HR sensor accuracy
-
@DrSilverthorn with the exception of one blip at the beginning of one run, it’s worked perfectly fine for me. HR for similar runs using Fenix are very close to this (can’t completely compare due to weather/alcohol intake the previous night).
-
ciao a tutti, qualche giorno fa ho provato a fare una comparativa fra garmin epix 2 pro e suunto race, il sensore hr di garmin era in linea con la fascia cardio facendo spinning… il suunto race era invece in grave difficolta’… poi sono un paio di giorni che mi alleno allacciando il suunto race sull’avambraccio e le cose sono sorprendentemente cambiate, in questa condizione riesce a tenere il passo con garmin… posso dirmi abbastanza soddisfatto
-
@carlopievani Not even after translation I could help me understand what changed the accuracy for you
-
@vjakub he change the placement of the watch to forearm and the accuracy becomes better,in line with Garmin epix 2
-
This might interest those who think OHR is accurate.
https://the5krunner.com/2023/11/29/garmin-fenix-6-hrv-vs-polar-h10-hrv-study-shows-the-winner/ -
@Brad_Olwin said in HR sensor accuracy:
This might interest those who think OHR is accurate.
https://the5krunner.com/2023/11/29/garmin-fenix-6-hrv-vs-polar-h10-hrv-study-shows-the-winner/Not really sure what this proves. We all know that chest straps are much more accurate that OHR. This is just some graphs an individual has put together. There’s no scientific input, no controls, and no peer review.
Different OHR sensors work differently for different people and are therefore usable only as a guide. Mine works great for me as a guide. I can certainly tell, without looking at my watch, if my HR is too high or isn’t high enough.
-
@David-l Thanks @Brad_Olwin , and I don’t agree with you at all @David-l .
This study does have the capacity to easily illustrate the difference between a competition medical device, a heart rate belt recognised as the best on the market (H10) and an optical reader, the Fenix 6.
It’s much more scientific than a ‘youtuber’ review like DC Rainmaker, which does interesting practical tests but with a scientific veneer that makes the non-scientist think it’s very scientific and which is in any case incapable of remaining impartial !
I don’t think the point of talking about this article is to excuse the inaccurate measurement of Suunto’s optical readers, or those of any other brand.
If the article can make those on this forum understand that if you want the most reliable measurement possible to be able to interpret all the Suunto indicators, you need the most reliable measurement and that therefore: sport = heart rate belt, that’s already great…And I think it’s time for brands to stop claiming too much about optical readers
Or maybe for Suunto to come out with a heart rate monitor that’s even more accurate than the Polar H10.After 8 years with Garmin and several watches in different ranges, I switched to Suunto in 2023, with the Race.
-
@Arnaud-Lclr said in HR sensor accuracy:
@David-l Thanks @Brad_Olwin , and I don’t agree with you at all @David-l .
This study does have the capacity to easily illustrate the difference between a competition medical device, a heart rate belt recognised as the best on the market (H10) and an optical reader, the Fenix 6.
It’s much more scientific than a ‘youtuber’ review like DC Rainmaker, which does interesting practical tests but with a scientific veneer that makes the non-scientist think it’s very scientific and which is in any case incapable of remaining impartial !
I don’t think the point of talking about this article is to excuse the inaccurate measurement of Suunto’s optical readers, or those of any other brand.
If the article can make those on this forum understand that if you want the most reliable measurement possible to be able to interpret all the Suunto indicators, you need the most reliable measurement and that therefore: sport = heart rate belt, that’s already great…And I think it’s time for brands to stop claiming too much about optical readers
Or maybe for Suunto to come out with a heart rate monitor that’s even more accurate than the Polar H10.Absolutely agree with this point! Just use OHR as a guide
-
@Arnaud-Lclr I’m not sure anyone would consider the5krunner more reliable than someone like @dcrainmaker. Yes, the source of the graphs appears to be from a scientific paper, but there is no direct access to it and little to no context given. If you read the comments, it appears the5krunner didn’t even realize the results were taken while exercising. I think t5k went back and edited the (very short) article to clarify this. He/they even added that "we can’t infer the performance of RR recording at lower levels from thse [sic] results.”
I agree with @David-l that we’re all well aware that OHR, specifically at the wrist, is less reliable than an electrical chest monitor. No news here.
Vertical Ti
-
Hi guys,
Very interesting readings here. Helps a bit understand my “bad HR sensor” impression since wearing the Race (titanium).
Here are 2 photos taken from the same exercice (small fitness) wearing Race versus good old Suunto 5.
I think I’ll try moving the watch up + resetting and I’ll see.
HR sensor is not 100% a major issue for me but when you put a lot of money on a watch that is supposed to work (and be better than the previous one) you expect something better.
-
@duffman19 I can upload the manuscript if you wish. I have access.
-
Garmin with chest strap suunto on the wrist no major abnormalities.
️
