Cardio Program, heart rate reading is totally inaccurate

Hi,

I'm playing Squash but unfortunately it does not exist in the Garmin world, and for Squash I found that I liked the Cardio activity :-)

I do agree that the heart rate measure on my Vivo4 is very dependent on the activity I select compared to a chest belt and the record of the hear rate with my phone during a Squash activity, which is i guess difficult to track due to high hear rate and quick variation while playing and between playing and resting between games.

If I select Cardio as the activity, the Vivo4 reading, and heart zone % are reasonably coherent with what I got with the belt. The Vivo4 does not capture the quick increase of HR during games or decrease of HR during rest very well, but I would say it's usable, see figures recorded yesterday:
Belt : Average HR: 136, Max HR: 162, 33 % in Zone 5, 44% in Zone 4
Vivo 4: Average HR: 136, Max HR: 158, 22% in Zone 5, 63% in Zone 4

If I select another type of activity, like Running without GPS or Running Indoor to measure my activity during Squash, the HR measure and Zone % are much lower and completely off compared to the belt and not usable, see figures recorded today:

Belt : Average HR: 133, Max HR: 171, 29 % in Zone 5, 37% in Zone 4
Vivo 4: Average HR: 120, Max HR: 139, 0% in Zone 5, 13% in Zone 4

I got the impression the HR real time measure is smoothed off and peaks averaged to remove what the watch considers as glitches, but the end result is that it's way below reality and inaccurate for Squash.

How do you submit a bug to support ?

DesFit (a great Youtuber) hase made a good video including the HR of the Venu/VA4.
You can see that in some activities the HR Reading is a mess, but its OK of you know how bad Wrist-Reading is.

Starts ~4:50min

www.youtube.com/watch

I just realized the same thing using Cardio activities, HR readings are too high, in the 180 bpm range and I was able to have a conversation with my wife as we were doing Zoom Zumba!!! My firmware version is 5.60

Hi, this is an old thread (just fyi).  Have you tried doing a soft reset on the watch by holding down the A button for about 15 seconds (past the emergency notification alert) until it shuts off.  Wait a couple seconds and then power back on by pressing the A button.  

I knew it’s an old thread, seemed abandoned? Thus I tried to update with my new Venu, fw version 5.6! As I discussed with my PT, she pointed out my cardio HR readings were never that high, well into anaerobic threshold! At the readings of 180s bpm, I was able to have a normal conversation with my wife as we did virtual Zumba together for 1 hour!

I did a soft reset as recommended, will have to verify in my next Cardio class tomorrow.

Btw, I just did another 30-min walk, HR readings looked fine, max HR like 120 bpm (before this soft reset) - only problem with Cardio!

I have the same problem right now.  My Polar H10 strap said my HR was 127, and my Venu 2 in Cardio mode said it was 176.  Can this be fixed with a software update?

Your Polar chest strap, or my Garmin HRM Dual, is for sure most accurate. Optical wrist-based just does not work accurately in dynamic activities such as Cardio, even walking, period. Mine is a humble Venu, I thought Venu 2 should have an improved algorithm to be more accurate. The way you reported, it is not any better to monitor HR in motion (e.g. Cardio activity). Maybe Garmin has a software update, ask their Support if they have a fix!

I don't have a Polar A370, but I believe if you found its HR monitoring working fine in Cardio activities, then it's true. By all means get a new Polar one! My wife has an inexpensive fitness tracker when she first tried out this device (like $30), and surprisingly, its HR reading accuracy is decent even in motion (I observed it takes more time in static mode to stabilize, may be that is why/how it records more accurate HR in motion). We walked together and I cross checked my HR using the chest strap, her "cheap" fitness tracker reads a similar value. So, I am really surprised how/why Garmin so far has not improved its Cardio HR readings, which has been complaint for the last few years? Perhaps when they stop selling chest straps , which is my solution, inconvenient when needed in Cardio, but otherwise I kind of like the overall smartwatch!

I too had a Polar A370, beautiful and precise, above all complete with the countless possibilities of personalized programs with the PolarFlow system.

Garmin has a lot to learn from Polar and in my opinion, it lives thanks to a great cheap Businnes, just look at the "hundreds of millions" of paid app downloads, cheap watches passed off as professional and a limited ridiculous "Garmin Connect" system believes that professional sports such as Cardio or Martial Arts etc. should not exist; and if we talk about the cardio results, limit yourself to an incomprehensible wave that shows no change of exercise pauses and resumes.

Venu 2 ??  .. I don't think so