Completely Inaccurate Biking step count

[jonboy1969]

I cycle to work, except when there is snow on the ground. And I found out that after the lastest update that  

"We've fine tuned the step-counting algorithm to further improve accuracy during bike rides. "

My 'steps' went completly down the tubes. I ride almost exactly 24 miles round trip. Last season I was getting around 11,000 to 12,000 'steps' durning my biking. Yesterday I rode to work and back and logged a total of 4,231 steps for the entire day!  I also keep track of my cadence (how many times I peddle) its between 90 and 120 a minute. This cadence to 'steps' was always fairly similiar. now its way way off.

If I can ride for 12 miles and get around 900 steps, somethings wrong. I have found similiar results if I ride my Mountain Bike or my Road Bike. 

I used to get a buzz on the way home when I hit 10,000, now after 3 weeks and 13 round trips to the office and back. I have yet to hit 10,000 steps on a riding day. (im usually less then 5,000 after 100 minutes of riding during the day)

Can someone let me know if they are experiencing a huge dropoff in steps while cycling or is my Surge messed up?

thanks for your time

[Delbert]

Is it just me but I have no interest in amount of steps when out on my bike. Bike rides are surely best when measured by distance, time, average speed, max speed, elevation, heart rate and calories. As you are on a bike steps does not come in to it. Or like I say is it just me that thinks steps should be taken off the bike option?

[bbarrera]

---

@jonboy1969 wrote:

I cycle to work, except when there is snow on the ground. And I found out that after the lastest update that  

"We've fine tuned the step-counting algorithm to further improve accuracy during bike rides. "

---

@jonboy1969

My typical bike ride is 30-50 miles. If a tracker accurately counts my steps - maybe 100-300 steps when I stop to use bathroom or refill water bottles.

Fitbit is trying to improve accuracy, and therefore you should see a decrease in steps because you don't take steps while riding a bike!

I understand your frustration, Fitbit's reward system is based on steps - challenges are step based, or we become programmed by Fitbit app to reach daily 10,000 step goal. The problem is that fitness isn't about steps. In fact the CDC and World Health Organization recommends 150 minutes moderate to vigorous cardio a week, plus at least 2 strenth training sessions a week. So you are doing great on achieving cardio fitness with the bike rides.

Sadly Fitbit's mission is to motivate people to lead healthier lifestyles - but Fitbit is still focused on steps. Your tracker is telling the truth, same with other non-step based cardio like rowing or swimming. And Fitbit doesn't do a good job rewarding non-step based cardio.

[jonboy1969]

My typical bike ride is 30-50 miles. If a tracker accurately counts my steps - maybe 100-300 steps when I stop to use bathroom or refill water bottles.

(doubth it if you use a Surge, I cant ride on a smoth road with my Madone or a very rough horse trail on my Gary Fisher MTB without getting at least 800 steps with the new update)

Fitbit is trying to improve accuracy, and therefore you should see a decrease in steps because you don't take steps while riding a bike!

Improving accuracy! according to your rides, your steps are only counted when you stop for breaks. Mine are counted during all my rides. Albeit at a much lower count then last year.

I understand your frustration, Fitbit's reward system is based on steps - challenges are step based, or we become programmed by Fitbit app to reach daily 10,000 step goal. The problem is that fitness isn't about steps. In fact the CDC and World Health Organization recommends 150 minutes moderate to vigorous cardio a week, plus at least 2 strenth training sessions a week. So you are doing great on achieving cardio fitness with the bike rides.

Im really not looking for cudos on my execersise routines. I know im in great shape. Quoting the CDC and World Heath Organization does nothing to answer why the step counts got cut by 80% from last year.

Sadly Fitbit's mission is to motivate people to lead healthier lifestyles - but Fitbit is still focused on steps. Your tracker is telling the truth, same with other non-step based cardio like rowing or swimming. And Fitbit doesn't do a good job rewarding non-step based cardio.

My tracker is telling the TRUTH? 800-1,100 steps during a 12 mile ride! Not even close. It should either be zero, or around 6,000 to match my cadence count. Was it telling the truth last year when I was getting 10,000+ 'steps' during rides last year? Saying they 'FINE TUNED' the algorithm to improve accuracy! That my huge problem. I would rather have them say we turned off the step counter durning rides! Not some BS that they 'FINE TUNED' it.

[jonboy1969]

I agree Delbert. Bike rides are surely best when measured by distance, time, average speed, max speed, elevation, heart rate and calories. (dont forget about power output!) 🙂

But the Surge does track 'steps' during my rides. Last year  (my Surge and my old Force) tracked a whole bunch of steps. I logged just over 3,000 miles last year and every riding day (from my races to lazy centuries) was a 10,000+ step day. I really want to know if fitbit is trying to zero out steps during rides or explain to us users what they are trying to do with the 'fine tuning' of their algorithm. 

[bbarrera]

@jonboy1969 woah, I realize you are upset but don't kill the messenger LOL. No worries I was just trying to explain that a fitness tracker should tell the truth... and that includes recording no steps when you aren't stepping. From the release notes it sure seems like Fitbit is trying to more accurately record steps while cycling, which means step counts will be headed toward zero.

When I was walking to lose weight, it made sense to use steps to measure fitness. Fitbit made sense. But then I started riding 3000-5000 miles a year, in the best shape of my life, and Fitbit's focus on steps is ridiculous. Sure you can try and ignore steps in the Fitbit world, but the whole reward system is based on steps. Its been 16 months since releasing Surge, their first multi-sport tracker, and the reward system is still steps. The reward system is need of an overhaul. The goal is fitness, and steps are a poor way to measure fitness, and a poor way to motivate those of us that bike, swim, row, and lift weights.

I rarely use my Surge - due to HR inaccuracy while spinning and riding my bike. So I use Garmin Edge 520 with speed/cadence/ChestStrap sensors and hoping to add power sensor soon.

My iPhone 5s is my Fitbit step tracker (Mobile Track feature) since returning Fitbit Force under recall. Its worked great as step tracker as my phone is almost always in pocket. Added bonuses:

- get full step credit when pushing a shopping cart around Costco

- I compete in step challenges, and with phone as tracker I get step credit for biking and spinning

Was just talking with a fellow biker/swimmer, and she is complaining that Fitbit One gave her more steps while biking compared to putting ChargeHR on her ankle.

I get pretty decent step credit from my phone tracker - 10,000 this morning during a 61 minute spin at the gym (phone in gym shorts pocket). On the road I get about 500 steps per mile while riding on the road (phone in back jersey pocket). I use TrainingPeaks/Garmin to track my training, fitness, fatigue, and predict recovery times. Not for everybody, but I get the best of both worlds - better fitness tracking, while still competing and winning step challenges on Fitbit app.

My suggestions for you are:

- try putting Surge in pocket or ankle to increase step count

- turn off Surge and use phone or Fitbit One while riding

- mentally 'check out' of Fitbit world and focus on fitness services that are cycling friendly

Hope that helps.

[MichaelSchulte]

I couldn't agree more.  I am glad that they are finally getting better at not counting steps during cycling.  Otherwise you're essentially double-counting the exercise and calories burned.  I have been wanting them to fix this for a long time.

[MichaelSchulte]

You could try changing your daily goal to calories burned rather than steps.  It makes much more sense to do that if you regularly get your execise lifting weights, cycling, swimming, etc.  Unless you're exclusively running and walking for exercise, calories burned seems to be a better metric.  And your tracker will still buzz when you hit your daily calorie goal.  

To do this, change your primary goal on the iPhone app, go to Account --> Surge --> Main Goal --> Calories Burned.

[etc22]

I noticed the big drop off in steps while cycling when I got back on the bike this spring also. IMO the cycling motion is like taking a step so I prefer that it count as a step and I did some testing to see if counting the steps while cycling does indeed impact the calorie burn (ie. doubling up).

I was going to do an out and back test so each leg was equal but I decided to make my return leg longer once I was riding so I broke the numbers down by averages over time and distance. My route was mostly flat (rails to trails) with some very soft rolling grades.

On the out leg I wore my Surge around my ankle in bike mode (I felt this would capture the step motion) and on the return leg I wore it on my wrist as normal in bike mode.

I have all the step/calorie/distance numbers in 5/15 minute intervals but I'll just post the out leg vs the return leg to show the differences. The calories burned was taken from the main dashboard graph, the steps were taken from the daily step count graph. the avg calorie burn was taken from the activities results (the bike ride) and everything was synchronized with the time of the bike ride.

Out leg: 28.6 Miles - 6827 Steps - 875 calories burned - 238.7 steps per mile - 30.59 cal per mile

Ret leg: 35.9 Miles - 4450 Steps -1209 calories burned - 123.7 steps per mile - 33.61 cal per mile

I feel like the big number is the calories per mile - if the Surge was truley doubling up on the exercise by counting the steps then the out leg calorie burn should certainly have been larger. Also, the calories burned per minute shown in the bike graph stayed fairly consistant even though it was counting nearly double the steps.

Out leg: Cal burn per min at  5mile/6.4 - 10mile/6.4 - 15mile/7.1 - 20mile/8.2 - 25mile 7.1

Ret leg: Cal burn per min at 30mile/6.1 - 35mile/6.1 - 40mile/7.4 - 45mile/7.6 - 50mile/7.4 - 55mile/7.4 - 60mile/ 7.6

Anyway..... my point in all this is to try and show that IMO the Surge does not double up on calorie counting by also counting steps while cycling - and my preference would be to have the steps counted

[Rich_Laue]

If I look at where the Surge is mounted, I see it is mounted on the arm, your arm is on the Handlebars, and has no idea of what your feet are doing.  Seeing that the hands are on the Handlebars and the handlebars are bouncing around by the bumps in the road, the steps while biking are a direct relation to how skirt the road is.

Another thought I'd a person is not walking while riding a bike and there is no direct relation of steps per mile, this would depend on how often abperson coasts, and what gear your in.