HR sensor accuracy

Fabio Vaccaro

I really understand your considerations, but do you have realized that 42 against 20 persons voted for “HR accuracy as an issue”?

Shrek3k

@Fabio-Vaccaro it is now 42:22

I believe that neither the vote nor the whole forum is truly representative. It is a meeting point for critically interested people, which is great and really helpful, but most probably not the ‘reality’ nor the ‘majority’. Just my thoughts.

JANTIKAINEN

Has anybody heard that is there a difference in OHR accuracy between the stainless steel and titanium version, taking in consideration that the titanium version is lighter and maybe is not so prone to move?
I know this might be a bit bogues question since it’s very unlikely that anybody would have both versions of the watch. Field testers might have.

Off topic, I had the pleasure of meeting the CEO & Board member of Suunto Oy by accident today at a local major electronics shop. I went there to see if they’d have the Race as a display watch, which they didn’t. So I was just glancing the sportswatch section and started playing with a Garmin watch when this one guy asked me that am I looking for sportswatch. I said that yes I am and then he asked that is Suunto out of the picture since I’m holding a Garmin watch. I replied that I came to see the Race but they don’t have it so then he introduced himself as a Suunto Oy’s CEO, took his Race from his wrist and let me play with the watch while we had a discussion about Suunto. Very nice and down to earth guy.

Fabio Vaccaro

@Shrek3k ahaahhaahahah
I think you are right with the representativeness of this forum

Fabio Vaccaro

@JANTIKAINEN wonderfull and have you asked clarifications about HR issues to the CEO?

DrSilverthorn

@David-l I think the wrist OHR should work for steady state running workouts at least. I think Garmin and Polar (VV2, Grit, not VV3) work better in this regard. Wearing a strap all the time in the summer months can lead to chaffing issues, and sometimes one is traveling and it’s one less thing to think about.

If you’re putting a OHR sensor on the watch, then the person buying it might reasonably expect it to work at least sometimes. The problem is that for many people it simply doesn’t work under anything but the most ideal conditions.

IMO, if they could fix the heart rate sensor, they’d be addressing a major shortcoming that would make them more competitive in this space.

@JANTIKAINEN said in HR sensor accuracy:

took his Race from his wrist and let me play with the watch

At that point he could have left it to you as a gift

David l

@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).

carlopievani

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

vjakub

@carlopievani Not even after translation I could help me understand what changed the accuracy for you

tiago

@vjakub he change the placement of the watch to forearm and the accuracy becomes better,in line with Garmin epix 2

Brad_Olwin

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/

David l

@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.

Arnaud Lclr

@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.

David l

@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

duffman19

@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.

Jean Lamy

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.

Brad_Olwin

@duffman19 I can upload the manuscript if you wish. I have access.

Kurt68

Garmin with chest strap suunto on the wrist no major abnormalities. ‍️