-
@mountainChris it has been said that cheaper and lighter watches have better ohr because of less wobbling when running (due to less weight)
-
@Yannis-Belouris said in Suunto 9 OHR readings:
@mountainChris it has been said that cheaper and lighter watches have better ohr because of less wobbling when running (due to less weight)
That is what I understood as major factor, too - the weight (and the following challenge to attach the watch “immobile”), so the better sensor and even algorithm won’t help if the thing is wobbling
… nevertheless a little frustrating and obviously one reason why Suunto is not advertising real HR-measuring from the wrist … -
The more research I did when deciding to get a running/hiking watch, the more it pushed me in the direction of deliberately getting one without built-in HR. My dainty and hairy wrists ultimately tilted me to the Spartan Ultra, and I don’t regret that decision at all. There was no sense for me to spring for an extra feature that would probably never work well on my wrist.
Ironically I’ve ended up using an optical HR monitor for workouts, and I have total trust in it now, but it’s worn against my upper arm on an elastic band. Optical HR can be very reliable; the problem is the wrist is pretty much the worst place to put a monitor, but that’s where watches have to be worn.
