Fenix 5 report too low heart rate at any intervall training.

Hi,

is there anything that can be done to this issue? At this point wrist HR is unusable to me. It does not give any sensible readings if i do any other than basic running exercise. Few weeks ago I forgot my chest strap at home from my ice hockey practice. Week after that i got chest strap with me at practice again. I knew that wrist HR would not be as accurate as chest strap but the difference is so huge that there is no reason to even use wrist hr at my training.

Point is that even thought wrist hr has it limits there is no excuse to be this wrong:

Wrist Hr
AVG HR 128bpm Max hr 177 Training effect because of these 2.8 and calories 680C

Chest strap
AVG HR 154 bpm Max hr 195 Training effect 4.6 and Calories 880C

Both practices were identical and my fitness levels were about the same (these would make only few bpm difference anyway). I'm not fittest person in the world but I know my data and that chest strap reported HR is almost spot on what it should be. I have noticed this same behavior when i do interval running. Basically you can't do any interval running with hr rates with the watch.

Something else i noticed is that after a shift i took watch of my wrist and it did not drop heart rate even if it was off from my wrist over 5seconds.

I know where i should were the watch to get any sensible data out of it so that is not the problem here.

When the watch also has GPS issues and Altitude meters report floors climbed when i stay still and sit at my chair there is something seriously wrong here. It is 500e watch here at Finland so I do have really hard time to believe that these are "features" and not flaws.

0 JSRUNNER_ over 6 years ago

louhe yes the scosche gets very good reviews (See DCRAINMAKER Site for a comparison with others). I think the armband based OHRs are much more reliable than wrist based ( for obvious reasons), With the new rythm 24 you could just wear the armband during the game/training and download to the watch afterwards.Not sure how well the band works with upper body strength work in the Gym but it has to stand a much better chance than something wrapped round your wrist.

0 SAHO over 6 years ago

Since Scosche is still an optical sensor it probably has most to do with placement, unless Schosche has managed to do some super clever software corrections that no one else has thought of yet. For intervals/HIIT I can't imagine it being faster than a chest strap, but I can't say that for sure as I haven't tried one myself.

I had a look at Scosche's website and the first I saw was this quote which made me laugh a bit: "...because you deserve hyper-accurate data to maximize your workout without using a bulky chest strap." I have not seen or tried a Scosche in real life myself, but based on the pictures on the website it looks much more bulky than for example the Garmin HRM-Run chest strap, and if the optical Scosche is hyper-accurate, what is an electrical chest strap? Super-ultra-mega-3000-accurate?

JSRUNNER_ mentions possible issues with strength training due to arm muscle use, I reckon that would be an issue with ice hockey as well?

0 JSRUNNER_ over 6 years ago

SAHO I was just speculating about the impact of arm muscle use but I'm sure there are reviews if you search around. For running cycling (including intervals) DCRAINMAKER is seeing pretty good accuracy (comparing a variety of HRMs) and finding a rapid response to HR changes too (which is a problem with many wrist based OHRs). For myself I'm generally happy with chest strap and it seems logical to measure HR by using electrical impulses as close to the source as possible but for at least some sports/training where a Chest Strap is impractical I think the arm-band type monitors can be an alternative.

0 SAHO over 6 years ago

JSRUNNER_ Sure, generally I think we agree, and I'm not saying that the chest strap is the final answer to all things HR related, even though I realize that I might come across that way :)

My point is simply that wrist based OHR is no good so far and if we're adding another device to deal with that, why not go straight to the chest strap instead of adding an arm strap that might carry with it some of the disadvantages of the optical sensor?

If the Scosche (or other OHR arm strap) outperformed a chest strap I would be the first to ditch mine, but so far I have not seen any overwhelming evidence of that. And, I hardly doubt any OHR will outperform a chest strap any time soon when talking about activities that includes rapidly changing HR and/or heavy muscle flexing in the area where the sensor is worn.

That's only my opinion of course, and everyone else must go with the option that suits their needs the best.

0 JSRUNNER_ over 6 years ago

SAHO agreed - I was talking only in reference to sports where the chest strap causes problems as in the case of louhe above who has problems with a chest strap when he is tackled. For myself chest strap works well except for pool swimming where the HRM Swim I find annoying and not very long lasting (the black fabric connectors degrade in the chlorine and you have to replace the whole strap) - for pool I might try the scosche rythem 24 and see if it has acceptable accuracy.

0 Former Member over 6 years ago

Yes this exactly. SAHO and JSRUNNER_ try to wear a chest strap under chest armor and and get tackled by 100kg defender. Something I want to void if I can. When I bought Fenix 5 it was basically marketed that I do not need chest strap anymore. This is what bothers me the most.

I wasn’t even expecting mine to be accurate. But this overmarketed watch is so off in it’s mesurements and I don’t mean HR only that it’ almost unusable. And with every software update something else is off.

As for HR mesurement. 166 bpm on a pro medical treadmill for little less than a full minute went completely undetected by this thing. Holes in stress or HR graphs, absurd HR measurements where treadmill or chest strap detect 120 or 140 bpm and this thing measures 82 or 90... it’s not imprecise, it’s absurd. One and half hours of really intense training it measures 460-600 calories depending on it’s mood, and 20 mins of walking the dog with million stops, 1,6 km distance and pace of only 12-14 mins/km it reports 189 cals *sour, ironical laughter* Some of us have a heart condition, so even an inaccurate measurements are fine for us, but not SO wrong. And I can’t wear a chest strap whole day. I’ve tried another product from another vendor and it was imprecise as expected. But not nearly as off as this thing. I was told by multiple owners of this thing that theirs aren’t nearly as off as mine, and seller told me that every now and then someone returns itfor a replacement. Bad sensor quality and buggy software development :( And no, I haven’t listed all it’s faults.

0 AshotJP over 6 years ago

I absolutely agree with you. My F5 (not in hard exercise) just simple walking sometimes sooooo off :( unbelievable. even apple watch adjusting to pulse change and getting much more accurate numbers.
I know that we can't expect fast and exact numbers as chest HM.. but at least closer numbers, not like poster above or I had few times when my pulse was 142 and watch showing 96 (f'n really?) than it drop to 110 and watch pick up 25-30 sec later and was showing for some reason 150 for another minute when in really my pulse already drop to 110 for like more that a minute. omg
really sad performance of ohm for watch over $600

0 SAHO over 6 years ago

I agree that the performance of the OHR isn’t even close to good enough, but it’s just the way it is and it’s far from unique neither for the Fenix 5 or Garmin in general.

I don’t really see the difference between being a bit off vs. being far off. Either it has a «lock» on your HR or it doesn’t, and if it detects false beats or fails to detect beats I guess it’s just as likely that it will be far off or even show half or double of the real HR rather than being 5 or 10 beats off. At least that’s my experience.

Also, I keep reading that people say it’s bad for a $600 premium watch - well, guess what: you don’t pay extra for a better OHR sensor, you pay for all the other features that the lower end devices doesn’t have - the OHR is exactly the same and if you were buying a watch solely for it’s OHR you would be better off buying a VA3 or something else in the Vivo series. (...and maybe spend the extra money on a proper HR sensor instead?)

0 AshotJP over 6 years ago

Seriously, ohm is not important.. well perhaps it is not important for you. but is it MAIN function of any SPORT watch. and it should be at least accurate and close to real level not like I had today 144 and watch again showing 96. if provides option is not even close than product is false advertised. as far as chest HM, thank you for advice but I do have one and use it all them for training. but sometimes I don't have it and I need rely upon the watch and since I'm paying money and not small amount, I expect it at least adapt faster to changing pulse and show me close to real numbers not 40% off.

If Garmin can not guaranty well build OHM and can't learn from other manufactures who provide decent ohm than they should not include it in this product and sell it only with chestHM.
and don't give me an advice what should I get, I bough this watch because it has all the functions that I need it and if one or few is not working as it should be, I'm right not to be satisfied and complain about as well as others in this tread.

let me also put it in plain language if you for some reason don't understand explanation above.
Let's say you bought sport car and everything ALMOST working fine,m except air conditioner instead keeping set temperature doing it aprox 10F higher and engine instead gauge instead turning cooling all the way at 180F only staring at 220F and half way. sooner or later you will hurt you car... but if you want to keep you car running, you need to buy additional unit for 15% price of the car and air conditioner, oh well ... everything else is working isn't it?

0 SAHO over 6 years ago

If built-in OHR is the main function then I would advise you to return the watch to Garmin as not fit for purpose and get your money back.

No, I won’t give you any advice for any alternative device, as I don’t think there is any other product out there that has a an internal wrist sensor that meets your expectation. (unless Polar has cracked the code with their new Vantage series)