Blaze bike recording

[TCFITTER]

Can the Blaze record stationary cycling activity when strapped on your wrist? Your ankle?
How does it track cycling on the road?

[Rich_Laue]

HaHa my Unicyclong gets detected as elyptical. 

[hikebikerun]

I actually like it not lumping my biking in with my steps. The impact from cycling is different than that of walking so I prefer to keep the two separate. 

[Lordrobs]

---

@Alaskayorkie wrote:
I think it's false advertising to say Fitbit tracks cycling, only to discover it doesn't give you steps for it! Yes, it tracks calories but Fitbit challenges are about steps. I paid $200 for a Blaze just so I can have more fun in Fitbit challenges because I cycle 10 miles a day. What a waste. They could easily estimate steps based on distance, speed and calorie burn. I counted 6,000 pedals on a 5.5 mile ride in 30 mins. Fitbit gave me 400 steps despite a 350 calorie burn. Sorry for the rant.

---

Exactly how many "steps" would you like the thing to give you while you cycle?

I have the exact opposite problem. A 30 mile bike ride gives me 6000 steps. I don't want steps when it is set to bike mode because (stating the obvious here) I haven't actually taken any steps. Bike should mean zero steps, if you are doing a step based exercise then it is covered under other categories.

It is my number one annoyance with the thing and if I had the opportunity to return it I'd do so and go the Garmin route instead.

[tinacycle]

When I'm in a step challenge I actually attach it to my spin shoe during spin class. It only give me 3000 steps but I reach down periodically so that it can also track my heart rate. It gives me the best of both worlds 

[Alaskayorkie]

I guess we got a Fitbit for different reasons. It was offered free through work so co-workers could have challenges and encourage each other to get fit. I thought that's what the Fitbit was for -- the challenges. I've since joined challenges with friends across the country. They're fun. But since cycling receives no credit in the challenges, my preferred method of exercise does me no good. I'm forced to become a mall walker or jogger if I want to compete, which cuts into my cycling time. 

If the challenges were based on calorie burn or something other than steps, I'd be happy. 

[bbarrera]

I also cycle extensively, and don't use a Fitbit tracker after returning my Force under recall in 2014. I've got a Surge and Blaze, but only do occasional testing with them.

After returning Force, I started using Fitbit's MobileTrack feature and it counts steps using my iPhone 5s. My phone is in jersey pocket and I get decent step credit, for example today I rode 25 miles in morning (19mph pace) and 33 miles in evening (18.8mph pace) and ended day with 35,000 steps. Maybe 4000 steps from walking today, the rest from biking. Step count dependent on cadence, I get less steps when climbing hills (low rpm) and more when hammering out rides on the flats (high rpm) unless I'm doing slow frequency repetitions (high gear, high speed, cadence around 60rpm to replicate load of hill climbing). And I get about 10,000 steps when spinning in gym for 70 minutes (fast spin).

Hope that helps.

[Alaskayorkie]

I'll definitely check that out. I'm more of a 10 mph commuter but it sounds like what you're doing might work. Thanks.

[mooreplusone]

What it sounds like to me is that this should be a 'tracking' option in the software. Turn on as needed, based on user preference.

[bbarrera]

Honestly, I think the problem is that Fitbit challenges are all step based. 

[Alaskayorkie]

Yeah, calorie burn would be nice for challenges. 

[Hamtini]

What about the indoor bike

[bbarrera]

I put phone in pocket for indoor cycling and get more steps versus outdoors. Sad because outdoor rides are more intense. Again points to fundamental problem with challenges only based on steps - Michael Phelps burned 10,000 calories in the pool training for the olympics but would lose every Fitbit challenge!!

[RickLoC53]

And Phelps would probably lose his Fitbit as well, since it isn't waterproof....

With all due respect, Fitbit is a high end pedometer. Pedometers measure steps - not cycle strokes or swim strokes. If your goal is to win STEP challenges, why not do step-based exercises, like walking, running, hiking, treadmill, elliptical, or, my current personal favorite- walking a golf course? And, like I'm doing, work cycling into your 10000 step day. Not for the Fitbit step reward, just because I love doing it.

Sent from my iPhone

[bbarrera]

---

@RickLoC53 wrote:
With all due respect, Fitbit is a high end pedometer. 

---

With all due respect to Fitbit:

From the Why Fitbit? page: "When it comes to reaching your fitness goals, steps are just the beginning" -- I agree Fitbit! Steps are just the beginning, so please Fitbit look beyond step challenges! They are fun but not motivating when I'm training harder but then lose a step challenge to a walker barely raising HR. The myth of 10,000 steps a day comes to mind...

At least for me, I agree that Surge/Blaze are basically a pedometer plus HR monitor for 'the other 23 hours' of my day - and while not exercising the Surge/Blaze do a good job measuring HR. However the HRM isn't accurate enough to help me on my 1-2 hours of bike riding (or 1 hour of weight lifting). So for me the current generation of Fitbit trackers are just a curiousity, and so I use MobileTrack on my phone to count steps and have fun in challenges!

[RickLoC53]

So, bberrera - you want to win STEP challenges without ever taking a STEP (i.e. bicycling)?

You do raise a couple of interesting points, though. First is the HR monitor not working on biking exercises. I noticed early on in my Fitbit experience that my overall heart rate was much lower when bicycling (or stationary biking) than when walking (pursuing the 10000 step "myth"). I asked my doctor about it, and she just kind of shrugged (docs don't care about the nuances of exercise as long as you're doing something). I came to the conclusion that in bicycling, once you establish a cadence, you're not really working as hard as those initial starting strokes - the machine is doing the work. In walking, there is no cadence, no machine - it's all you. Also, the better shape you're in, the harder it is to get heart rate into the training zone.

The second thing is challenges: Fitbit would do well to add some non-step challenges, like calories burnt per day or minutes of cardio heart rate/ day, or simply minutes/day of activity. It wouldn't require new hardware - just some software additions. I think this would help them be more of a "Fitness Band" than a high-end pedometer. On an activity minutes/week challenge (for example) - bicyclist, walkers, golfers (walking course), even weight lifters, would be on equal footing. Swimmers are either out of luck or on the honor system for that one, though, since water and Fitbits don't mix.

Sent from my iPad

[bbarrera]

@RickLoC53 hey I take steps, lol, the problem here is that when upgrading from Fitbit Zip or One to something with HRM (Charge HR, Blaze, Surge) you get less steps. All my friends complain about it, you really get a lot more steps while biking with Zip or One or MobileTrack. In any case, I get more steps walking 4 miles in one hour (15:00 minute/miles) than I do cycling 20mph for one hour - and average walking HR is 120bpm vs 145bpm for cycling. So I'm already taking a 'loss' in steps despite the harder workout. Not going to feel bad about getting some Challenge credit even if 50% or more of "steps" are from cycling.

Regarding HR on biking vs walking - I'm pretty average and walking HR is always lower than biking. For example I walked a half-marathon in 2:59:33 and my average HR was 124bpm and rarely exceeded 130. My HR was pretty much a flat line, wiggling between 122-126 for the entire 3 hours. That is a blistering pace for walking - 13:41 minutes per mile - I was walking faster than some "runners" (ok they were really jogging). While biking 18-21mph on flat terrain my average HR is in 140-149bpm range (equivalent of running 8-10 minute miles), although more intense efforts say 15 miles at 22-26mph will push average HR into 150-160bpm range (equivalent of running 6 minute miles).

With walking there is a natural limit on pace, and therefore HR is limited as in my half-marathon experience. The great thing about biking is there is no limit (practically speaking), you can easily "dial in" HR by increasing or decreasing effort.

[czimborbryan]

I would prefer the blaze to be more customizable. For example, I compete with friends for weekly step count. As a mountain biker, I am at a severe disadvantage because steps are not calculated equivalent to calorie burn. I would either prefer the competition among friends to be based on calorie burn or to have an option to translate biking calories into an equivalent step count.

[JenkinsA]

Actually it usually ends up looking something like this. I can promise I did not run back and forth between all these points. Most of my walks and rides end up looking similiar to this when I try to track them using the settings on my Fitbit Blaze. Not exactly sure what is happening or how to fix it. I've updated all the associated apps and still things look like this. Very disapointing for what I spent on the Blaze. You would also think that it would give you extra steps with all this back an forth but this mile walk at lunch ended up saying only 0.79 miles.

[Rich_Laue]

@JenkinsA I'm not sure what phone your using, this is half of the setup, but if on an Android device make sure you have it set to high accuracy

[JenkinsA]

It is an android and is set to high accuracy. I did have the One and switched to the Blaze because I wanted an easier way to track my bike rides. I like that I can set if from wrist (my phone is mounted to my handlebars but the rubber strap makes it difficult to access) but its so inaccurate that its not even worth my time. Ive had it since it was first released but overall dont feel it was worth the money I spent.