# Heart Rate Monitors



## MikeB18 (19 Dec 2015)

Having been underweight most of my life and struggling with it as I have got older and more active, I have decided it's time to do something about it as I plan to cycle a lot more and just become a healthier and fitter person and live a normal day to day life without the effects I have been having. I will be seeing a dietician in the new year and have been advised to monitor my heart rate and Calories.

My question to you is what bit of kit would you recommend that will allow me to do this accurately? I ideally would like a watch style monitor for my regular day to day activities such as work, walking to the shop, walking the dog etc and then a chest strap monitor for cycling and running. 

I understand the most accurate monitors are the chest straps but it's not possible for me to wear one all day every day especially at work. 

I am happy to use 2 different brands of products as long as I can link the results in some way. I am currently using myfitnesspal and strava so it would be good if I can connect the monitors to them but I know that's not always the case 

Any help or advice will be greatly appreciated and hope to hear some feedback soon


----------



## Crandoggler (19 Dec 2015)

Fitbit?


----------



## Oldfentiger (19 Dec 2015)

I have a TomTom Multisport Cardio. I can't vouch for accuracy but the results are always consistent.
Syncs to smartphone using Bluetooth - TomTom Mysports app, then uploads to Srava automatically.


----------



## Citius (19 Dec 2015)

MikeB18 said:


> and have been advised to monitor my heart rate



Who advised you to do that? Unless you have a diagnosed heart or related health condition, there is no need and no particular benefit.


----------



## MikeB18 (19 Dec 2015)

Citius said:


> Who advised you to do that?



My GP, I don't wish to go any further into my health problems


----------



## Citius (19 Dec 2015)

MikeB18 said:


> My GP, I don't wish to go any further into my health problems



Did your GP mention what the point of monitoring your HR was?


----------



## midliferider (19 Dec 2015)

MikeB18 said:


> My GP, I don't wish to go any further into my health problems



Perhaps you should ask him for one.
If your GP's professional opinion is that it is important to monitor your heart rate because of your health, I would expect your GP to provide the equipment as well.


----------



## MikeB18 (20 Dec 2015)

my question was about equipment not my health or my GP so please if you can't answer the question I've asked, quite simply don't reply to my post


----------



## Jody (20 Dec 2015)

Cheap bluetooth hrm and then use polar beat app. You can also link the hrm to Strava. If you have both apps running it will give you quite a bit of data. You can pick a cheap BT hrm up for about 15 to 20 quid.


----------



## Citius (20 Dec 2015)

MikeB18 said:


> my question was about equipment not my health or my GP



I think the point that myself and midliferider are both trying to make is that if your GP is recommending that you monitor your HR, then it ought to be as a result of a medical intervention, not by asking some random people on the internet.


----------



## midlife (20 Dec 2015)

Maybe ask your GP for Holter ambulatory cardiac monitoring if you both want to do it accurately?

Shaun


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (20 Dec 2015)

MikeB18 said:


> My GP, I don't wish to go any further into my health problems


Your post on another forum you say "I would like to monitor my hr" Either you were told by a doctor or you weren't

Besides that, wearing an hrm isn't going to tell you anything usefull, it simply can't...


----------



## cyberknight (20 Dec 2015)

I think others are more concerned that you may have a condition that needs monitoring and as said the doc should provide you with one if so , there are heart conditions that can be monitored and others like my irregular heart rhythm that dont show up unless you have an ECG .As long as your happy with your doctors advice and are happy with the suggestions provided on here its up to you whether you are comfortable with revealing personal information on your health to random internet loonies 
.


----------



## Stephenite (21 Dec 2015)

Garmin products and the Garmin Connect app/website link seamlessly with MFP and strava.
I have an older version Vivosmart on all the time (no gps but can syncs with a chest strap), and a Forerunner 910XT for specific activities.
If you only plan to cycle you might consider something from the Garmin Edge range.


----------



## HeroesFitness (29 Dec 2015)

MikeB18 said:


> Having been underweight most of my life and struggling with it as I have got older and more active, I have decided it's time to do something about it as I plan to cycle a lot more and just become a healthier and fitter person and live a normal day to day life without the effects I have been having. I will be seeing a dietician in the new year and have been advised to monitor my heart rate and Calories.
> 
> My question to you is what bit of kit would you recommend that will allow me to do this accurately? I ideally would like a watch style monitor for my regular day to day activities such as work, walking to the shop, walking the dog etc and then a chest strap monitor for cycling and running.
> 
> ...


I would use a Polar Monitor with chest strap during exercise and if you have an I-Phone or Android then for general use they have a fitness app where you can monitor your heartrate, if not just try amazon for heartrate monitors and take a look at the reviews.

Happy New Year :-)


----------



## gavintc (29 Dec 2015)

My daughter has a med condition. She monitors her HR using 2 fingers and a watch. It works pretty well for her - cheap as well.


----------



## screenman (29 Dec 2015)

gavintc said:


> My daughter has a med condition. She monitors her HR using 2 fingers and a watch. It works pretty well for her - cheap as well.



I agree that system works well, but there are certain times on a bike where it might be slightly difficult.

I used Polar for over 20 years, now it is a Garmin.


----------



## gavintc (29 Dec 2015)

screenman said:


> I agree that system works well, but there are certain times on a bike where it might be slightly difficult.
> 
> I used Polar for over 20 years, now it is a Garmin.


I agree, but that was not the original question. He wanted to measure HR through the day. A 6 sec check gives you a quick feel as to whether things are a problem.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (29 Dec 2015)

gavintc said:


> I agree, but that was not the original question. He wanted to measure HR through the day. A 6 sec check gives you a quick feel as to whether things are a problem.


No, the OP wanted to measure calories derived from Heart Rate accurately, something that cannot be done


----------



## martint235 (29 Dec 2015)

I've been thinking of getting one, was looking at the Fitbit Surge.

I've been diagnosed with something that I can't remember off the top of my head but is basically an irregular heartbeat. I'm waiting for the 24 hr BP test and the 24 hr ECG plus a heart scan but I'm kind of curious about what an HR readout would look like over a typical day.


----------



## Andrew_P (29 Dec 2015)

I thought most if not all commercial HR monitors use software to smooth out the data anyway. The Polar RS800CX was one that can or does record continuous raw data. http://beatloneafib.blogspot.co.uk/p/how-to-monitor-your-heart.html


----------



## screenman (29 Dec 2015)

gavintc said:


> I agree, but that was not the original question. He wanted to measure HR through the day. A 6 sec check gives you a quick feel as to whether things are a problem.



Apologies, I did read the OP but instantly forgot it.


----------



## Citius (29 Dec 2015)

Andrew_P said:


> I thought most if not all commercial HR monitors use software to smooth out the data anyway



Smooth out what data? Most HRMs simply count the number of beats in real time and convert it into whatever type of screen display you happen to request, in real time.


----------



## cyberknight (29 Dec 2015)

Can anyone recommend a watch based monitor without the strap ?


----------



## BRounsley (30 Dec 2015)

Hopefully this makes sense and is useful!!

There’s three parts to the questions. A) How you gather the information. B) How you view the information. C) When are you gathering the information.

A) It sounds like you want to gather the information while exercising so you have two main options. One is the chest strap. The other is optically skin sensor (shines a light through the skin, normally a green light and looks at the veins pulsing. Invented by Philips I believe). The chest strap is worn around the chest! The optical one is typically worn on the wrist (or built into a watch).

There are some cleaver apps that can take a reading other ways, but you can’t use while exercising. Such as the “Philips Vital Signs” that looks at the change in colour in your face.

B) You typically pair the monitor to a reader. A reader could be a bike satnav (Garmin), a phone or a watch. Sometimes the monitor and reader are the same device (watch using the optically skin sensor).

C) You may want to just view your heart rate while exercising. You may want to record the heart rate and use the information (e.g. Calories burn). You may want to record you heart rate over the day for base reading, like resting heart rate. Or all three.


The cheapest would be a cheap watch and chest strap, but typically all you get is a reading while exercising.

A very good cheap option for exercising is a Bluetooth HR Chest monitor paired to a smart phone (on the assumption you have a smartphone and it’s got Bluetooth 4.0).

If you want a wrist monitor not a chest strap them MIO were first to the market. They do a reader only (Mio Link about £70) and all in one watch (Mio Alpha about £110).

You could go the heath tracker route. Someone talked about the FitBit HR. That’s the optically skin sensor.

You have the smart watch option. The apple watch (you’d need a recent iphone) has the same optically skin sensor and does all of the above.


I have an apple watch but for cycling I use a Wahoo chest strap and connect it to my iPhone and Strava


----------



## bozmandb9 (30 Dec 2015)

Funnily enough, I just posted a thread about my Garmin 235. It does exactly what you want. It monitors pulse 24/7 (optical heart rate monitor on the back of the watch), and provides charts, low, high and average, plus resting heart rate, 7 days, plus 4 weeks. It also tracks calories burned, based on heart rate plus GPS, great cycle and running apps. It also interfaces with MyFitnessPal, into which you can enter the food you eat, to accurately track your calories ingested.

Oh, it tells the time too! Plus smartwatch functionality, such as call and text, plus social media notifications. 

Early days for me with this model, but I love it so far, and from past experience, I think it's really useful, especially if you're looking to achieve health goals through tracking calories burned against calories consumed.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (31 Dec 2015)

Calories based on HR is a misnomer. No device capable of sensing HR can in any way accurately tell how many calories you have burned per hour/session/day/week etc.

It simply cannot be done..


----------



## david k (31 Dec 2015)

Oldfentiger said:


> I have a TomTom Multisport Cardio. I can't vouch for accuracy but the results are always consistent.
> Syncs to smartphone using Bluetooth - TomTom Mysports app, then uploads to Srava automatically.


I like the look of that, what's your feedback please and did you buy online


----------



## david k (31 Dec 2015)

martint235 said:


> I've been thinking of getting one, was looking at the Fitbit Surge.
> 
> I've been diagnosed with something that I can't remember off the top of my head but is basically an irregular heartbeat. I'm waiting for the 24 hr BP test and the 24 hr ECG plus a heart scan but I'm kind of curious about what an HR readout would look like over a typical day.


Me too, irregular heart rythem which goes in and out, they missed mine on a 24 hour test but got it eventually 

I think measuring heart rate is helpful if you know your usual rate and nothing wrong with a gadget to add nterested to rides and exercise etc.


----------



## david k (31 Dec 2015)

martint235 said:


> I've been thinking of getting one, was looking at the Fitbit Surge.
> 
> I've been diagnosed with something that I can't remember off the top of my head but is basically an irregular heartbeat. I'm waiting for the 24 hr BP test and the 24 hr ECG plus a heart scan but I'm kind of curious about what an HR readout would look like over a typical day.


I had a Fitbit charge and the strap fell apart quickly, lost confidence in them now

I like the look of the Tom Tom after reading this thread


----------



## bozmandb9 (1 Jan 2016)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> Calories based on HR is a misnomer. No device capable of sensing HR can in any way accurately tell how many calories you have burned per hour/session/day/week etc.
> 
> It simply cannot be done..


So the metrics are distance covered, time, speed, elevation, with known height, weight, age, and heart rate, normal activity level, resting heart rate, estimated vo2 max, recovery time (plus knowledge of heart rate 24/7, and daily activity/ steps, workouts). So far as I'm aware, the only more accurate way is incorporating a power meter. Certainly it's less INaccurate than 99% of other methods out there! If there's a better way, I'd love to find out how?


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (1 Jan 2016)

bozmandb9 said:


> So the metrics are distance covered, time, speed, elevation, with known height, weight, age, and heart rate, normal activity level, resting heart rate, estimated vo2 max, recovery time (plus knowledge of heart rate 24/7, and daily activity/ steps, workouts). So far as I'm aware, the only more accurate way is incorporating a power meter. Certainly it's less INaccurate than 99% of other methods out there! If there's a better way, I'd love to find out how?


A power meter is only good on the bike, what about the hours of day you aren't cycling? There isn't a better way, there is NO way.

None of your metrics provide accurate information in relation to caloric consumption, accurately.


----------



## bozmandb9 (1 Jan 2016)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> A power meter is only good on the bike, what about the hours of day you aren't cycling? There isn't a better way, there is NO way.
> 
> None of your metrics provide accurate information in relation to caloric consumption, accurately.


Of course not. Surely we're talking about calorie burn, not calorific consumption, which can be extremely easily and accurately tracked. A power meter provides the most exact measure of energy expenditure on the bike, this is not in any doubt. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but I am pretty certain that it in no way contributes towards helping the OP.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (1 Jan 2016)

bozmandb9 said:


> Of course not. Surely we're talking about calorie burn, not calorific consumption, which can be extremely easily and accurately tracked. A power meter provides the most exact measure of energy expenditure on the bike, this is not in any doubt. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but I am pretty certain that it in no way contributes towards helping the OP.


Yes, calorie burn, an error on my part. The OP wanted to measure calorie burn with an HRM, since this cannot be done, there is no "helping the OP" who hasn't returned to the forum since 21st Dec


----------



## bozmandb9 (5 Jan 2016)

I saw this answer in a similar thread in a different forum : "Any measure of calorie burn is an approximation, but that doesn't change that it's worth having at least some measurement. No one's asking for perfection, just questioning what assumptions are made in the calculations"

I guess what it means is that if you're a pedant, and not interested in anything which has a possibility of error, then don't look for answers to this sort of question. Myself, accepting that there will be a margin of error, I'm very happy to use the Garmin figures, knowing they are based on time, distance, elevation, and heart rate, and factoring in my age weight and height, and also 'learning' more about me over time. 

I do not expect the figures to be totally accurate in an absolute sense, however they will be in a relative sense (i.e. I can measure one session against any other session). Furthermore, accepting the margin for error, I would rather have approximate data, than no data.

Looking at some of the early answers, I'm not surprised that the OP didn't return.


----------



## david k (5 Jan 2016)

bozmandb9 said:


> I saw this answer in a similar thread in a different forum : "Any measure of calorie burn is an approximation, but that doesn't change that it's worth having at least some measurement. No one's asking for perfection, just questioning what assumptions are made in the calculations"
> 
> I guess what it means is that if you're a pedant, and not interested in anything which has a possibility of error, then don't look for answers to this sort of question. Myself, accepting that there will be a margin of error, I'm very happy to use the Garmin figures, knowing they are based on time, distance, elevation, and heart rate, and factoring in my age weight and height, and also 'learning' more about me over time.
> 
> ...



Good post


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (5 Jan 2016)

bozmandb9 said:


> I saw this answer in a similar thread in a different forum : "Any measure of calorie burn is an approximation, but that doesn't change that it's worth having at least some measurement. No one's asking for perfection, just questioning what assumptions are made in the calculations"
> 
> I guess what it means is that if you're a pedant, and not interested in anything which has a possibility of error, then don't look for answers to this sort of question. Myself, accepting that there will be a margin of error, I'm very happy to use the Garmin figures, knowing they are based on time, distance, elevation, and heart rate, and factoring in my age weight and height, and also 'learning' more about me over time.
> 
> ...


The OP didn't ask for an approximation, he asked for "accuracy" The answers he got, addressed the question.

If he had have asked for HRM recommendations then there would be a plethora of responses as such.


----------



## martint235 (8 Jan 2016)

Supplementary question. I've not seen any mention of memory on these devices, do they only transmit real time data to a phone/app? Ideally I'll be looking at linking to my tablet once a day, is that feasible?


----------



## PhilDawson8270 (8 Jan 2016)

I use the Microsoft Band, it's 3/4bpm out from a garmin chest strap. I can't use the chest strap for rugby as that tends to hurt 

However, I have cycled with both on, and they track pretty much the same, 3-4 bpm difference between them. It is also very tough, so tough that I have played rugby in it for 6 months so far, and it has no damage.


----------



## PhilDawson8270 (8 Jan 2016)

martint235 said:


> Supplementary question. I've not seen any mention of memory on these devices, do they only transmit real time data to a phone/app? Ideally I'll be looking at linking to my tablet once a day, is that feasible?


MS Band stores it all, then bluetooths it too a phone (or anything that can run Windows Mobile apps, or can run android apps, or iphone app)


----------

