Fenix 6 Series - 8.00 Release Candidate

Cardio app didn't do the trick.. Still jumpy

Pathetic

Thanks for checking.

Hi Garmin Team,

I already informed you, today i had a first-time reboot watch during connection with tempe .

I already informed you via mail

Just for some balance to all of the negative WHR reports, the HR graph below is from my swim earlier comparing HRM Tri to WHR on my 6X Pro Solar with 8.00.  Aside of some hiccups during the first 3-4 minutes (not unusual), the WHR is good, even during the drops and rises around short breaks.  This is indicative of WHR more generally for me and I don't see the issues others are during other activities (hike, indoor bike) and even out of activity (24/7 watch mode) the WHR happily tracks my HR rising to (and falling from) normal 'operating temp' of around 150 bpm.

It seems that that those posting here are seeing an issue (I'm not saying you aren't), but if it's working for many others, Garmin may not be finding it all that easy to fix things so it works for you without breaking it for those WHR currently works for.  It seems WHR is very person specific and some brands (hardware and software cobo) work for one person and not so much for another.  All I can say is stick with it and keep sending in data to the beta email address above; in my experience, they do monitor (but only reply if they need more info) and they do get to the bottom of bugs eventually, even if some prove harder nuts to crack than others and take time (months) to refine/fix.

https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/4660430273

[In case anyone is wondering, if you upload the fit file to the DCR Analyzer it displays the WHR rather than HRM Tri data; but if you export the tcx file from Connect, that shows the HRM Tri data in the DCR Analyzer.  Hence I can easily compare WHR to HRM Tri whilst swimming using only one watch.]

Thanks you very much Crispin_Ellisdon for your post. 

However did you try recording your hr while swimming without starting the activity?  A video would be great 

I have to get a strap as well just for the sake of proving to some people how good the fenix 6 can be.

 Thanks Crispin_Ellisdon  

My watch has generally good OHR performance within an activity, when recording as an activity. When not recording the activity and simply on the watch face or, interestingly, broadcasting the heart rate, the performance is, at times, garbage. This is the thing that is frustrating people because it means that 24x7 heart rate cannot be trusted, especially as the heart rate rises above resting and light activity levels.

Here is an example of OHR from my 6X Pro Solar and 5X+ vs a chest strap when recording a treadmill activity. I would not complain about this performance from any of the devices, although you might query why the 6X is so far off the pace at the very beginning. I can't answer that.

Now, here is (one of) the major problem areas - broadcast heart rate. You would think that if the watch was asked to broadcast heart rate it would take the trouble to measure heart rate accurately before transmitting the values. Well it doesn't. I have no idea what it thinks it's doing, but broadcasting actual heart rate is not it. 

Here is a graph showing 6X broadcast heart rate captured by my Garmin Edge bike computer and my Zwift PC. At the same time I was recording OHR from my 5X+ and a Polar H7 chest strap paired to my ELEMNT bike computer. 

The top pair of traces is from the chest strap and the 5X+ OHR. Fantastic job by the 5X+. The bottom two traces have a timing offset, which can be ignored, but these are the broadcast heart rate values from the 6X. If I leave the watch on the watch face, just doing normal 24x7 recording, without broadcasting, the HR accuracy is no better once pulse rises above 120 BPM. Actually it can be bad at any value, but above 120 it gets worse.

So if heart rate is not tracked properly 24x7 what trust can there be in data like calories, stress, body battery, maybe sleep analysis. I've had a high heart rate alert from my 6X while sitting calmly and eating breakfast or lunch. I have been wearing my 5X in parallel. My actual heart rate at the time was 60-70. The 6X peaked at 131 while I was sat there. I reach 130 when putting out 200W on the bike, not when sitting still.

I have recorded videos of my tests and sent these and files to Garmin. I've had a ticket open since December. The ticket is not closed. Investigation is on-going. Latest contact was a week ago when they requested more test data from me. I supplied it. I am trying to work with Garmin to get this problem resolved. Progress is slow, but I am doing my best to move it forward.

Writing here does not really help, because the feedback will not reach Garmin and those who do not witness the problem just turn the discussion into a battle. People have to report to Garmin and ideally provide supporting evidence.

For those who say "well start recording an activity then", yes, this is a solution if you have very specific activities that you want to track with a distinct start and end time, and you want detailed metrics and to remember to both start and stop recording. But 24x7 heart rate should still be correct without having to record things like power or pace or gradient or elevation or cadence.

What if you are a bike courier and have repeats bursts of activity throughout the day? Should you record the whole day as one big activity? Should you start a new activity for each delivery? Should you have every right to expect 24x7 heart rate recording to do the job for you, including down time in between. What about a construction worker or landscape gardener, or fencing contractor, regularly doing hard work with no set start and end, or activity type? What if you walk the dog every day over hilly terrain and heart rate goes above 120 on the climbs? What if you commute to work by bike - 2 miles, 5 miles, 10 miles - whatever it is, should it be required that they start and stop recording an activity? Shouldn't 24x7 heart rate be good enough for them too? Maybe they'd like to workout in the evening and check on their body battery, which they'd hope to be correct. Maybe they are trying to lose weight and calories matter, so they'd like the best data that can reasonably be expected, based on ACCURATE heart rate rather than nonsense.

It would appear that the OHR has at least two working states - high accuracy within an activity and something far less accurate outside an activity. Speculation is that this is something to do with battery saving. That's fine, if the effect on accuracy is marginal, but the effect is not marginal, especially once heart rate rises above resting or walking levels. Quite what goes on when broadcasting is anybody's guess. Maybe that has a third category of operation which is even worse.

Crispin_Ellisdon said:

Just for some balance to all of the negative WHR reports, the HR graph below is from my swim earlier comparing HRM Tri to WHR on my 6X Pro Solar with 8.00.

Thanks for your test but to understand if the issue is solved in Beta 8.00 you have to do one of the following tests: 

1) Try to reach 160BPM recording an HIKE activity

2) Try to reach 160BPM doing what you want but WHITHOUT start any activity but staying in the watchface page

3) Try to reach 160BPM doing what you want but WHITHOUT start any activity but staying in the HR widget

4) Try to reach 160 BPM during BROADCASTING WHR to another device 

My prayer is to do this test and give us a feedback. 

I hope I will can do another test with 8.00 today but is not so easy working at home with two kids because of the Covid-19. 

Sorry for capital letters but in this test is very important to follow these protocol anyway the test is not relevant because WHR during activities (exept hike as you can read in the forum) is perfect! Very few people have problem during activities (except hiking). 

Please let us know

I also have issues during with the wrist HR some activities (backcountry skiing) not running or cycling... weird.