So, you're on WHR2.50 and your heart rate doesn't go to 71/72, then gradually settle on your actual heart rate when you check your widget? What WHR version were you on when you received your 235? I think there are two different groups posting here; pre and post version 3.10/2.20. A lot of people are receiving their watches with versions 3.20/2.30 and have had the 71/72 HR right out of the box. So, this would be "normal" for them. A lot of users had version 3.10/2.20 or earlier and the HR was sampled more frequently and when you checked the HR widget, it went straight to your HR like every other monitor on the market. The earlier version did use more battery, but there's a large consensus that would rather sacrifice battery life if they could return to that higher sampling rate.
No it does do that, or more accurately, seems to pick something close to my last measured HR and display that while it samples. But I consider this a feature not a bug. It doesn't bother me to be honest. Better than a blank readout.
Inaccurate calories, RHR and cadence lock are far bigger problems IMHO. The performance from the last version hasn't changed for me.
So, you're on WHR2.50 and your heart rate doesn't go to 71/72, then gradually settle on your actual heart rate when you check your widget? What WHR version were you on when you received your 235? I think there are two different groups posting here; pre and post version 3.10/2.20. A lot of people are receiving their watches with versions 3.20/2.30 and have had the 71/72 HR right out of the box. So, this would be "normal" for them. A lot of users had version 3.10/2.20 or earlier and the HR was sampled more frequently and when you checked the HR widget, it went straight to your HR like every other monitor on the market. The earlier version did use more battery, but there's a large consensus that would rather sacrifice battery life if they could return to that higher sampling rate.
I'm now on 2.50 - here's what typically happens for me:
Switch to HR widget using the down arrow.
HR initially displays "correct" HR reading (e.g. low 40s)
Over the course of 5 to 10 seconds, the HR reading climbs to 71 bpm before decreasing down to the "correct" HR again.
I'm now on 2.50 - here's what typically happens for me:
Switch to HR widget using the down arrow.
HR initially displays "correct" HR reading (e.g. low 40s)
Over the course of 5 to 10 seconds, the HR reading climbs to 71 bpm before decreasing down to the "correct" HR again.
Hi, I'm on 3.30 and 2.41 beta (aka stable 2.50 I think...); my device behaves exactly as you said...it starts with apporx my right HR, then it moves to 71/72 for few seconds and then again to the right HR. I think this is related to the fact the 24/7 HR monitoring it's not a real 24/7 but a 24ish...or maybe defective device?:confused:
Hi, I'm on 3.30 and 2.41 beta (aka stable 2.50 I think...); my device behaves exactly as you said...it starts with apporx my right HR, then it moves to 71/72 for few seconds and then again to the right HR. I think this is related to the fact the 24/7 HR monitoring it's not a real 24/7 but a 24ish...or maybe defective device?:confused:
Mine was first getting stuck at 66. That has stopped for now. But, it does exactly what you describe above.. I have no clue why. I doubt this is a hardware issue and its more likely a software bug. I used to have a 220. The did a software update about 3 months ago and basically bricked everyone's watch... Finally, after 3 days of complaining they allowed people to go back to previous version and no issues since.. Why they do not bug test these things..
Just thought I would check the behaviour of my watch again. I am thinking that the first reading that appears was the last recorded reading. Now if you had been sitting down and you are still sitting down the initial reading would look correct. It then decides to climb to the 71/72 bpm. Now if you are really unlucky like I was was it will create a spike and continue to climb to in my case 114/115 bpm and fluctuate around there for a bit. A good couple of minutes for me and several down arrow presses. I may now get added a good few calories for the activity that I haven't just done before returning to 72 again and then my proper HR of 58. :mad:
I'm now on 2.50 - here's what typically happens for me:
Switch to HR widget using the down arrow.
HR initially displays "correct" HR reading (e.g. low 40s)
Over the course of 5 to 10 seconds, the HR reading climbs to 71 bpm before decreasing down to the "correct" HR again.
Seems like I might just be a little lucky then, as my "wandering around the house/office" HR sits at around the 70-75BPM mark. Perhaps I'm the statistical mean.
Hi, I'm on 3.30 and 2.41 beta (aka stable 2.50 I think...); my device behaves exactly as you said...it starts with apporx my right HR, then it moves to 71/72 for few seconds and then again to the right HR. I think this is related to the fact the 24/7 HR monitoring it's not a real 24/7 but a 24ish...or maybe defective device?:confused:
It's not a defective device or a bug. This was done by design. There's speculation on why Garmin did this. A doctor posted that in the past, 72 was an accepted average HR for most people. Again, it's speculation, but I think he hit the nail on the head. Anyway, some have no problem with the current sampling rate. I, like many others, have seen it sample more frequently without the "72 default". The fix is to make the HR sampling configurable so users can set it up for their own liking. Hopefully Garmin is listening.
The newest update has caused me more problems with accurate readings. For the first time, I've experienced the locked BPM at 66. During the warm up alone my HRM was dropping from 66 to a low 47. It was my fault for purchasing a first generation.
I am packing it at the moment and sending back tomorrow as faulty. Game is over , 66 value for a week. No time to play. Garmin support totally crap. After sending them all data with the soft versions etc. they are replying to me with directions how to wear it on the wrist.......
After refund moving to the Suunto Ambit3 Peak.
