I just got myself an Ionic!
However, from the moment I started wearing it I felt like the heart rate wasn't quite right. When checking my wrist, the Ionic was about 8 beats per minute ahead of what I counted myself. To be sure I wore both my old charge 2 (on my right wrist) and the Ionic (on my left wrist) for a day.
Here's a screenshot from me waking up that morning, Ionic in blue, Charge 2 in red. Every horizontal line is 5 beats per minute.
Now, what's going on here? How can these two trackers have such different results? I've been wearing them both according to the through fitbit recommended instructions.
Sleep also isn't entirely similar (note that they aren't the same length so are a bit skewed at the end):
So, well, who's lying here? And how can I be sure that I've got some thrustworthy data to work with? I really looked forward going to the Ionic from the Charge 2 but now I'm doubting both.
Any info will be appreciated,
Kind regards,
David
Best Answer
Thank you for your reply! I have to admit I am one of the people taking it a bit too seriously, especially for the accuracy of these devices.
That said, I'm still surprised by the inaccuracy of, well, either of these devices.
This is taken while I was working at my computer at work, again with the vertical lines being 5 bpm each. Again the Ionic (in blue) is about 10 bpm higher than the charge 2 (in red), except for one bit.
And then there is this, same day, same computer.
I've ordered a Polar H7 to for once and for all find out who's lying to me here, but I have the feeling I'm probably going to give up on the Ionic.
I'll keep you up to date!
Best Answer
Agreed that chest heart rate monitors using EKG signals are more accurate. However aren't you contradicting your statement. Why compare fenxi 3 and ionic?
The point in comparisons is to understand whether we should continue to use ionic (until its issues are fixed) or not when we have an older model which we had validated to be accurate. When someone pays 300$ for an item he is rightfully correct to validate accuracy. For example to see its effectiveness I tracked my weights session the other day something I don't usually do. IONIC was on hiper and it was grossly inaccurate. I records a max heart rate of 160 on a dumbbell bench press. I think I know how I feel when my heart works at that rate.
although I didn't wear blaze on that day, I am sure it wouldn't have done that. I have also attached the polar recording for the same weights session.
Now here is what Polar shows for the same 58.20 min duration.
I haven't found any use case for ionic until its issues are fixed.
Best Answer@Venkats thanks for sharing, and congrats on changing the course of your life! My wakeup call was five years ago, about the time I turned 50 and had three surgeries including major shoulder repair. In the last two years I've transformed myself into a cyclist. That said I'm genetically predisposed to be a slightly above-average endurance athlete. There is a large and active cycling community here, with many former racers, so its always fun trying to hang onto the wheel of someone in a different league (genetically and experience wise).
I started training with Fitbit and quickly realized that steps were meaningless and sometimes counter productive. Don't get me wrong, competing in step challenges is fun, but often led to unwise decisions like not going to bed on time and instead pacing around the house after 10pm to win a challenge. Lately I've been training 10 hours a week, enough that its difficult staying awake after 9:30pm given I must wakeup at 5:30am. I still track sleep using an app that doubles as alarm clock. The most interesting data in it is the amount of minutes snoring at night.
Agree with you about predictive analytics, I've come to rely on TrainingPeaks to monitor, plan, and predict impact of overload and recovery (adaptation). I also cross-check recovery predictions using HRV, with the recovery feature on my bike computer. In addition I also cross-check recovery level with an HRV phone app and chest strap in the morning when I wake up. Here is an example of my rising and falling fitness level from TrainingPeaks:
Higher fitness levels on that chart correlate to an increased performance on both short (weekly group ride) and long events (10,000' of climbing). As a mini guided tour, on the 28 and 90 day charts you can see that I'm ramping up my cycling fitness level for a big event on November 11th. On the 365 day chart you can see two previous fitness peaks, one for a February event and the other for the May double century. For reference, back in May my sustained 1-hour power output was about 10% higher than it is today.
By entering my future training sessions:
TrainingPeaks will predict fitness levels in the future (this is the simplified graph):
I also use another fitness platform that predicts my ability to sustain long hard efforts (1 hour power), like the signature 3000+ foot climb in 9+ miles of the upcoming Mt Fig event.
So yeah, I bought into predictive analysis two years ago and none of those tools use steps or sleep or 24x7 HRM. I do monitor morning RHR and HRV, but HRV monitoring isn't something Fitbit offers and Fitbit overestimates RHR. TrainingPeaks was designed for professional endurance athletes and their coaches. I'm self coached, and once I understood how my body reacts to training and my individual tolerance for ramping fitness level, I've found the tools to be very accurate in planning for events because it does a good job at predicting my future fitness level and overload/recovery requirements.
Best Answer
