Heart Rate Monitor?
Options
klr1981
Posts: 46 Member
Do you have one? What are the benefits? Do you like it? Do you feel it is accurate?
0
Replies
-
All my HRMs have been accurate for counting heartbeats when they and their straps worked properly.
(Polar FT1, FT7, FT60, Garmin Edge 800 & 1000).
Main benefits are so I know my HR during cardio exercise (cycling primarily), a training aid.
FT1 - very, very basic, FT7 - very basic functions but watch was OK, FT60 much better with more sophisticated and interesting features.
Neither FT7 or FT60 proved completely reliable or long lasting. Garmins on the other hand have been excellent.
What are you hoping to get out of owning/using a HRM?
What sports or activities?2 -
Mainly just to see how hard I’m actually working during my workouts. Thank you for the information!0
-
My Garmin (with chest strap) is very useful when I am running. I use it to stay in specific heart rate zones for maximum calorie burn. It allows me to see exactly how hard my effort is and gives me more ability to sustain the activity.2
-
I have a Scosche Rhythm arm band heart rate monitor and love it. It seems very accurate when I've cross checked it and works well. The only thing is it's a tad pricey at around $80. Also you need to pair it via Bluetooth, it doesn't show or store the data on the monitor itself. I use wahoo fitness app for this. Helps be a little more accurate with calories burned and also to know if I'm in my target heart range.0
-
I'm a runner, I have a Garmin FR225 which gives me a calorie burn that isn't far off the bodyweight x 0.63 x distance in miles calculation0
-
Jeepfreak81 wrote: »I have a Scosche Rhythm arm band heart rate monitor and love it. It seems very accurate when I've cross checked it and works well. The only thing is it's a tad pricey at around $80. Also you need to pair it via Bluetooth, it doesn't show or store the data on the monitor itself. I use wahoo fitness app for this. Helps be a little more accurate with calories burned and also to know if I'm in my target heart range.
I have the same for running and I love it. It's a perfect little thing and compared to most 'watch'-like monitors it has the advantage that it can be worn literally everywhere (yes, also on your forehead or in your undies). Oh yes, the advantage: the wrist gets colder quicker than for example the upper part of the lower arm, and hence the HR is less accurate.0 -
Do you have one? What are the benefits? Do you like it? Do you feel it is accurate?
I've got a Forerunner 735XT which has an Elevate wrist sensor, also and HRM Tri strap, HRM Swim strap and HRM2 strap.
The 735XT in its own is good enough for most running, but for anything that involves wrist flexion is less reliable. That's cycling, rowing etc.
The HRM Tri will synch with the 735XT head end, and gives a lot of running dynamics data. If I was only interested in HR I'd probably not bother, but the dynamics data is important to me.
The HRM Swim stores HR data when I'm in the pool, and downloads it after the fact. If anything that's less useful, but that's a function of swimming for X-training, rather than as a primary sport.
I use the HRM2 with my Garmin Edge cycling computer. Useful for zone training on the turbo trainer, but not really of huge value for real world training, except post training analysis.
The 735XT has always on HR, but the only valuable part of that is Resting Heart Rate.0 -
I have a low-end Polar HRM. When I've been actively training (I'm a rower) I've used it to manage workout intensity in line with my training plan.
Nowadays, I'm not competing so not doing structured training, just working out for fun and general fitness. I use it to make sure I don't slack off during workouts (
) and to get general idea of fitness level changes by paying attention to my heart rate response to exercise (observing things like how fast heart rate drops after a workout segment, or how heart rate responds to exercise intensity and duration).
Once in a while, I wear it overnight to spot check my AM resting heart rate, another fitness benchmark.
It seems to be accurate for these things, to the extent that I have independent reliable evidence. (Example: Before my AM cataract surgery, my resting heart rate set off the medical "low heart rate" alarm, confirming my estimates of my AM resting rate. Don't worry: My doctor confirmed that fitness induced low heart rate is a fine & healthy thing!).
However, for a HRM to be close to accurate for training purposes, it does need to know your actual AM resting and real maximum heart rates. Age based formulas for HR max are notoriously inaccurate. Some HRM will let you set these values, and some will estimate actual max from exercise tests.
Most people can get good fitness training results using RPE (rate of perceived exertion) methods, without a HRM. But I'm a data geek, so I like my HRM.
I don't consider the HRM deeply useful for calorie burn estimates, because heart rate is so influenced by extraneous factors like heat, hydration, and strain. That said, I do use its estimates for MFP exercise logging for activities it's most likely to estimate well (steady state cardio or close to it). Sometimes I adjust those estimates when I know they're off (example: high reported burn from rowing in very hot weather). I'd never use it to estimate something like weight training: It's laughably far off.
When I was starting weight loss, I tended to compare different exercise calorie estimates for my frequent steady-state cardio activities: HRM, MFP exercise database, specialized online calculators (for biking, walking), exercise machine estimate, etc. Other estimating methods tend to give me higher burn estimates for those things than the HRM, and on the calorie burn side I prefer to estimate a little low vs. a little high.2 -
I LOVE my HRM. It seems to be quite accurate. I only wear it during workout and do not turn it on for warm up or cool down. Best investment I have made to date. Bought my first one in 2015.
Mine is a chest strap. I have found those to be most accurate.0 -
i have a fitbit charge 2 that i wear 24/7 and love it!0
-
MeanderingMammal wrote: »Do you have one? What are the benefits? Do you like it? Do you feel it is accurate?
I've got a Forerunner 735XT which has an Elevate wrist sensor, also and HRM Tri strap, HRM Swim strap and HRM2 strap.
The 735XT in its own is good enough for most running, but for anything that involves wrist flexion is less reliable. That's cycling, rowing etc.
The HRM Tri will synch with the 735XT head end, and gives a lot of running dynamics data. If I was only interested in HR I'd probably not bother, but the dynamics data is important to me.
The HRM Swim stores HR data when I'm in the pool, and downloads it after the fact. If anything that's less useful, but that's a function of swimming for X-training, rather than as a primary sport.
I use the HRM2 with my Garmin Edge cycling computer. Useful for zone training on the turbo trainer, but not really of huge value for real world training, except post training analysis.
The 735XT has always on HR, but the only valuable part of that is Resting Heart Rate.
Sidetrack, but looking at the HRM-swim and HRM-Tri. You mention the swim stores data and downloads after the fact. Does the HRM-Tri not do the same thing for swimming? I thought the difference was the swim was tighter and kept better contact while swimming. Would the HRM-tri be useless for a pool swim?
To the topic, I've got a Garmin Fenix 3HR. Seems accurate for running but I aven't had it long enough to test much else out. My Vivoactive HR was pretty spot on, based on how I lost weight vs expected. It just lacked some features (like swim HR) that I was looking for.0 -
I just have the Polar M200, don't need any band and it's lovely, help me to stay in my burner zone and motivation0
-
I’ve a Garmin Fenix which has an in-built HRM, I love it as it let’s me do all the multi-sport stuff I want while recording data with one device. For me the HRM is one set of data to analyse amongst all the other data available, while allowing the unit to more accurately calculate calories burned.0
-
I have a Wahoo Fitness Tickr which I link to various fitness apps on my phone (including the Wahoo Fitness app, which can upload to a large number of other apps, including MFP).
When I run, I keep my phone in my hand using a strap. The numbers are big enough for my aging eyes to see (unlike watches). I also use the phone on my bike. I have even towed my phone in a buoy as I did open-water swims (but without a HRM, sadly).
Wahoo now sells a number of options. I have the plain Tickr, but if i did it again, I'd probably get one of the better ones. I've now had the Tickr for a year without changing the battery, which is pretty good.
So, why use a HRM?
1) To do zone-based training. Know when you're slacking off.
2) To estimate calorie burn.1 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »
Sidetrack, but looking at the HRM-swim and HRM-Tri. You mention the swim stores data and downloads after the fact. Does the HRM-Tri not do the same thing for swimming? I thought the difference was the swim was tighter and kept better contact while swimming. Would the HRM-tri be useless for a pool swim?
.
The difference is the compound. The Tri will perish fairly quickly in treated water, it's optimised for open water.
The Swim is deeper, and has a better chest fit for pool swimming when there's no suit to keep it in place.0 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
Sidetrack, but looking at the HRM-swim and HRM-Tri. You mention the swim stores data and downloads after the fact. Does the HRM-Tri not do the same thing for swimming? I thought the difference was the swim was tighter and kept better contact while swimming. Would the HRM-tri be useless for a pool swim?
.
The difference is the compound. The Tri will perish fairly quickly in treated water, it's optimised for open water.
The Swim is deeper, and has a better chest fit for pool swimming when there's no suit to keep it in place.
I believe the Tri also does all the HRM-RUN metrics too.0 -
scorpio516 wrote: »MeanderingMammal wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »
Sidetrack, but looking at the HRM-swim and HRM-Tri. You mention the swim stores data and downloads after the fact. Does the HRM-Tri not do the same thing for swimming? I thought the difference was the swim was tighter and kept better contact while swimming. Would the HRM-tri be useless for a pool swim?
.
The difference is the compound. The Tri will perish fairly quickly in treated water, it's optimised for open water.
The Swim is deeper, and has a better chest fit for pool swimming when there's no suit to keep it in place.
I believe the Tri also does all the HRM-RUN metrics too.
It does, I'd highlighted that in the previous post, but was responding specifically to the pool swimming aspect there.0 -
The arm HRMs aren't near as accurate as the chest bands.
That being said, I've had some issues with the Garmin soft strap giving anomalous readings after a while. Some threads I've seen seem to indicate that when sweat gets into the band it can cause a short between the two connectors.0 -
The arm HRMs aren't near as accurate as the chest bands.
The question this raises is what do you mean by accurate?
Recent comparative tests I've seen indicate instantaneous comparison as within margin of error, and session trends being consistent. Discrepancies are greatest in the higher anaerobic range, and low aerobic. For me, that relates to below 55bpm and above 185bpm.
What causes most sensor issues for wrist worn optical tends to be flex, meaning that the blood flow is sufficiently constrained. That's the advantage that the Rhythm device has, the variability of blood flow in the upper arm is much lower due to increased soft tissue in comparison to the wrist.
First generation optically were very poor, we're now in third and fourth generation.2 -
While I accept that a chest strap is usually better, I’ve not noticed any gaps or anomalies with my wrist-based HRM and it’s one less thing I have to worry about when I go training.
I also now have 24hr heart rate data along with a ton of other data I wouldn’t have access to either.
For me it’s the same as step trackers - they’re all accurate enough for what most of us need and the biggest requirement is that they are consistent so we can analyse the data over time and use it to make informed changes for the better.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions