Guys, what fitness tracker do you use?

Garmin Fenix 3 for me, but that is a multi-sports watch with wrist-based HRM. Also got a Fitbit Surge (retired) which worked really well (and gave me many more burned calorie count than the Fenix )

I jumped on the fitbit band wagon. Got myself a fitbit blaze set it all up put my details in etc and it pretty much gives me the same info mfp gave me so i synced them both. It's definately motivated me to move more. Gives me a lower burned calorie amount the the same info put into mfp but that's because it reads your heartbeat.

Middle aged woman here ...

I use Strava.

Fitbit Charge 2.

For what it's worth, heart rate monitors like Polars are only supposed to be worn during exercise, not all day, as they won't be accurate.

Tomtom Spark Cardio.

lemonychild wrote: »

iofred wrote: »

Garmin Fenix 3 for me, but that is a multi-sports watch with wrist-based HRM. Also got a Fitbit Surge (retired) which worked really well (and gave me many more burned calorie count than the Fenix )

Wow that's one crazy investment @iofred 5 bills is a pretty ugly number ... I'm assuming yours doesn't have a strap either, how can u be sure that calorie count is correct?

It was a crazy investment, but it looks good as well, which helped (why else do people buy Rolex, or have and a running watch + cycle computer, so to me it is worth it ... or so my justification goes)... the calorie count of the Fenix I am certain is not (always) correct, but as it provides "lower than expected" (trust me, I have tried it against other trackers, including chest HRM-applied trackers (at one stage I was running around with 2 straps and 3 watches ... guilty geek)) and the Fenix was sometimes way off. But as it is providing less calories it actually means if you eat back your recorded calorie intake you have less to eat ...

I love my Apple Watch - but it's only really worth it if you want the other features as well as the fitness tracking aspect.
I'm not tracking my calories at the moment, but when I was, the cals from the watch seemed pretty accurate - I lost at about the expected rate when I ate what MFP suggested and I had the Apple Watch linked.

I have a Garmin Vivoactive and am very pleased with it. In addition to the standard step counting and sleep tracking, it has GPS which I use for running. It also has basic smartphone interactivity, downloadable watch faces and apps. Quite a neat piece of kit for under $150.

Fit bit charge hr

"I've stuck with fitbit because of their amazing customer service" ... that is a true statement indeed. They are fantastic for customer service.

I just use Google Fit on my phone in my pocket for step tracking. It also tracks distance (by GPS) for cycling and walking outdoors. It's been enough for me, but it would also work as a supplement to a more precise exercise tracker used during workouts.

mspris2u wrote: »

I have a polar A300 - It does the whole step counting, activity monitor, calories, sleep thing AND you can use it with the chest strap for when you are getting your exercise on. It also has a vibrating alarm (helpful at 4:30am for not waking up the hubs) and you can get notifications like texts and calls (you can't RESPOND via your watch like say an apple watch). I've had mine a year and I love it!

edited to add - The h7 strap I use with my A300 also synchs to some of the machines at the gym I go to. Funny the elliptical overestimates calories burned and the treadmill underestimates. I'm pretty happy to be able to use the chest strap for better accuracy...

Same. I upgraded from the Polar FT7 to the A300 - I find Polar to be amongst the most accurate (I've worn Fitbit, Jawbone and Misfit), it's waterproof, you can pair it with the chest strap, the app is great... the only thing I'm missing is some of the color/gadgets of the Apple Watch and the like, but I can do without that for a much lower price.

If your main type of exercise is walking, ie you are looking for a step tracker, than I wouldn't bother with a heart rate monitor.,the equations for calorie burn are pretty straightforward and don't need heart rate. Even for running, the variation between different calculators using the same heart rate data varies more than whether or not I wore the heart rate monitor. It's useful to gauge whether your activity level is where you want it (ie you are training to improve your running/cycling pace or making sure you are working hard enough at cardio) - but definitely not necessary for estimating calorie burn for walking/running. If you are doing some generic cardio (aerobics or something) - maybe you can get a better guesstimate of burn.

I have a charge hr and polar chest strap. They both give me roughly the same data for hr and cals burned for workouts, the hr is usually about 30 cals lower on the circuit training but that's negligible for me. I've stopped using my chest strap now and just use my Fitbit

Brocksterdanza wrote: »

I have my old faithful polar ft7 that i have had for several years. The wife has a fit bit. I was wondering if there is anything out there that can give me accurate data like my polar gives me without having to wear a chest strap all day. I know there are under armour, polars, fitbits, etc. Just curious.

Thanks

Why would you wear a chest strap all day?