Is there already one out there which works that I’ve missed?
The idea of developing a watch with a built in HRM seems pretty obvious, but why won’t it work (I’m assuming it doesn’t work or else there would be more on the market)?
I understand a regular strap style HRM (e.g Polar) measures electrical impulses sent by the heart. Shouldn’t this be consistent over all of the body or does it need to be near the source (i.e. your heart)? Given that sometimes my HR strap slips and ends up arounrd my waist, sometimes twisting to the side of the abdomen, it still works fine and records data.
Consider where hospitals will measure your pulse via a clip on your fingertip when in the op theatre or casualty (OK, this is an advanced piece of kit which apppears to measure the pulse via pressure) or women during labour having the in-womb baby’s heart beat recorded (what looks like sound via sensitive microphones).
So why can’t the boffins develop a HRM that’s built into the watch strap or have I completely missed the point here? That would be a super convenient solution.
yeah, i totally agree with you. unfortunately it’s not quite that easy…
-you’re right, the electrical impulses only work across the centerline of the body/torso area, I’m sure there are lots of other measurable electrical signals in other parts of the body but they’d be from different muscles firing and not the heart
-there are a few HR monitors out there that use an IR finger cuff/clip wired directly to the watch so there is no chest strap. None have really caught on or been all that much better in terms of ease of use and comfort. With the Suunto you had this wire and a clip that ran to your finger, the other brand which advertises in run mags quite often adn whose name I forget is like a single finger glove that wraps around your wrist and the neck of your hand. No chest strap but a bit of a pain and I’m guessing possibly a bet hot in the heat to wear.
-I always thought that with a piezo sensor and some error correction you could build a HR/pulse sensor into the watch strap that would read the pulse off movement in the artery in your wrist. That’s all I’ll say on that as the rest of it I’ll keep to myself in case I ever end up pursueing it…
Last, in case you haven’t tried it, Polar’s Wearlink soft chest strap is a LOT more comfy than most other straps out there… $50 well spent
A few companies make heart rate monitor watches without chest straps. The downfall is that it has two little pads where you put your fingers on to get a reading and they are not as accurate as a strap. If you just need to check your heart rate at times, it is a good option, but most serious athletes want to see and track their heart rate throughout a workout.
I remember seeing one a few years ago. I think it was Nike??? Supposedly it read the pulse on your wrist. But the reviews were terrible. It was hard to keep it exactly in place and tight enough to register. Maybe we should get patch that sticks to our necks?
The downfall is that it has two little pads where you put your fingers on to get a reading and they are not as accurate as a strap. If you just need to check your heart rate at times, it is a good option, but most serious athletes want to see and track their heart rate throughout a workout.
Jeff
I don’t find this to be true at all. I have a HRM watch and a Polar chest-strap HRM. I’ve worn both as a test and the watch HRM was identical to the Polar.
I find it easy to check HR with the watch and I’ve gotten pretty good at estimating HR on my own. The only disadvantages I’ve found to the watch HRM is it is sometime hard to get a reading when it’s really cold and it doesn’t give you the run totals (total cal, avg HR etc) but I personally find those worthless and outweighed by the vastly improved comfort of the watch HRM.
The downfall is that it has two little pads where you put your fingers on to get a reading and they are not as accurate as a strap. If you just need to check your heart rate at times, it is a good option, but most serious athletes want to see and track their heart rate throughout a workout.
Jeff
I but I personally find those worthless and outweighed by the vastly improved comfort of the watch HRM.
HTFU!!!
The problem is that wrist readings are based on pulse pressure and not on an electrical signal. And with pulse readings, in order to get a good reading, it needs to be pretty tight - tighter than you want it to be for any longer than 30 seconds or so. Also, different people have that artery in a slightly different location so it’s very hard to make a watch that does it.
The computrainer ear piece is very uncomfortable as it also ‘pinches’ enough to get a reading and actually does restrict blood flow - though not in a vital area.
The chest strap is really the best and most accurate solution. It’s out of the way, causes no restriction of blood flow, and is highly accurate.