What is Pro about Epix?

schmjoe said:

Your Navigation youtube video is for a Fenix 8. I don't own a Fenix 8. On my Epix it works fine. I'm using it frequently and have never had any issues with response times. Maybe we have different use cases.

They're all the same, Fenix 8 or Epix doesn't matter. 

The general problem with this forum is its zero tolerance towards negative feedback and even positive criticism; dissenting opinions are simply recognized as trolling. Here are some generic responses to complaints:

• If you're unhappy with the watch, why are you still using it?

• Mine works smoothly. So, if there is a problem, it must be due to you or your usage style. You don't know how to use it.

• The watch doesn't measure SPO2 correctly? No, it's your fault. Your blood flow isn't good enough, or you have a hairy wrist.

Years ago, I suggested to Garmin that they develop a "Driving Mode," similar to "Do Not Disturb," which would disable related sensors like the pedometer and altimeter. This way, when the mode is activated while driving, it won't count fake steps and floor climbing. But of course, they ignored it.

Accurately measuring heart rate must be the key feature for calculating other health and sports metrics. This task has to be performed as precisely as possible in every single circumstance. The Epix Pro, marketed as a "Sports Watch," lags behind some others sold as "Smart Watches." That's actually a shame.

Imagine purchasing a Porsche or a Bugatti, which are sold under the "Super Sport Car" category, only to find that they have handling and cornering issues, even at low speeds! What would you think? And the general responses on this forum are like this:

• If you're looking for good handling, you need to install Eibach Sports Springs on your car and buy another set of tires.

• No, the suspension is fine, but you're a bad driver. You don't know how to drive a car.

Our situation is just like that. Hey Garmin, we don't need to see a new model every year; first, please improve the heart rate sensor!"

Please have a look at the watch reviews by The Quantified Scientist on Youtube and check how Garmin watches perform there.

Thanks anyway.

Ryu said:

The watch doesn't measure SPO2 correctly? No, it's your fault. Your blood flow isn't good enough, or you have a hairy wrist.

As much as you consider it like a joke, that's exactly what can happen sometimes.

If some people experience issues with HR detection during a run, for the first 5-15 minutes, and other don't what do you think is the problem? The watch or how it's being worn or how some people could be not compatible with Garmin's algorithm due to whatever reason(skin type as a simple example).

Ryu said:

Please have a look at the watch reviews by The Quantified Scientist on Youtube and check how Garmin watches perform there.

And be also aware how the results of his girlfriend were a lot different when comparing the same watch(except for the dimension of course).

Garmin Bug said:

Finally I am not sure if one can trust the training metrics if the OHR lags behind when not in training.

That's the most critical part; the hr recording outside of the training is as important as the hr during workouts. Both hr trends post-workout are different and general activity tracking plays a bigger role in health metrics.

I think Coros, Suunto and Polar are worse than Garmin, only Apple and Huawei is excel at hr performance but i don't like their eco-system.

Mladen T said:

If some people experience issues with HR detection during a run, for the first 5-15 minutes, and other don't what do you think is the problem?

Then why doesn't this happen with an Apple Watch? It can measure correctly even on your ankle.

Skin type is not related to the algorithm; it's about the type and power of the LEDs located on the WHR.

Mladen T said:

And be also aware how the results of his girlfriend were a lot different when comparing the same watch

It doesn't differ much actually, as far as i remember. I don't know; may be i'm wrong or may be he's being paid by other brands, which seems unlikely to me. I also don't know if others like Desfit or DCR are sponsored by Garmin. Who knows?

Ryu said:

Then why doesn't this happen with an Apple Watch? It can measure correctly even on your ankle.

Skin type is not related to the algorithm; it's about the type and power of the LEDs located on the WHR.

A friend of mine running with apple watch 9. I don't know how he is wearing the watch but I told him to pay attention and to try different ways. The majority of the times the first few minutes have *** readings.

As I said, I don't have, usually, such problems but it can happen occasionally. The last time it happened, was during a rainy day.

The first 3 minutes had bad readings

But it's really rare, for me, and it's just for the first few minutes...sometimes maybe just 10-30 seconds and not 5-15 minutes like for other people.

I really want to try an apple watch sooner or later but I don't expect much difference.

Even Oura ring which should be the best of the best for the sleep recording is not perfect and I had some weird stuff from time to time.

People should understand that optical sensors can't measure the HR accurately for the simple reason that they are not measuring the heart rate. They are estimating it based on the blood flow and it's pretty easy to understand that blood flow can be affected by a lot of stuff like it can be the light from the sensor.

Funny example...just a few days ago my friend was surprised how the apple watch was giving some readings while being on the table and I explained to him how it estimates the beats. He then tried to place it over the clothes and was still getting readings...now, do you want to tell me that the readings were correct over a pair of jeans? Maybe yes, maybe not...who knows.

I don't believe in any magic behind any of these watches. If you test something for long enough you will always have some errors at a certain point. Use the best AI or cloud computing or whatever but if I affect the blood flow or the light of the sensor there's no way that I'll get accurate readings for the majority of the time.

Back to quantified scientist...he's clearly in favor of apple watch and i stopped to watch his reviews after i noticed that pattern. 

When a watch has a correlation of data of 0.95 it's like it's the end of the world just because in some tests in other watches he got 0.98? Are you telling me that that 2-3% will make the difference? C'mon, let's be serious.

Sometimes he says that the test was made of 3 runs? WTF? lol

He also talks so seriously about sleep recording when the device that he is using is also not something that has a 100% accuracy...and far from that. If I remember correctly, zmax compared to PSG has an accuracy of something like 60-70%(with some phases more accurate and others less accurate) so about what are we talking? lol again

There are no perfect devices...just some are more compatible with some persons because physiology matters(said also by quantified scientist) and probably many other stuff matters.

And yes, I had also steps or stairs counted while driving slowly from the garage. Do I like it? Of course not. Do I care? Not really because it will definitely not change my life like I'm not expecting it to count steps when I'm walking but my arm with the watch is not moving.

Weightlifting comparison lol and you want to tell me that the watch is inaccurate? Clearly it works better on some persons and not on others.

(I'm using the Venu 3 as example because I remember how much I liked this video ahahaha...before, he didn't have this type of comparisons and not watching his videos anymore so can't say much about the recent ones)

My sister has Apple Watch 6 and she recently got the series 10. I tried her Watch 6 in the past and it was superbly accurate. But i don't like the Apple Watch, regardless of how accurate it is, even though i'm deeply in the ecosystem (I have Iphone, Macbook,  Apple TVs, Airpods etc.)

He can try warming up if early readings are inaccurate.

Yes, OHR is not as reliable as a chest strap but the technology has developed a lot comparing to 10 years ago. Additionally, the working principle of fingertip pulse oximeters are similar to OHR, but they're reliable most of the time and are widely used in medical industry.

I'm agree with you about The Quantified Scientist because he primarily highlights Apple and Google products. I don't follow him as closely or seriously as I used to. However, he is right about Huawei and Apple; these devices really do a great job of measuring heart rate. I also tried Fitbit Charge 3 and it was a disaster experience for me. 

The correlation value of the Watch 10 in his latest review for indoor cycling, outdoor cycling, and indoor running is 1, which is the maximum limit. The correlation for outdoor running is 0.99. 

Ryu said:

Can I make my own decision on which one to use, if you let me, please? Perhaps Garmin cares about my feedback and will use it to improve the sensor?

Yes :-)

I admire your patience as I've never used a brand for 10 years while disliking their products.

Ryu said:

Running workouts are a piece of cake, even for bands sold for 20 bucks such as the Mi Band. It's a steady-state activity.

I said "even workout" in comparison with 24/7 tracking. If you do activities in which wrist-HR struggles, use a strap or an armband.

Ryu said:

But the science disagrees with you,

"Consequently, cardiac patients may consider the Apple Watch ECG a trustworthy remote monitoring technique."

How many Garmin users are cardiac patients? I don't say it's not reliable, it's just useless in most cases.

Ryu said:

So you approve that the OHR sensor on Epix is not good ?

No ; you say it's bad, so in your place I would choose a "good" one. Or maybe you can stick with bad Garmin products for another decade, after all.

When connected to an external chest strap, the OHR sensor remains active. It doesn't flash but stays on as statically (fixed) when i start a workout after connecting to the chest strap.

Is this normal? My previous watches used to turn off the OHR completely after starting a workout.

100.000 Steps Challange
- Epix Pro died at 95.000 steps
- Fenix 8 completed 100.000 steps and still left 40% battery

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMisin6JQfA