Totally disappointed with Garmin Fenix 7S optic heart rate sensor accuracy

I don't mean to be rude and I might be wrong, but after this post you should provide the community with a separate post about battery life as well. I suppose as this is a Garmin forum most of the forum members have no idea how Apple, Oura, and Huawei outperforms any models from the Fénix 7 series.I think if you're looking for almost perfect heart rate detection accuracy you should look for a medically certified gadget. I cannot assure you that device will fit on your wrist, but maybe you can carry it on your back 

Garmin has never had good optical heart rate. Wearables with off the shelf Maxim PPG reference designs with the MAX77074 and lifeQ algo are much better. 

my fenix 7X won’t even pick up riding my mountain bike on anything but a flat road. Every time I forget my chest strap it records my heart rate for the two hour climb up  then the 20 minute down hill run it stays at 110bpm or whatever it was at when I started. When I wear my chest strap I see my HR go up to 190 so than I lose all that anaerobic and high aerobic training and it gets listed as low arobic. The next day suggested workouts are high aerobic when I’m sore from intervals.  lol. Super annoying

$1100 and a fit bit records better downhill mountain biking. Pos 

J117 said:

it stays at 110bpm

Have you started an activity profile ? To record a correct heart rate, you need to start an activity profile.

None of these devices are "medically certified gadgets" but they outperform Garmin despite less price and a less history of R&D.

Garmin failed to make a reliable HR sensor but instead create the biggest watches catalog.

There are far more people out there , happy with the F7 OHR than there are in this forum complaining about it, Personally I paddle surfskis, cycle and MTB. I have Fenix 5, 6 & 7 and the OHR remains with 1 or 2 BPM of my chest HRMs throughout my HR range. I have no doubt that some people have issues with OHR but I would put it down in the main to, fit, personal physical characteristics or failure of an individual unit.

Same applies to yours. I find it hard to believe tht 3 different watches with OHR which function as intended are a statistical anomaly. I have also used Mio Link, Mio Fuse and Polar OH1 with my Fenix 3 (not HR version) with similar accuracy. OHR technology is very good, it just doesn't suit everyone's physiology as well as a chest monitor but I wouldn't yet trust OHR for HRV data  Just remember the only people in forums have had some sort of issue in the past.

...and check around, there are studies into the accuracy of OHR measurement.

I don't mean to be rude either ;-) I have a few wrist based fitness trackers; Whoop, Pixel watch and Galaxy watch 5 Pro, they are all with 5-10 BPM of my Polar 10 chest strap when exercising, which is acceptable, with the Whoop out performing the rest.

My Garmin Fenix 6 pro is the most expensive wearable devise I own and is usually 50-60 BPM out compared to the Polar 10, I have done all the usual things in terms of changing wrists, band tightening, hardware reset and have come to the conclusion that Fenix HR sensors are absolute garbage.

You don't need a medical grade HR monitor as you've [sarcastically] suggested, just one that works within an acceptable tolerance would be a start.

Other than the HR sensor, I love the Fenix watch.

Melsea said:

usually 50-60 BPM out compared to the Polar 10

Which activity profile have you started ?