help menu

Join us on the Community Forums!

  • Community Guidelines

    The Fitbit Community is a gathering place for real people who wish to exchange ideas, solutions, tips, techniques, and insight about the Fitbit products and services they love. By joining our Community, you agree to uphold these guidelines, so please take a moment to look them over.

  • Learn the Basics

    Check out our Frequently Asked Questions page for information on Community features, and tips to make the most of your time here.

  • Join the Community!

    Join an existing conversation, or start a new thread to ask your question. Creating your account is completely free, and takes about a minute.

Not finding your answer on the Community Forums?

Cancel
Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Some Good News on HR

ANSWERED
Replies are disabled for this topic. Start a new one or visit our Help Center.

‎12-18-2021 10:43 - edited ‎12-18-2021 10:48

‎12-18-2021 10:43 - edited ‎12-18-2021 10:48

Although I only have 4 bike rides using both the sense and another wearable, the comparison between the two is much more in line when the auto-detect bike is set to 'off' and do not select activity, cycling... just get on the bike and ride (or start running). FitBit will eventually (sometimes takes a few hours) figure out the activity, biking in my case, and provide a graphical reference of HR.

The marginal differences (eyeballing the graphs) is within an acceptable margin of error (0-8 bmp @130-145). It 'removes' the drastic drop in HR during exercise.

 

If anyone would like me to post some results, I will login tomorrow morning (Sun 12/19, EST) and post data... (and have a fifth ride) but there is no doubt in my mind that the suggestion made in the now closed thread on HR accuracy to:

1. Turn off auto-detect activity (not sure this has an impact as I never turned it back on)

2. Do not use activity = bike (or run or whatever). Of course you lose GPS and related data (speed, elevation etc).

has a huge impact on accuracy.

Let me know,

mattie

Best Answer
1 BEST ANSWER

Accepted Solutions

‎12-18-2021 12:42

‎12-18-2021 12:42

Have you compared results to accurate reference HR or it's accurate because it feels so?

 

Let's assume the workaround works and user loses GPS and elevation data (and when cycling, the speed, too). Then, why to use this watch at all for sports tracking?

View best answer in original post

Best Answer
2 REPLIES 2

‎12-18-2021 12:42

‎12-18-2021 12:42

Have you compared results to accurate reference HR or it's accurate because it feels so?

 

Let's assume the workaround works and user loses GPS and elevation data (and when cycling, the speed, too). Then, why to use this watch at all for sports tracking?

Best Answer

‎12-18-2021 14:45

In response to t.parker

‎12-18-2021 14:45

I'm wearing two fitness trackers, one on my left hand, one on my right. Unlike you I don't have a fancy chest strap, way too lazy to take on/off for a 30 minute HIIT ride, which is basically what I do 4 or 5 times per week and have been doing so for 5 or so years.

 

@t.parker wrote:

Let's assume the workaround works and user loses GPS and elevation data (and when cycling, the speed, too). Then, why to use this watch at all for sports tracking?

1. The workaround improves results dramatically. It is not perfect, but, if I were married to fitbit/sense and I was willing to carry my phone whilst exercising...(I'm not).

2. I'm not going to use it, I'm still in the return window. Thought I'd wait to test and let the holiday surge quell a bit. But tomorrow is probably my last 'duel' day.

I figured I got a lot of useful information from this community and I'd do a little to pay it back... BTW, thanks for your input, greatly appreciated.

mattie

 

Best Answer
0 Votes