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 AshotJP over 6 years ago

Dude, you either don't want to understand what users are saying here or just dont read at all.
HM is one of the main functions of any sport tools, together with other data it give correct stats and recommendations, plans for any sport type.

No one saying Garmin is bad, no one saying there is other way to measure HM.. no, there are only 2 optical and electrical. Every company in the world are using the same method in their watches, nothing new here at all.. all depends on censor and programming algorithms.

F5 measuring really well while person is not moving much or decently steady - which mean censor is good.. however as soon as pulse start changing the watch showing either weird numbers or adjustment take really long to get right results..... this what Garmin need to fix and it is most likely programming algorithm not censor. (all watches take about 10-15 sec to adjust to any changes, no one asking immediate pickup of it (it is only possible with chest hm),

just fix programming logic to get best result and faster adjustment.

0 JSRUNNER_ over 6 years ago

AshotJP ohr is a flawed technology just like the fuel guage in your car - even a luxury car still has the same problem whereby 2/3 of mileage occurs in first half of fuel guage - except with the car you can't easily get an add on that works. The OHR is mainly for 24/7 monitoring and will work better for some than others/

0 AshotJP over 6 years ago

@JSRUNNER_Flawless(~5%) and way off(~30%) is two different things. No one is expecting the perfect results from OHM but at least on the level of apple watch, fitbit, samsung watch, polar.. all these also not perfect but adjusting much faster to pulse changes and decently close to real numbers... that all I'm personally expecting from wrist ohm and for intensive training of cause I use and recommend to use chest HM

0 JSRUNNER_ over 6 years ago

AshotJP flawed means it may be 5% or 50% off depending on the person, positioning, activity. Your experience with Polar and Apple may be better but someone else's for another activity may well be different. I think there are two hardware problems with the Fenix that make them prone to error (even before considering the algorithms) - they are thick watches with the sensor proud of the surface making it more likely that outside light might interfere, they are also heavy - so with any activity they are more likely to move about on the wrist and again give a false reading. My 935 though far from perfect (and with similar sensor and software) was far more accurate for OHR - but it is lighter and thinner - so fits much more snugly close to the wrist. It's very difficult to get a broad view of how watches perform from a forum like this as what you tend to see are the disatisfied users rather than those for whom the device works satisfactorily. I'm sure the algorithm could be improved and I hope that garmin are looking at this but I suspect the anomalies we are seeing is because they have already tweaked it to try and overcome other shortcomings.

0 SAHO over 6 years ago

JSRUNNER_ well explained!

If I for some reason would have to rely on the wrist sensor during a session where HR matters and the sensor isn't capable of providing an accurate value, I would actually much prefer the sensor to be 50% off rather that 5% off. At 50% at least I would know instantly, instead of screwing up the whole exercise i.e. by believing to be 5 bpm under LT when I'm actually 5bpm over and not realising before it's too late!

0 simonsev over 6 years ago

My Fenix 5 has gone from similar to Fitbit Charge-3 to totally random and (barely above resting) inaccurate after the 12.40 update, with exactly the same exercise routine week to week.

Let's see what the next update does.

0 AshotJP over 6 years ago

SAHO and @JRUNNER_ you two are either have no idea about production and specifications or don't even f'n listen. I'm not going argue with you two anymore. if ohm is not accurate at all, not 50% or wte % about allowed error, it's means that this inaccuracy should be in the specification of the product, otherwise it is false advertised product. end of the f'n story!!!!
and go read what I said.. this is programming problem not censor or technology

or perhaps you get paid my Garmin to write all these word with absolutely having no clue about technology and programming?

IF ERROR IS THIS BIG, IT IS FALSE ADVERTISED PRODUCT. COMPANY CAN NOT ADVERTISE "SPORT WATCH WITH OHM" IF OHM IS NOT WORKING CORRECTLY WITH ALLOWED ERROR MARGIN!

0 SAHO over 6 years ago

Haha.

I don’t know how many posts I’ve written around this forum about how useless OHR is for excercising,
regardless if it’s hardware, software or both. I have also repeatedly been saying that it’s a shame that the marketing tries to convince people that OHR is capable of replacing the chest strap.

And now you think Garmin is paying me for doing that?
Thanks for giving me a good laugh!

0 Former Member over 6 years ago

SAHO and @JRUNNER_ you two are either have no idea about production and specifications or don't even f'n listen.

I think it's you who doesn't get it or isn't listening. As pointed out already, different watch designs, different weights and different sensors. Just because you're seeing the problem with your watch and not with Apple, Fitbit, or whomever, doesn't make it a programming problem. I'm sure there are people out there who say their Fenix 5 oHRM works much better than their Apple, Fitbit, etc. ever did.

0 JSRUNNER_ over 6 years ago

AshotJP many products are over-marketed but the fact is that the OHR DOES work - it just doesn't work to the level that you expect or want. If you can find somewhere in Garmin's advertising and specifications an assertion that the OHR will be accurate to within x% of the true heart rate for all excercise types for all people then I'm sure you have a very good case to take to advertising standards authorities etc - but if not then .... Also I suggest that you re-examine your own logic and thought processes before suggesting that some people are "paid" to write these words - I wish I was because I'd make a fortune responding to people that seem unable to understand the limitations of OHR technology.

I'd be grateful if you could show me where in the Garmin literature it sets your expectation that OHR measurement will be accurate to within a specified margin. By the way I'm not saying there's not room for improvement but only that these issues are not confined to Garmin but affect most OHR devices currently on the market. The problem with changing the algorithms to overcome one issue is that it may well cause other issues. However you are obviously unhappy with your device so return it as not fit for purpose and buy another device that will work for you and let us know how you get on :)