Forerunner 945 Beta 2.72 is available

Well ive tried loading the new beta done as instructed i think, not being very tecky, cant get to work ant advice for a computer dim wit  thanks

Sounds like you are not in the target group for beta test. You should be able to narrow a bug down. 

Whatever the various fixes for ConnectIQ and PulseOX settings are, it did something good for the battery life, because I'm getting 935 levels now (PulseOX was set only to sleep before and after this beta update). Whatever you did; do, not, change, it.

Dr Phil said:

Don't forget, except for the most highly trained swimmers, heart rate while swimming is generally not as high as cycling or running.

Most people are unaware of that and try and compare RPE when swimming to their HR while running.  I've read several articles about this and on average the max HR for swimming is about 15 bpm less than their running max HR.  I wonder how many people didn't realize this and are now re-evaluating just how accurate they thought the oHRM was for their swims?  I too see a HR way too high while swimming with the oHRM and find that data absolutely useless.

2 things, 1 it's still in beta, 2, if it doesn't work for you disable it and move on. After you've submitted the report of course which will help Garmin improve the feature and get it into a production firmware. 

We all know that readings ara not super accurate. And yes, they are "slightly" high in some cases. In what I´m not agree is that they are absolutely useless. In my opinion, useless is having a watch that offers no data at all. 

Imagine we are talking about cycling or running. What  option do you prefer, a graph with a 170 bpm when reality is 160 or nothing at all? I can deal with a results of 3.5 aerobic/1.8 anaerobic, when reality is 3.0 aer/1.0 anaer. I can´t deal with 0 aerobic/0 anaerobic when I´ve been swimming an hour. 

And most of us swimmers (mostly non profesional swimmers) are aware of that and we´re really really happy with this new feature. And I´m sure that in the future, it´ll be improved.

So don't install the beta firmware and wait until Garmin have ironed out the issues and put the feature in a production firmware! Simple!! 

I've been following all of the WHR for swimming commentary on this forum, as I'm assuming this functionality will port across to the MARQ in due course.  What I have yet to see posted is any meaningful side by side data comparison, on the same activity, of WHR vs HRM Swim/Tri.  So far commentary broadly falls in to one of three groups: 1) It's great and looks about right, 2) it's higher than I expect and therefore is wrong and 3) it's something that I don't have already and I don't care if it's a little wrong.  The last group is perhaps not all that helpful from a software development side (although it does show Garmin how desperate people are for this feature to work).  The first two groups all make valid points, but they are all subjective and we are left just trusting people's judgement.

So what we really need is some fitness tech+data nerds to 'strap up' with a few swim compatible HR devices (connected to another compatible Garmin fitness wearable) and a 945 running 2.72 with WHR, to give us that cold data comparison.  From Strava I can see dcrainmaker is up some mountains in the Alps at present; he is the obvious public figure expert on such matters, but I sense he may not be in a position to do such testing right now .  So is there anyone else that can provide some honest concurrent WHR vs HRM Swim/Tri strap data for more than one activity? (preferably a mix of pool and OWS activities)

I think you didn´t understand my post. I installed the 2.64 the moment it came out, and stayed in it until 2.72 came out. I didn´t complain AT ALL about this feature. In fact, I enjoy it very, very much.