the exercises you want onto the watch and remove the ones you don't want, and customize them anyway you want.

It also has a heart test that determines your VO2. You set your age, height, and weight, and use the heart rate monitor to perform the test. You lay down with the heart rate monitor on and start the test. After about 5 minutes it determines your VO2 number and stores it. When you exercise, it uses that number along with your heart rate and personal data to determine calories burned.

I know this is just an estimate, but to me it seems like the most accurate estimate compared to other trackers that I have tried, and based on the exercise sessions I have done so far, it does not seem to be overestimating like the others.

I also has 24/7 activity tracking and sleep monitoring, but it does not focus on just steps like most activity trackers do. The goals are set by a combination of all activity, and not just how many steps you take. I think this is much better because it makes you think about overall activity and not just having to get your 10,000 steps a day in.

I like to kayak (which is something that many of the fitness trackers don't have as an option), and was able to create a custom workout for it, and upload it right to the watch. I set it to use the GPS and HRM. Yesterday, I took my kayak to the lake to try it out, and it worked perfectly, and gave me what seems to be a pretty accurate calorie burn number.

So, if you are looking for something that is flexible, customizable, and pretty darn accurate, its definitely something worth taking a look at.

Replies

  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    edited August 2015
    It measures VO2 without a breeding hood?

    I think you mean estimates based on tables ..no?

    This sounds like an estimate of RMR "It also has a heart test that determines your VO2. You set your age, height, and weight, and use the heart rate monitor to perform the test. You lay down with the heart rate monitor on and start the test. After about 5 minutes it determines your VO2 number and stores it. When you exercise, it uses that number along with your heart rate and personal data to determine calories burned."

    (This isn't my field..)
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    It measures VO2 without a breeding hood?

    I think you mean estimates based on tables ..no?

    This sounds like an estimate of RMR "It also has a heart test that determines your VO2. You set your age, height, and weight, and use the heart rate monitor to perform the test. You lay down with the heart rate monitor on and start the test. After about 5 minutes it determines your VO2 number and stores it. When you exercise, it uses that number along with your heart rate and personal data to determine calories burned."

    (This isn't my field..)

    Not really sure. I was just stating what it says in the users guide. I don't know much about that stuff either.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    It measures VO2 without a breeding hood?

    I think you mean estimates based on tables ..no?

    This sounds like an estimate of RMR "It also has a heart test that determines your VO2. You set your age, height, and weight, and use the heart rate monitor to perform the test. You lay down with the heart rate monitor on and start the test. After about 5 minutes it determines your VO2 number and stores it. When you exercise, it uses that number along with your heart rate and personal data to determine calories burned."

    (This isn't my field..)

    Polar estimates VO2 Max based on resting heart rate. It's not a new technology--it was a feature in the FT40 and FT60 (and above) models, so it's been around for 15 years or so. Not sure if whether they use a standard table to interpret results or additional data. Polar does a lot of proprietary research on HR, so it wouldn't be surprising if the had a more elaborate calculation.

    However the results are subject to the same limitations as any heart rate research. The correlation between resting heart rate and aerobic fitness is not super strong and it weakens over time--meaning the longer you exercise, the less predictive value rest HR has.

    So the VO2 Max test might be "accurate " for some beginners, the normal variability in heart rate means there is a certain amount of random chance involved.

    The best thing about the VO2 Max test feature is that the models that have it allow you to manually enter your own value. If you have done some testing and have a more accurate VO2 Max estimate, you can enter it. This does improve the accuracy of the steady-state aerobic estimates.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    I think using a "breeding hood" involves a different type of aerobic activity. >:)

    Not sure about the calorie burn.
  • I love my M400. It has really upped my running game.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    It looks like the M400 has some nice features. Keep in mind that it is fundamentally a heart rate monitor adding some activity tracking ability. Which means it is probably better at tracking exercise than tracking activity (not a criticism--activity trackers are pretty mediocre at tracking exercise).

    It looks like Polar has incorporated their existing HR technology (tracking exercise and calories) into this model, so I don't think it is different from their older, upper end HRMs in that regard (again, not a criticism). Being an HR based device, the calorie estimates will be subject to the same limitations as any HR tracker. Meaning that things like doing upper body work, thermal stress, illness, etc., will artificially raise heart rate and overestimate calorie burn.

    IMO , as long as you are realistic about what it can and cannot do, I think you will be happy with the M400.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Azdak wrote: »
    I think using a "breeding hood" involves a different type of aerobic activity. >:)

    Not sure about the calorie burn.

    Arf :open_mouth:

    Breathing dagnammit
  • MelodyandBarbells
    MelodyandBarbells Posts: 7,724 Member
    Great review, OP, but that's a lot of activity trackers! What do you tend to do with your older ones?
  • bpetrosky
    bpetrosky Posts: 3,911 Member
    edited August 2015
    It looks like a fine device. When my current device dies, I might consider that line.

    I'm not sure if the M400 uses the green LED based HR detector like some other devices use, galvanic skin response, or if it only pairs with the chest strap (the docs I've seen on the device don't state it)

    In theory, there's a correlation between venous oxygen (sVO2) and oxygen uptake (VO2). I don't know how good the research is on it that they could build a good model on it for consumer devices.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8311310

    If the devices could include a red and infrared LED set, they could theoretically measure blood oxygen like a pulse oximeter, but I doubt you could get an accurate reading a the wrist (hospital units use the fingertip).

    I don't think the green LED technology can determine blood oxygen, but it does give the HR by measuring the green light reflected back as the vessels pulse under the skin.

    If the light sensing technologies aren't yet advanced enough to estimate VO2, it's likely the device is correlating current activity and heart rate to a formula or table to estimate VO2.

    ETA: The study referenced is geared towards post coronary operation patients recovery, not athletic performance.
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    JaneiR36 wrote: »
    Great review, OP, but that's a lot of activity trackers! What do you tend to do with your older ones?

    Thanks,

    I gave the jawbone to my grand daughter, I returned the fitbits for the garmin, I exchanged the basis peak for the M400, and I think I am going to give the garmin to my older sister.
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    bpetrosky wrote: »
    It looks like a fine device. When my current device dies, I might consider that line.

    I'm not sure if the M400 uses the green LED based HR detector like some other devices use, galvanic skin response, or if it only pairs with the chest strap (the docs I've seen on the device don't state it)

    In theory, there's a correlation between venous oxygen (sVO2) and oxygen uptake (VO2). I don't know how good the research is on it that they could build a good model on it for consumer devices.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8311310

    If the devices could include a red and infrared LED set, they could theoretically measure blood oxygen like a pulse oximeter, but I doubt you could get an accurate reading a the wrist (hospital units use the fingertip).

    I don't think the green LED technology can determine blood oxygen, but it does give the HR by measuring the green light reflected back as the vessels pulse under the skin.

    If the light sensing technologies aren't yet advanced enough to estimate VO2, it's likely the device is correlating current activity and heart rate to a formula or table to estimate VO2.

    ETA: The study referenced is geared towards post coronary operation patients recovery, not athletic performance.

    It comes with a chest strap HRM.
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    I love my M400. It has really upped my running game.

    I love this thing. I especially love that I can create custom workouts and upload them right to the watch. Like kayaking. That is one of the best features for me.
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    Azdak wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    It measures VO2 without a breeding hood?

    I think you mean estimates based on tables ..no?

    This sounds like an estimate of RMR "It also has a heart test that determines your VO2. You set your age, height, and weight, and use the heart rate monitor to perform the test. You lay down with the heart rate monitor on and start the test. After about 5 minutes it determines your VO2 number and stores it. When you exercise, it uses that number along with your heart rate and personal data to determine calories burned."

    (This isn't my field..)

    Polar estimates VO2 Max based on resting heart rate. It's not a new technology--it was a feature in the FT40 and FT60 (and above) models, so it's been around for 15 years or so. Not sure if whether they use a standard table to interpret results or additional data. Polar does a lot of proprietary research on HR, so it wouldn't be surprising if the had a more elaborate calculation.

    However the results are subject to the same limitations as any heart rate research. The correlation between resting heart rate and aerobic fitness is not super strong and it weakens over time--meaning the longer you exercise, the less predictive value rest HR has.

    So the VO2 Max test might be "accurate " for some beginners, the normal variability in heart rate means there is a certain amount of random chance involved.

    The best thing about the VO2 Max test feature is that the models that have it allow you to manually enter your own value. If you have done some testing and have a more accurate VO2 Max estimate, you can enter it. This does improve the accuracy of the steady-state aerobic estimates.

    Good info. Thanks.
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    edited August 2015
    I just recorded a walk.

    duration; 1hr 09min 32sec
    distance: 4.61mi
    avg: pace:15:04
    max. pace: 13:13
    ascent/descent: 80
    avg. HR: 129bpm
    max HR: 149bpm
    calories: 556

    my VO2 (according to the HR test) is 27 (fair).

    Isn't it pathetic that I can get to cardio zone 4 just by walking?

    jeepers I'm out of shape... :)
  • Protranser
    Protranser Posts: 517 Member
    edited August 2015
    bcalvanese wrote: »
    I just recorded a walk.

    duration; 1hr 09min 32sec
    distance: 4.61mi
    avg: pace:15:04
    max. pace: 13:13
    ascent/descent: 80
    avg. HR: 129bpm
    max HR: 149bpm
    calories: 556

    my VO2 (according to the HR test) is 27 (fair).

    Isn't it pathetic that I can get to cardio zone 4 just by walking?

    jeepers I'm out of shape... :)

    I think it's good to be focusing on a healthier lifestyle goal rather than just letting things get further out of control, so, no, it's not pathetic.

    92152203.png
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    Protranser wrote: »
    bcalvanese wrote: »
    I just recorded a walk.

    duration; 1hr 09min 32sec
    distance: 4.61mi
    avg: pace:15:04
    max. pace: 13:13
    ascent/descent: 80
    avg. HR: 129bpm
    max HR: 149bpm
    calories: 556

    my VO2 (according to the HR test) is 27 (fair).

    Isn't it pathetic that I can get to cardio zone 4 just by walking?

    jeepers I'm out of shape... :)

    I think it's good to be focusing on a healthier lifestyle goal rather than just letting things get further out of control, so, no, it's not pathetic.

    92152203.png

    thanks
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    I am so obsessed with these activity trackers.

    I started doing some more research on the higher end ones, and wound up returning the Polar M400 and getting a Garmin fenix 3.
  • BWBTrish
    BWBTrish Posts: 2,817 Member
    I want the M400 too. Specially because it is waterproof

    but remeber it still are estimates
    I had a lot of data back this week and my polar FT7 is not far off.
    But the VO2 max and the metabolism rest test are still the most accurate options....Polar does a good job it seems to be close to those numbers

    But again it still takes some calculating to be sure what your body really is doing

    and some things are quite easy to check
    Weigh ALL your food on a scale for 4 weeks or more
    Take your weight loss over those weeks ( each pounds is 3500 calories)
    Put it all together divide it by 4 weeks ( 28 days) and you have the most accurate ESTIMATE ( still) you can have lol

    Because there are still factors that can influence this, like water weight for example

    But yes i love gadgets too. Specially when i see all the data i have...and that the numbers are pretty much right :)
This discussion has been closed.