Good Heart Rate Monitor?

look at the Fitbit, wristwatch type, monitor. Prices here are expensive but it's the same for any imported electronics in Thailand.

kebab4tw wrote: »

I'm looking for a good heart rate monitor for gym, running and sleep tracking.

So that's not so much an HRM as an activity tracker with HR functionality. Subject to how much you run you may prefer to go for a GPS device that has activity tracking and HR capabilities.

Personally I use Garmins, but Suunto make good devices as well. Mid range TomTom are adequate but nothing spectacular.

For a recreational runner the Forerunner 235 is probably the optimal at the moment.

An HRM is of very limited value in the gym.

Are the wristwatch heart rate monitors actually accurate? Or do you need to get the chest ones for any sort of real accuracy?

Optical HR, wrist or arm based, is good enough for most people, most of the time. You'll see a fair amount of received wisdom that electrical, chest strap, pickup is more accurate but that's only really meaningful if you have a top end analysis device and you're looking for the more advanced performance metrics.

Whilst technically correct, it's about as meaningful as comparing a laser ring gyro vs a mechanical speedometer in your car. A laser ring gyro would be more accurate, but not in any way that is meaningful to the driver.

kebab4tw wrote: »

I'm definitely more often at gym than running outside, but I'd also like to use it for when I walk/skate to places etc.

OK, in that case HR isn't a reliable indicator of calorie expenditure in those sort of situations. For walking, the most meaningful is a GPS, but a step tracker is probably of more practical use. Your HR shouldn't be high enough to be a meaningful proxy when you're walking or skating.

...I know any hrm can be wildly inaccurate when monitoring strength exercise, but I'd still like a rough idea.

You'd get a figure as meaningful as HR derived if you throw two ten sided dice, apply a scaling factor based on the age or your dog, multiplied by the height of your second cousin.

For strength training, personally I account about 200 calories per session, so small numbers in the grand scheme of things.

The reason is that when your strength training, what's causing the increased heart rate is not the requirement to transport greater levels of oxygen to the muscular system.

I've done a bit of research and heard good things about the Fitbit Charge 2 and the Garmin Vivosmart HR. Would I be good with either one of those? Is one of them clearly better than the other with what I want it for?

Personally I prefer Garmin, as the ecosystem is more focused on performance. I use a VivoSmart HR for activity tracking, a Forerunner 310XT for running and an Edge 520 for cycling, then a Virb X action camera. They all work together nicely.

FitBit doesn't have that.

If you're looking for a straight-up HR monitor on the cheap, I have the Mio ALPHA 2 Heart Rate Watch + Activity Tracker. I didn't dl the software, just use it to monitor my HR while I'm running, and it works great. It's around $66 on Amazon right now.

Definitely can recommend the garmin vivoactive hr or flagship fenix 3hr for weight training.

Avoid fitbit, the garmin calculations are very realistic and what you would expect.

kebab4tw wrote: »

Asking this here because I honestly have no idea where to start. I'm looking for a good heart rate monitor for gym, running and sleep tracking. I'm willing to spend anything I need to get a good one but I'd obviously prefer something cheaper if there isn't a huge difference. Are the wristwatch heart rate monitors actually accurate? Or do you need to get the chest ones for any sort of real accuracy?

Cheers!

A HRM is not applicable for sleep tracking...

kebab4tw wrote: »

If anyone's curious, I ended up getting a Vivoactive HR and so far I'm loving it.

Thanks everyone for your help!

I'd be interested in hearing more about it...I'm a big fan of Garmin products but always have been a bit leery of "jack of all trades" tech.

cwolfman13 wrote: »

kebab4tw wrote: »

If anyone's curious, I ended up getting a Vivoactive HR and so far I'm loving it.

Thanks everyone for your help!

I'd be interested in hearing more about it...I'm a big fan of Garmin products but always have been a bit leery of "jack of all trades" tech.

I like it for the number of available activities to track. I use a treadmill and walk the dogs. They are distinct activities, one without GPS and one with. I can look at a map of my walk if I want. It doesn't have a fishing activity though. You can download new screens, apps and widgets from the Garmin Connect IQ store, something the Vivosmart couldn't do. I've tested downloading a local golf course to it, but haven't tried it as the greens are kinda white right now. But the list of activities is pretty extensive. Might try snowshoeing this weekend depending on the weather and there is a mode for that.

As far as accuracy, it is closer to what my Polar H7 gives me when on the treadmill than the Vivosmart was. What comes into MFP is still a bit higher than what the Polar gives, but it's not bad. Maybe 20% high.

If I had a specific sport that I was going to do, then I might get a dedicated tracker for that, but I don't expect I will focus on one thing so the jack of all trades works better for me. I plan to do some running (want to do 5K in 2017) biking as well as some general outdoor stuff like fishing.