Question about running and heart rate

[Lolly2721]

I did a quick 1 mile run today and when I checked my Fitbit right after a sprint, I noticed that I had a higher heart rate.  When I did the sync and added the activity to my Fitbit, it was showing my heart rate while running at close to my resting heart rate and said I was never in the cardio zone.  

Is there a way to start tracking the heart rate better through my Fitbit or the app when I start my run?  I have been running on a treadmill so I can hit the weights shortly after in the gym.

[GenePreston]

I've noticed the update takes about 30 seconds on mine.  I'm already through the hill climb before it even updates.  Why does it take so long to update the pulse rate?

[DominicJ]

Do you use the "tracker" mode?

My heart takes quite a while to start pumping 

[GenePreston]

I'm not sure. I pressed the button till it buzzed on my arm and it starts a timer. I climb the hill and my other BP monitor goes up to about 120. That's two beats per second which is easy to time just looking at seconds on a watch so I know the 120 is about right. The new fitbit hr is slow to increase and may show only 90 at the top of the hill which is about a football field in length and maybe 50 feet higher. The slowness to respond to my heart rate means I don't capture when I get into a danger zone. I have a heart condition so I need it to show current heart rates, not something averaged over many minutes. I will try shaving the hair off my arms to see if it give a quicker response. Any help suggestions on getting a quicker response on the display would be greatly appreciated.

[Heybales]

Like many have observed - accuracy at higher HR's or past a certain point just goes out the window.

Look in their FAQ for the device about other ways of wearing it to get better accuracy - if possible.

Some just don't.

And ya, it's not the delay effect to that great an extent. There is no averaging - it literally takes a bit more compared to HRM's reading the actual electrical signal of the heart.

[GenePreston]

I think I know what's going on.  The heart rate is a smoothed function to appear nicely on the graph on the dashboard results.  If there were more insantaneous readings the graph would look jittery, not a nice smooth curve.  Im not interested in a nice smooth curve of my exercise day.  What I need is an alarm that sounds off when I exceed a certain heart beat rate.   There is about a 15 second delay in giving the correct readings.  I've noticed several times that the response curve will slightly dip before rising smoothly.  But the correct readings are about 15 seconds late.  I walk up this steep hill and top out at 115 and the fitbit shows teh 115 about 15 seconds later after rising sharply and smoothly.  I will try to contact the company and see if they can provide a software update that turns off the smoothing function.  I don't need or want that and Im  not interested in a nice looking graph.  Other than that I love the feel and operatio nof the device.  If I cannot get this time delay out of the system I will need to return the device.

[DominicJ]

Its not a piece of medical equipment.

Is basically the only answer to that.

[Heybales]

---

@GenePreston wrote:

I think I know what's going on.  The heart rate is a smoothed function to appear nicely on the graph on the dashboard results.  If there were more insantaneous readings the graph would look jittery, not a nice smooth curve.  Im not interested in a nice smooth curve of my exercise day.  What I need is an alarm that sounds off when I exceed a certain heart beat rate.   There is about a 15 second delay in giving the correct readings.  I've noticed several times that the response curve will slightly dip before rising smoothly.  But the correct readings are about 15 seconds late.  I walk up this steep hill and top out at 115 and the fitbit shows teh 115 about 15 seconds later after rising sharply and smoothly.  I will try to contact the company and see if they can provide a software update that turns off the smoothing function.  I don't need or want that and Im  not interested in a nice looking graph.  Other than that I love the feel and operatio nof the device.  If I cannot get this time delay out of the system I will need to return the device.

---

Well, that's mainly the visual display you are talking about after the exercise - that won't help even if you could turn off smoothing for during the exercise.

That happens post processing of the data - not while it's happening.

The nature of the way that method of HR reading happens means there will always be a delay, read reviews on any devices that use light method of seeing pulse.

You can manually set your zones - but there isn't an alarm function for that - you'll need a normal HRM with instant accuracy and alarm functions to obtain that, and wear it during the workout.

[GenePreston]

How do I set my HR zones? I didn't see that in the settings.

[GenePreston]

After reading reviews I see the Fitbit HR is right up there with the best that use light to measure HR.  I'll keep experimenting.  I shaved off my arm hairs and I did get better results when holding my arm continously up so I could see the display during the time I wanted to get a quicker more accurate readng.  This reduced arem movement.  I am walking not running and my target is no more than 120 bpm, so I fit in the very slow runner range I guess.  I'll keep experimenting and maybe it will be suitable.  The electrical pulse wrist monitors have their own problems, like shorting out on humid mornings and giving no readings at all.  We have yet to find the perfect HR monitor.

[DominicJ]

"We have yet to find the perfect HR monitor."

Chest straps are perfectly accurate, they are just uncomfortable and rarely have battery life for more than a day.

[Heybales]

And wouldn't be accurate for calorie burn anyway.

And how interesting is daily heart rate info really after the first few times seeing it?

Doesn't seem to be an actionable item. Which true, life is full of them, but still...

[GenePreston]

It looks like the flashing lights HR monitor is still a work in progress, especially for the wrist.  I'll stick to electrical signals monitors for now.  I'll be returning the fitbit hr today.

[Gnarly]

Like some others have pointed out, the HR wont show instantly. I do cardio 5 days a week and I'm not sure how long the HR delay is but it's accurate to what the cardio machine says. I love my charge HR. During exercise I can usually gauged where my HR is so I don't need the instant feed back but like others have pointed out if you are looking for instant feedback then possibly get the HR monitor that goes around your chest.

[Julia_G]

Well, just to add my own experience here, it may be that I am a perfect candidate for the HR LED technology, but mine works beautifully, and after the first moments of my workout I see almost no odd readings and little or no delay. Day to day I only wear the Fitbit, so I can't really confirm the accuracy, but when I go for a run I also get out my Garmin watch with chest HRM, and for the entire run (5 miles at the mo) my heart rates on the two devices match each other almost exactly, beat for beat. Having said that, I am 61, so my heart rate never goes above 154 (and I shouldn't really let it get that high!) and I don't do HIIT exercises, so the rises and falls are steadier. I also have fairly thin, fair skin, and only very fine, blond hairs on my arm.

[Heybales]

Not only the skin - but just having the vessels closer, meaning thin layer of fat if any, and they are in right spot.

Yes, you are on the other side of the bell curve from many.

Pretty sure it's a strangely shaped curve.