Garmin Forerunner 235

Are you really concerned about you pulse rate over the course of the day? Does it change that much without doing a workout? Why do you think you would want it on all day?

I use my Garmin when I'm running. I don't see the utility in keeping it on all day. Easy enough to check your heart rate taking your pulse for 15 seconds and multiplying by 4. (some other equivalent equation).

Specifically for HR the biggest benefit I've seen is in determining my Resting Heart Rate, which allows me to determine fitness improvements, and identify whether there is anything that informs my training.

Knowing RHR, currently 50bpm, is helpful. If my RHR increases by 10bpm for more than a couple of days, there something wrong that needs addressed.

Other than that, agree the point above, just use it and see how you find the data informing your decision making.

Personally I don't use HR as a contemporaneous data point when I'm training. Pace when running or pace and cadence when cycling tend to be far more meaningful for my objectives. What is useful is being able to correlate HR with other characteristics in post training analysis; how did it respond to changes in elevation or pace/ cadence etc. Being able to compare it with mapping so that I can judge surfaces is also handy.

Optical HR monitoring has some limitations while training, but it's good enough for most purposes, most of the time. I've got no aspirations to try out for Team GB, so the more sophisticated data from electrical sensing aren't particularly meaningful.

maaadde wrote: »

I want to be able to know what my HR is while at different paces to kind of gauge how fit I am and see how it (hopefully) improves over time. I'd also like to know for my HIIT that I'm in a good zone etc. But I realize I might need to get a chest strap to get good results for HIIT training so perhaps I should have gone for the 230 instead

If you've got time to check your HR when you're doing HIIT, you're not doing HIIT.

Answering the how fitness is improving question is about analysing data after the fact, identifying trends and acting on that information.

RHR is your most reliable indicator of improving fitness.

maaadde wrote: »

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

If you've got time to check your HR when you're doing HIIT, you're not doing HIIT.

Answering the how fitness is improving question is about analysing data after the fact, identifying trends and acting on that information.

RHR is your most reliable indicator of improving fitness.

I wasn't saying I'm doing tabata, but for HIIT I most definitely have time to glance at my watch during the 30-60 seconds I'm in either the fast or the slow parts of the workout. Why would you think that was impossible?

I think we're in the same place then, long threshold intervals.

The optical pickup is sensitive to wrist positioning, and does have some potential lag compared to electrical pickup. What I would say is, and alluded to upthread, that lag isn't significant enough to make a material difference to your decision making. If you were doing 10-20 second intervals above 95% MHR then the <1sec lag between the two might be meaningful.

The reality is that you can pair any Garmin ANT+ Chest strap with the 235 if you think it's useful to you.

I know I'll mainly use it for analyzing after but also then I think knowing my HR during the workouts, combining it with a note on how I felt, seeing if my results improve faster if I've had multiple workouts in a row with a higher HR etc. I don't find it an unnecessary feature at all, I do however wonder if I should have gotten the 230 instead or if I'll make use of the continuous measuring of my HR. Right now it says my RHR is 54 which I know it's not, I've never in my life checked my HR by any method for it to be below 63 so I don't know why it says that

The Garmin platform builds the indicated RHR over a rolling average, so it'll take 2-3 weeks to stabilise. The one criticism I'd make of the process is that it uses lowest measures through the course of the day, so it doesn't understand that whilst I might have two hours of low HR that's not resting, it's merely passive while I've been in a meeting or writing.

Taking your RHR and VO2Max together can be useful, particularly if you're in race preparation and doing work on maximising VO2Max for competition. What is missing from that information is an appreciation of Lactate Threshold. The VO2Max approximation is more limited that on the higher end Garmins which do use more data. The Garmin Run HR strap collects more data types, but the 235 can't use all of them.

The reality is that we al make choices on the kit we use based on our need, our budget and availability. The 235 is a good piece of kit. It's a third of the price of the ones that can use all of the data, so the question becomes whether that greater precision is worth the additional cost?

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

The VO2Max approximation is more limited that on the higher end Garmins which do use more data. The Garmin Run HR strap collects more data types, but the 235 can't use all of them.

For example...?

NorthCascades wrote: »

For example...?

The running chest strap has an accelerometer which measures running dynamics like bounce, ground contact time, stride length - not sure what I would do with this information - only available on the top end watches

squarewheels66 wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

For example...?

The running chest strap has an accelerometer which measures running dynamics like bounce, ground contact time, stride length - not sure what I would do with this information - only available on the top end watches

Yeah. I don't think that's what M&M means, but the comment was pretty vague, it could have referred to anything, so who knows?

I do find the 'vertical ratio' metric somewhat useful. I can tell in realtime while I run that I'm spending too much energy bouncing up and down and not getting enough forward motion for my energy. I run faster when I pay attention to these parts of my form. But it takes concentration, at least in the short term.