Anyone use a strap HR monitor synced to the watch for workouts?

[Fable]

I ran across my old Polar Wearlink which honestly won't do me a lick of good since its not Bluetooth enabled. This got me to thinking since today is leg day and you can't ever skip leg day That I can probably get a better reading off a HR Strap... but I haven't used one in a while. I have been using gadgets for a while now: Bodybugg, Fitbit, etc.. So for anyone using a strap -- which one are you using and how do you find it to be more accurate than the wrist sensor.

Thanks in advance.

 

[doogald]

I do not, but a great resource for reviews and recommendations is the DCRainmaker blog. Here is his review of the first Apple Watch, which includes a statement that you can pair it with a smart BT heart rate monitor: https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2016/02/apple-watch-review.html

And here is his recommendation for the best smart BT heart rate monitor: https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2014/05/scosche-antbluetooth-optical.html

 

[CC_89521]

I use the Polar H7 chest strap heart rate monitor paired to my Apple Watch. It is considerably more accurate than the wrist sensor built into the watch. I noticed that when using the "Other" activity at the gym for my cross training workouts that the watch calculates that I burn 2 to 2x as many calories. I highly recommend a bluetooth chest strap.

 

[StraightlineBoy]

I use the Polar H7 chest strap heart rate monitor paired to my Apple Watch. It is considerably more accurate than the wrist sensor built into the watch. I noticed that when using the "Other" activity at the gym for my cross training workouts that the watch calculates that I burn 2 to 2x as many calories. I highly recommend a bluetooth chest strap.

How do you know which sensor the watch is using? I've got a Bluetooth chest strap from Wahoo which seems to pair ok but it's then down to blind faith that the watch is using it rather than the optical sensor as far as I could tell.

I regularly run and agree that chest straps are definitely more accurate than the optical sensor (this is based on a Garmin 920XT with chest strap vs the Apple Watch HR sensor). When you review the results afterwards you'll see anomalies in the AW results that make no sense whereas the chest strap is very consistent

 

[tcuprof]

I regularly run and agree that chest straps are definitely more accurate than the optical sensor (this is based on a Garmin 920XT with chest strap vs the Apple Watch HR sensor). When you review the results afterwards you'll see anomalies in the AW results that make no sense whereas the chest strap is very consistent

What sort of anomalies? I'm curious how you know the chest strap is more accurate so I'm thinking maybe your explanation can help me recognize when my AW sensor based results are off.

 

[StraightlineBoy]

What sort of anomalies? I'm curious how you know the chest strap is more accurate so I'm thinking maybe your explanation can help me recognize when my AW sensor based results are off.

It may be that you're having better luck with the HR sensor than I have...some people do have better success than others with optical HR sensors from what I've read. I think you'd know if it was happening to you. I've got a screenshot from Strava of one of the more extreme examples but it shows a couple of things...



You'll notice a couple of things. Firstly that it took nearly 1.5km's to even register anything and then secondly how infrequently it samples, because in theory between 2.0 and 2.4km's there's no fluctuation in my heart rate at all which is really very unlikely.
With a chest strap most of my graphs start out exactly the same; over the first 0.5km's a sharpish rise to maybe 120-130 bpm and then a steadier rise throughout the rest of the run.

It may be that I'm being too pedantic. I'm not in training for the olympics so it doesn't really matter if my heart rate graph is a bit off some days but if I run a personal best or if I'm struggling someday then sometimes the heart rate graph has all of the answers. I find that once I'm warmed up and moving at pace then my heart rate mostly fluctuates in the 150-170 range; that's quite a small window so accuracy is needed or the figures are useless. If the graph says 160 and it was really 170 that's the difference between trying hard and being virtually flat out for me.

 

[tcuprof]

Thanks for the explanation. I feel moderately confident about the sensor's accuracy because the average heart rate for my morning runs is fairly consistently in the 150s. But: 1) I always just look at the average and have never seen a graph like you posted; and 2) there is the occasional 180+ average that I doubt.

 

[StraightlineBoy]

No worries. Somewhere in the 150s sounds about right for a morning run for a typical adult who is in at least reasonable condition. I agree with you about 180+ readings - for me once I'm showing 170+ that's either running up a steep hill or a flat out sprint and definitely couldn't be my average for a run. I've got another graph where it showed my heart rate starting out high and being 177+ for a third of a 5km run which just isn't going to happen.