Does Charge 6 have maximum steps per minute?

[MS.]

I starting using a Charge 6 over a week ago to replace a 2 yr-old Inspire 3. One of the main reasons I upgraded was that I had hoped the more advanced sensors in the Charge 6 would fix what I thought was an "Inspire 3 problem": a maximum count of about 100 steps per minute. But, it doesn't.

I can achieve over 190 steps per minute during some exercises. However, the most Fitbit Charge 6 and Inspire 3 will track is about 105 steps per minute. This is obviously a huge difference.

My arms are swinging, it's not user error (as Fitbit's "tips" always imply--"make sure the Fitbit is simultaneously loose and snug, defying gravity above your wrist"). I've tried it on both wrists and my ankle. I've tried it loose and snug. I've restarted the device. I've calibrated my stride length--which varies dramatically depending on what I'm doing and should be completely irrelevant to a motion detector detecting my arm swinging back-and-forth!

So, is there a solution in the Fitbit ecosystem for a Fitbit to accurate count steps, be the slow or fast?

Moderator Edit: Clarified subject

[KatherineNY]

@MS. How do you workout how many steps a minute?  I find the step counts oddly.  My duration of exercise, stride length and distance are consistent but step counts are sometimes all over the place.

[MS.]

If I'm walking/running/hiking, step count is generally accurate (unless I'm carrying a bag of groceries, then that's usually off). But if I'm doing intense cardio, high-steps, that sort of thing, the step count does not tally more than about 105 steps per minute per my tests (during which periods I count over 190 steps/minute). So I think it's in the algorithm, which is some pretty bad logic!

[KatherineNY]

Technically the Fitbit isn't counting your steps. It's inferring how many steps based on certain motion.  In your example, your hands are carrying groceries so you're not swinging them so it thinks you're not walking so count is off. I

For my mom and I, I noticed her step counts are higher than mine for the same distance because she walks and swing her arms harder and I jog and I keep my swings  smaller and tighter to my body since my elbows are bent.  We both have the same stride length (I manually input that instead of letting it auto calculate).  So I find is how we move which Fitbit would interpret / consider as a "step".

[MS.]

Yes, forget about the groceries comment for obvious reasons. Back to my initial question: I can achieve over 190 steps per minute during some exercises, arms swinging (I have counted on multiple occasions), but the greatest Fitbit will count is about 105 steps a minute--is there a solution within the Fitbit ecosystem to override this apparent cap on steps per minute?

[Rich_Laue]

190 steps per minute are about 3 steps per second. 

A few thoughts 

• Does the arms at the pace move in a way that is natural for a slower walk? Fitbit looks at atm motions
• Is the hardware able to track this fast if a motion. 
• Is the cpu clock speed fast enough to detect and process the data. 

[MS.]

Good questions. But first, this is a fitness tracker, not a slow walker tracker, so the design/software logic should be built to detect 190 steps/minute exercise over a leisurely stroll that's not much more of a workout than the effort required to sip a beer. Wouldn't it make more sense if someone were on here asking why their fitness tracker isn't tracking a slow walk than someone being on here asking why it isn't tracking intense activity? Second, I think a chip from the 1970s would be fast enough to detect and process 3x/min. The device does so much more (lower important items for a fitness tracker) that the chip should get fitness first. It's not a Walletbit, GPSbit or Alarmbit. Why add those features if it can't complete fitness? This I suspect, logically, it's an algorithm. I suspect that someone in Silicon Valley thought incorrectly that there was a reasonable upper limit on step pace and went with it. I'd love to hear from Fitbit on this, but perhaps they don't participate in this forum?

[KatherineNY]

I doubt Fitbit engineering really look at these community comments.  It would be data overload.  And they wouldn't be able to fix it all anyway.

What it comes down to is that a device that's worn on my wrist won't be able to accurately detect what's going on with my feet.  Be it limitations with current software, hardware, design, or profit margin decisions the company has made.

[MS.]

I doubt so, too. Interestingly, I've strapped it on my ankle and it still cannot detect what's going on with my feet!

[KatherineNY]

 It's not built for wearing it on any place other than the wrist to be able to interpret foot motion. 

There was another thread I read about someone putting the pebble in their pocket while walking when their hands are motionless because they're pushing a cart as part of their job.  Charge 6 counted their steps that way.  But then they lost out on the other stats like heart rate etc.

Yet another suggested for ladies to put the pebble in their bra to count steps and get heart rate.

[MS.]

Or clipped on the body.

On my ankle I've gotten more accurate (lower) heart rate readings. Steps are also spot-on accurate as long as you don't take more than Fitbit's max count of 105 per minute. 

[Rich_Laue]

There hasn't been any mention of what type of exercise that a lerson does that let them step at more than 8 steps every 5 seconds. I kow if walk that fast, my arms are moving in a way fhat Fitbit might not think steps are being taking. Its hard for me to walk that fast. However moving my arm quickly up and down for a minute. The  Charge 6 tracker  accurately counted 184 arm movements in a minute.