Heart Rate Monitors and Fitbits (recommendations?)

I used to have a couple of different Jawbone bracelets and I loved them for tracking steps but would never use them to track actual workouts as all it does is measure time spent doing something really and an estimate when it comes to the burn. For real workouts I use a Polar HRM with chest strap and I never have any problems with it shifting or not picking up my heart rate.

stanmann571 wrote: »

SezxyStef wrote: »

stanmann571 wrote: »

SezxyStef wrote: »

unless you are consistently doing steady state cardio a HRM is of no use.

I currently wear a Jawbone (think they are going out of business tho) and I won a Fitbit (one) and wearing that to see if I like fitbit...I find they are both fairly decent for my work outs which include lifting, running, walking, sports etc.

It all depends on what you want it for really...

Actually, knowing your RHR has a number of benefits. and an always on HRM will help you get a good approximation of your RHR.

if you think a HRM in a bracelet is accurate...well..I have some land to sell you.

It's quite accurate.. At Rest.

There's plenty of references from folks who've run them against chest straps for an extended period of time.

You can't do motocross on a moped and you can't track vigorous exercise with a wrist hrm. Tools have specific uses. When you try to drag them out of their envelope they fall. It doesn't make them useless

Try again

I never once said it was useless...I said unless you are doing steady state cardio it's of no use...RHR can be found easier and more accurate by the "old fashioned way" as you cannot guarantee the HRM on a wrist strap is touching the points it needs to the entire time...

NorthCascades wrote: »

stanmann571 wrote: »

SezxyStef wrote: »

stanmann571 wrote: »

SezxyStef wrote: »

unless you are consistently doing steady state cardio a HRM is of no use.

I currently wear a Jawbone (think they are going out of business tho) and I won a Fitbit (one) and wearing that to see if I like fitbit...I find they are both fairly decent for my work outs which include lifting, running, walking, sports etc.

It all depends on what you want it for really...

Actually, knowing your RHR has a number of benefits. and an always on HRM will help you get a good approximation of your RHR.

if you think a HRM in a bracelet is accurate...well..I have some land to sell you.

It's quite accurate.. At Rest.

There's plenty of references from folks who've run them against chest straps for an extended period of time.

I have a Garmin Fenix 3 HR. The wrist/optical monitor is closer to a roll of the dice than it is to my chest strap.

then there is this...

Try again...

PS I am not arguing against them they have their uses to track things like trends maybe...but I wouldn't buy an activity tracker that has a Wrist HRM and expect it to be accurate...it even says on the package it's not medical grade and Fitbit got sued (didn't lose) due to their poor readings...

sort of like those body fat scales...really of no use...but people keep buying them.

I just researched a load of these, I've gone with the Garmin Vivoactive HR, it tipped to the top of the pile over the fit bit for being waterproof and under £200.

The charge hr from fitbit is their best selling product of all time. It's a simple, no nonsense fitness tracker that's really user friendly. As with all bands if you're weightlifting they won't accurately track your HR and you'll need a heart strap but for cardio this a very inexpensive and popular tracker.

I have a polar ft60, got it for around £50 on ebay last year. There's a lot more newer models out now but it does the job. I love the chest strap, the bikes in spin class and the machines in the gym pick up on it and display your actual HR and I find the calorie count to be quite accurate from session to session. Personally I didn't want something like the fitbit that you wear constantly as I feel they're a bit of an eye-sore and I read so many reviews saying how inaccurate they are, I wanted something that you put on when you're exercising and click start and had a chest strap. But there's positives and negatives to them all, it just depends on what sort of exercise you do and what you want it to track.

I can recommend the Garmin Forerunner 35 which should be within your budget.
It offers plenty of useful functions including HR monitoring, satellite tracking and different profiles for walking/running/cycling/cardio which means it does a better than average job of keeping track of your daily calorie burning.
It's also fully waterproof, has a screen you can read in direct sunlight and looks really good. It can sync with your smartphone using the Garmin app and/or talk directly with your computer via USB, so keeping your data updated is easy.
I've found the HR measurement to be as good as chest straps but without the added hassle of wearing an extra monitor and having to sync readings.

I have a FitBit Charge 2 and find it to be very accurate. I lose weight exactly as predicted based on the calorie burn it reports.

I do almost no "steady state cardio" but I walk a lot (average 19,000 steps/day). I get very few "bonus steps" (in other words, "steps" from moving just my arms). I do a circuit-style workout class twice a week (for a total of 2 hours/week), and the calorie burn FitBit suggests for that seems pretty reasonable (~400 cals/hour including BRM) but it's a tiny fraction of my weekly calories so if it's off by 100 either way, I wouldn't notice.

For someone like me (on their feet a lot; minimal gym-based exercise), it's a perfect choice. And it's purple!