DC Rainmaker Blaze review is live

[Timeflies1980]

Hi all see the link:-

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2016/03/fitbit-blaze-depth-review.html

Pretty favourable review, apart from lack of full notification support and the onging HR during excercise debate (same for all Fitbits with HR).

Happy reading

Dave

[bbarrera]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:
when it tracks beat for beat my polar. However, what is annoying is when it all goes south and the data is nothing like what is happening. Further, this departure from accuracy is not consistent, also annoying.

---

I don't see 'tracking beat for beat' with either Surge or Apple Watch. Both wander, and Blaze wanders too in the DC review.

Random accuracy departures make all these devices unreliable for my use - interval training above/below threshold, and raises questions about training intensity, zones, and calorie estimate claims on PurePulse marketing page. I still wear a chest strap when I'm cycling/spinning (not for weight lifting), and use Apple Watch for apps and notifications and occasional HR use - when I forget to put chest strap on at 4:45am on my way to spin at gym.

[SunsetRunner]

---

@bbarrera wrote:

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:
when it tracks beat for beat my polar. However, what is annoying is when it all goes south and the data is nothing like what is happening. Further, this departure from accuracy is not consistent, also annoying.

---

I don't see 'tracking beat for beat' with either Surge or Apple Watch. Both wander, and Blaze wanders too in the DC review.

Random accuracy departures make all these devices unreliable for my use - interval training above/below threshold, and raises questions about training intensity, zones, and calorie estimate claims on PurePulse marketing page. I still wear a chest strap when I'm cycling/spinning (not for weight lifting), and use Apple Watch for apps and notifications and occasional HR use - when I forget to put chest strap on at 4:45am on my way to spin at gym.

---

I rowed with both the Blaze and my Polar and  after the row looked at the two graphs. Over the 30 minutes the graphs were near identical. However, on my next session, the Blaze couldn't come within 30bpm

[Salpal23]

 @SunsetRunner Out of curiosity, did you do anything different at all in either of those two sessions? Just wondering if theres something that might be causing the inaccuracies or if its just simply inaccurate at times.

[bcalvanese]

---

@Salpal23 wrote:
Are any wrist based hr monitors real accurate? I'm genuinely curious.

Are any chest based hr monitors compatible with the fitbit app?

Regarding this review, I mostly agree with everything they're saying. A lot of the same points are being made across the board. The Blaze is good but needs some help in a few areas.

Hopeful that a firmware upgrade can fix some of this stuff.

---

I have been testing the heart rate monitor against my fenix3 (with chest strap monitor), and find it to be very accurate overall. The average heart rate is within 1 or 2 beats of the fenix3 average heart rate.

If I overlaid both I would probably see variences at certain points because the optical sensors lag the chest strap sensor by 5 to 10 seconds, but the average is extremely close, and that is what matters anyway.

[SunsetRunner]

@Sapal23 I can only guess that it was to do with position, though I obviously thought that I had everything the same. The row was the same. I'm still playing around with position/tightness on my wrist to try and find some consistency. Given it was very good during a 6x500 rep I'd like to think I'll get it sorted.

[bjanow]

---

@bbarrera wrote:

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:
when it tracks beat for beat my polar. However, what is annoying is when it all goes south and the data is nothing like what is happening. Further, this departure from accuracy is not consistent, also annoying.

---

I don't see 'tracking beat for beat' with either Surge or Apple Watch. Both wander, and Blaze wanders too in the DC review.

Random accuracy departures make all these devices unreliable for my use - interval training above/below threshold, and raises questions about training intensity, zones, and calorie estimate claims on PurePulse marketing page. I still wear a chest strap when I'm cycling/spinning (not for weight lifting), and use Apple Watch for apps and notifications and occasional HR use - when I forget to put chest strap on at 4:45am on my way to spin at gym.

---

If you are doing interval training at threshold HR there is nothing you can do for accuracy other than a chest strap. For casual use and endurance zone training the watch should suffice. At least biking so far for me. My run was disasterous.

[Salpal23]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:
@Sapal23 I can only guess that it was to do with position, though I obviously thought that I had everything the same. The row was the same. I'm still playing around with position/tightness on my wrist to try and find some consistency. Given it was very good during a 6x500 rep I'd like to think I'll get it sorted.

---

Ahh, alright. Thanks for the reply. 

Was hoping thered be something a little more obvious but I guess not 😛

[SunsetRunner]

Yep, think you're right @bjanow and certainly doing zone work I'll use my Polar

[bjanow]

Yeah, when I do anaerobic interval sets I need to know the exact time (HR) I hit lactate threshold. At that point my training begins and there is no deviation allowed. A strap measuring the actual beat of my heart is the only way. On my 65 - 75% days for aerobic base building there is much more leaway and I can use the watch to approximate. Even on an outside ride it's nice to have a measure of what I did during the rollers. I'd never want to wear a strap on those. But let the weather warm a bit, sweep the sand, and pedal on.