Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Garmin Accuracy Gripe
Quote | Reply
I posted a thread a week or so ago asking about the accuracy of the forerunner 235 on 'run indoor' mode. I got some helpful answers, and decided I more or less need a foot pod to get more reliable accuracy.

In using it outdoors a bit more, I've also noticed that the wrist based heart rate appears pretty far off (on the low side). For example, on a hilly run I often do, my HR can reach 170-180 near the top of some of the hills, getting close to my max. My highest reading with the forerunner was something like 145. I know the wrist based tech isn't as accurate as a heart rate strap, but, that is a pretty big discrepancy.

The watch I was using previously was the TomTom Multisport Cardio. It came out quite a while ago (I think I bought mine in 2013 or 14, for around $100 less then the garmin). It's wrist based heart rate is pretty bang on, and the indoor treadmill option works much better then the garmin as well. Did I just get a dud Garmin? Has their quality gone downhill this much?

I'm pretty let down by the Forerunner, knowing that my much older, much cheaper watch is outperforming it at very basic functions.

Long Chile was a silly place.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin Accuracy Gripe [BCtriguy1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I recently upgraded from a fenix 3 to fenix 6. I found the wrist based HR of the 6 to be right iine with the HR strap and fenix 3.

That is until the recent FW upgrade killed the fenix 6 sensor hub.

--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin Accuracy Gripe [BCtriguy1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BCtriguy1 wrote:
I'm pretty let down by the Forerunner, knowing that my much older, much cheaper watch is outperforming it at very basic functions.
I've been using the Forerunner 235 for several years and agree with your comments about the sketchy wrist-based HR accuracy. As such, I continue to use a Garmin soft chest strap HR monitor for every workout. Also, the chest strap allows for reliable HR data collection when wearing long sleeves in colder temps (watch on top).

For indoor (treadmill) sessions, I use the Garmin footpod with varying degrees of accuracy. I've attempted to maintain calibration by wearing the footpod for every workout (outdoors and indoors), but still, the accuracy varies when "running indoors". I've thought of trying the Stryd footpod, but hesitate at the steep price.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin Accuracy Gripe [Brushman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I just started using the old generation garmin foot pod. I like the results so far. It has been pretty spot on. The thing that was pissing me off, is during races when I would run between two buildings, lets say I was keeping a 7:30 pace.... it would fall to 10:00 pace for about 5 seconds, and then overshoot to like 3:45 pace for the next 5 seconds to correct. I was just getting tired of this and wanted to know more or less my true accurate pace. Even if the foot pods are off, they do not swing like this. I still hit my lap timer every mile to make sure if I am on or off my desired pace in a race.

- Jordan

My Strava
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin Accuracy Gripe [BCtriguy1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BCtriguy1 wrote:
I posted a thread a week or so ago asking about the accuracy of the forerunner 235 on 'run indoor' mode. I got some helpful answers, and decided I more or less need a foot pod to get more reliable accuracy.

In using it outdoors a bit more, I've also noticed that the wrist based heart rate appears pretty far off (on the low side). For example, on a hilly run I often do, my HR can reach 170-180 near the top of some of the hills, getting close to my max. My highest reading with the forerunner was something like 145. I know the wrist based tech isn't as accurate as a heart rate strap, but, that is a pretty big discrepancy.

The watch I was using previously was the TomTom Multisport Cardio. It came out quite a while ago (I think I bought mine in 2013 or 14, for around $100 less then the garmin). It's wrist based heart rate is pretty bang on, and the indoor treadmill option works much better then the garmin as well. Did I just get a dud Garmin? Has their quality gone downhill this much?

I'm pretty let down by the Forerunner, knowing that my much older, much cheaper watch is outperforming it at very basic functions.

Forget about getting any accuracy on treadmill. I tried the watch itself (essentially only knows your cadence), Garmin foot-pod, HR-TRI (which has more run statistics, so theoretically more accurate) and Stryde. Nothing is really accurate and all are just a factor of your cadence (though hr-tri and stryde are slightly better). Don't think its a Garmin thing, there's just no good way to measure it since every treadmill is different in power/speed, softness/bounciness, etc.

As for wrist HR - the 235 has the older Garmin hr monitor which in my experience (with fenix 5) is much less accurate than the new one that's on the 245/945/etc. Having said that, you still need to tighten the strap hard to keep the watch on the skin and if it moves around it will impact accuracy.
Now I'm just using the polar OH1+ on my bicep. Accuracy is good and it is tiny so I don't feel it at all, used to get a lot of chafing from chest HR band. Also, don't have the issue of "cadence lock" early in the run that you get in the winter with hr bands.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin Accuracy Gripe [BCtriguy1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BCtriguy1 wrote:
...the wrist based heart rate appears pretty far off...

I think wrist based HRM can offer widely different results for different people. It sounds like your previous watch worked better for you, so maybe there's hope there, but in my case I have tried a few different watches / sensors and have not found one I would trust during activity. I assume it has something to do with my blood flow and body composition / structure.

I consider the wrist HRM in the garmin (and, for me, other watches) to be useful for non-activity use - maybe also while sleeping - but always add a chest strap during sport modes. I have toyed with trying one of the forearm or upper arm optical sensors, but even there recharging the battery feels kind of annoying compared to the classic CR2032 once every few years of a chest strap.
Quote Reply
Re: Garmin Accuracy Gripe [BCtriguy1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BCtriguy1 wrote:
Did I just get a dud Garmin?
Probably not a dud. Wrist HR is not a prime time product for athletes. It is OK with me, but I abandoned it years ago and use a Scosche or TICKR FIT arm strap. I have never tried wrist HR running or cycling on my 945-- who knows, it might be great for me now. (It is freakin' great in the pool, but that is because nothing else works for me there.)

Where wrist HR seems to lose it are:
  1. Just doesn't work - often due to skin color or opacity
  2. Cadence lock - needs to be worn tight to avoid this
  3. Lag - I suspect error filtering causes wrist HR to lag or miss peaks entirely
I wouldn't knock it. It may not work for you. Plus, the 235 was an early (or first) gen HRM sensor for Garmin.They have made vast improvements since then.
Last edited by: exxxviii: Nov 7, 19 10:50
Quote Reply