Epix Gen 2 Pro 47 Hearth Rate Sensor

Hello,

• This is a really good question. I currently have a Fenix ​​7X pro on this point I am really satisfied.
  Before I had a Fenix ​​7X that I sold for the purchase of my new watch. With the upgrades my Fenix ​​7X had really good off-activity heart rate tracking.
• I wonder if Garmin for the Epix 2 versions reduced the operation of the heart rate sensor when out of activities to save battery for OLED display consumption?!

When I had the Epix, I deciphered the algorithm in this way: in rest situation the sensor went at reduced speed. Reading was suitable only if one was truly and at rest (sitting
or in bed). But if I started to take the stairs after seated, the sensor remained dormant, and continued to mark me the same heartbeats as when I was seated. After more or less intense movements, the reader (led) doubled the reading frequency and also the heart readings became correct. This reading update happened even after about 1 minute. Living a very busy life, the readings were completely off by the end of the day. Now I know that with the Epix Pro, the rest situation, 2 of the 4 LEDs remain off, I would like to know if the situation described above has been solved or is still going on. I think Garmin did this to save the battery, but it didn't work for me.

The sensor is still going to low power mode in 24/7 mode as also in F7 and others. It's only using 2 LEDs and the frequency is also lowered.
But all in all it's a new sensor and it could bring some improvements for you. 

Unfortunately, the preliminary tests show that there is not much of a difference between Elevate 5.0 in the Pro vs Elevate 4.0 in the Gen 2. Have a look here: https://youtu.be/5-KFL_drbuw
I recently upgraded from Venu 2 to Epix Gen 2 and noticed that although they share the same Elevate 4.0 sensor, the Epix 2 heart rate accuracy is so bad.
I wear the watch as tight as I can but cannot get an accurate reading, really. It's especially noticeable during my sprinting and floor climbing exercises, where you have quick peaks in the heart rate. Interestingly, Venu 2 had no issue with it. Strength training is also a disaster. Venu 2 performed better there as well.

Considering the fact that maybe the heart rate is the single most important parameter used to calculate not only the training load, readiness, calories spent, recovery (especially at high altitude), and a lot of others, from a customer's pov, it's not acceptable to pay for a premium sports watch and not receive a better accuracy. I feel that (probably) because of this inaccuracy, all daily training suggestions are quite off for me. For example, after several days of heavy training, it keeps suggesting me I shall continue training (running), instead of getting at least a 1-day rest.
I know the solution is either a chest strap or an arm strap, but when paying such a price, you would expect it to do the job on your wrist.
In the end, Apple really nailed it with their latest sensor, it's just a lot more accurate considering the fact that it's predominantly a smartwatch and certainly a lot less of a sports watch compared to the Garmin, which is ridiculous. 
Hopefully, some software updates will fix this.

Yosif Starkov said:

In the end, Apple really nailed it with their latest sensor

It's tiresome to keep seeing this. ALL watches with OHR have problems for some but not for others.

https://www.archyde.com/apple-watch-ultra-significant-problems-with-heart-rate-measurement-possible/

It's due to the technology as well as individual physiology.

Yosif Starkov said:

the solution is either a chest strap or an arm strap

Exactly. As has always been the case since OHR came to watches.

Apple may have nailed it with their sensor, but their watch has 18 hours of battery life. My laptop computer goes longer than that between charges.

I'll take the OHR in my Epix Pro and 29 days of battery life.

Yosif Starkov said:

Unfortunately, the preliminary tests show that there is not much of a difference between Elevate 5.0 in the Pro vs Elevate 4.0 in the Gen 2. Have a look here: https://youtu.be/5-KFL_drbuw

I tested this myself. I wore my AWU on one wrist, and my epix pro 51mm on the other wrist. I did walk/run intervals, and both OHR's where the same most of the time, and never went more than 1 or 2 BPM from each other. If anything, the AWU had slightly more lag than the epix pro 51mm.

I've been having the same issue with my Epix Gen 2.  Very disappointing to spend $1k on a watch and get defective HR readings.  With a chest strap, my easy runs stay around 135-145BPM consistently; however with the EPIX the HR inexplicably spikes to the 170s around 3-4 miles into any and all runs.  When I stop to clean the sensor, my HR readings hover around 65-70 BPM for the next few miles before normalizing again.  Sounds like I'm not alone in these bugs, but I really hope Garmin does something about this.