Experience with optical HR

joey100

Anyone have any experience using the wrist based optical HR? Have to return another fenix 3 and not replacing with the same, looking at a basic enough run only watch but they all seem to be optical hr. Old info says around a 5% margin of error which isn't great but I know some can be used with a chest strap too, and maybe newer technology might be better. Just wondering if I need to get myself another chest strap is all. Anyone compared readings from wrist to chest during same run?

68 lost souls

I dont have many data points but I tested my VivoactiveHR compared to Garmin HR Strap and a 310xt when I first got the Vivoactive. I also had my VivoactivHR running while doing a VO2Max test.

I can send you the 2 activities on the bike test.

Kurt.Godel

I've a garmin 935 with the wrist HR, the first week it seemed to jump all over the place but its settled down now. Very happy with the HR capability and don't bother with the chest strap at all now. Whether it is as accurate as a chest strap I don't know (never compared), but its certainly accurate enough for my purposes.

shotgunmcos

What is wrong with the Fenix 3?

joey100

Issue with it picking up satellites. Went over night from it being brilliant to taking around 20 mins. Followed all the instructions, done hard reset, everything offered by Garmin and it would work properly for a day or two and then back to waiting ages. Where i used it hadn't changed either. Exchanged that for a new one and never right from the start, 3/4 mins of waiting at the start but put that down to it being new and after a while it would find them quicker. No luck, 15 mins and 17 mins this week so it's gone back. Shop said they have no more so will be a refund. Looking at just getting a pure run watch, I never used it for swimming anyway and I didn't use half the stuff on it.

trailrunner

I’ve the Fenix 5s.
I was suspicious of the wrist HR after a week or two so compared HR with old 910 with HR strap and wrist on three different runs , Wrist was high by 4-5 Bpm every time .
Then I tried it on the bike with the edge and guess what ...... out by 4-5 BPM. Now some might say no big deal but it was putting me well into Z3 on a Z2 run like wise on the bike , easy run was then enduro, enduro run was turned into a tempo , again no big deal some might say but if your doing long distance ..........!!!

pgibbo

I've a 735. Not a fan of the optical HR. I've never compared it against the strap by wearing 2 devices but I know from looking at the data that the optical is reading high. I just use the HR strap now.

P

fletch

I have a 235 with an optical HRM and tbh I never look at the data anymore. I've done all out 5k PB races and supposedly my heart rate was barely above resting and likewise I've done easy runs and I've had it flashing at me that my HR is 190+. It's a brilliant watch but I just don't trust the wrist based HRM.

I did read that it's less accurate on people who aren't that fleshy and that you need the strap on tight but even with it tight, I don't find it reliable

joey100

Seems to be fairly conclusive so, I'll stick with the HR strap then. I've read as well that it can struggle to read through tattoos as well so another potential issue. I'll stick with what I've been using up to now so. Cheers folks.

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

joey100 wrote: »

Seems to be fairly conclusive so, I'll stick with the HR strap then. I've read as well that it can struggle to read through tattoos as well so another potential issue. I'll stick with what I've been using up to now so. Cheers folks.

2hr turbo and I tracked both (just for you Joey) avg 135/136 max 153/153 and both hr files look consistent between optical and chest strap. That's the 735 I am using.

tunney

The big problem work ohr is outdoors biking. All else is good imho.