HRM & Revy Heart

[jsstbs]

Just bought a Garmin with a heart rate monitor. All seems to be working well with it but I appear to have some physiological "quirks".

My resting heart rate seems accurate at 55ish and my max heart rate (or the highest that I've got it to) is 193bpm (expected to be 220-30=190). In between, though, my heart seems to be (what my husband has described as) "quite revy".

As soon as I set off on a ride, the heart rate climbs quickly. At the speed I would usually do a reasonable (reasonable for me) ride of 10/20/30 miles I'm at 170bpm. Its quite comfortable for me, and although I'm slightly out of breathe I can easily hold conversation. At the effort I would put in to do a reasonable hill (Honister, Hardknott, etc), I'm doing about 180bpm. Both of these levels of effort I could keep up for an appropriate ride (i.e. the whole ride or the whole hill). And yet according to the conventional "heart rate zones", both of these are 90% of my max heart rate so I should be exercising anaerobically which is unsustainable for long periods - but I know I can keep up both paces!

Just wondered if anyone else has experienced these quirks or might have any ideas about whats going on?

My thoughts are that:
- maybe I have a very high max heart rate but just haven't pushed myself there, so I'm not really working at 90%
- when I peaked at 193bpm what stopped me was not my legs (where I should be feeling the lactic acid building up) but a feeling of lack of air coming into my lungs - so my lungs are stopping me somehow (I know my lung size/performance is my a weak point)
- I've just got a weird body and the usual heart rate zones don't apply, and I should configure the top zones to be much closer together (i.e. put Zone 5 to 185bpm where things start hurting not the 174bpm that the formulas say, 193 x 90% = 174)

This doesn't cause me any particular medical concerns - I must have been like this for 30 years before getting the heart rate monitor and I'm still alive! Its just annoying that having bought a heart rate monitor for training, it doesn't seem to work for me!

Although I've had two weeks off for Xmas, I've been back cycling now for one/two weeks. I cycle 5 days a week to & from work, totaling about 40 miles per week. The monitor and standard zones seem to work well for my husband.

 

[Dusty Bin]

No such thing as a 'standard zone' unfortunately. Your max HR is probably not 190 and if it isn't, then no standard zone will be any use as a reference point. Your HRM won't tell you anything useful until you can establish a true MHR figure....

 

[Octave]

Check your base layer, static can do funny things to a HRM, try a loose cotton tee shirt as an experiment. Also make sure you have good skin contact to the strap, sorry but saliva works well. Don't ask me how I know these things but let's say I spent a few months riding slowly expecting to have a heart attack!

 

[sittingbull]

There are reported issues with the Garmin chest straps. One solution is to replace the Garmin strap with a Polar Wear-link strap (transfer the Garmin transmitter to the Polar strap) as detailed here. Assuming your strap is as detailed in the linked article.

I tried to train with an HRM ( I've used a few) as a runner from time to time for over a decade and gave up. I just couldn't keep within the zones, largely due to changing terrain. In the end I would just use it for additional info and perhaps to keep within a max target.

I established my max HR by sprinting say 100m, possibly up an incline, repeating several times. This was just over 200 bpm and I could get nowhere near this on the bike. It makes sense to me that a true max heart rate is independent of activity (running/cycling......) but I have seen reference to differing max heart rates for each activity.

I'm now wondering if I should establish different zones when cycling based on my max cycling heart rate, rather than the higher figure I could obtain running?

 

[Dusty Bin]

I'm now wondering if I should establish different zones when cycling based on my max cycling heart rate, rather than the higher figure I could obtain running?

Cycling HR does not transfer well to running, and vice versa..

 

[sittingbull]

That's pretty much what I've experienced.

I've recently been looking at the Maffetone method which recommends training (running) at 180 - age bpm to stay within the aerobic zone. It also says not to exceed that level for other exercise activities. I haven't tried it yet but expect to have to walk rather than run frequently (this is apparently normal at first). However I'm expecting to be able to cycle at a steady pace. Should be interesting.

 

[uclown2002]

Why you bothering with HR zones when you are only doing 40 miles a week?

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

Why you bothering with HR zones when you are only doing 40 miles a week?

This! A lot of bolleaux in that OP for a ride to work

 

[medavidcook]

Just bought a Garmin with a heart rate monitor. All seems to be working well with it but I appear to have some physiological "quirks".

My resting heart rate seems accurate at 55ish and my max heart rate (or the highest that I've got it to) is 193bpm (expected to be 220-30=190). In between, though, my heart seems to be (what my husband has described as) "quite revy".

As soon as I set off on a ride, the heart rate climbs quickly. At the speed I would usually do a reasonable (reasonable for me) ride of 10/20/30 miles I'm at 170bpm. Its quite comfortable for me, and although I'm slightly out of breathe I can easily hold conversation. At the effort I would put in to do a reasonable hill (Honister, Hardknott, etc), I'm doing about 180bpm. Both of these levels of effort I could keep up for an appropriate ride (i.e. the whole ride or the whole hill). And yet according to the conventional "heart rate zones", both of these are 90% of my max heart rate so I should be exercising anaerobically which is unsustainable for long periods - but I know I can keep up both paces!

Just wondered if anyone else has experienced these quirks or might have any ideas about whats going on?

My thoughts are that:
- maybe I have a very high max heart rate but just haven't pushed myself there, so I'm not really working at 90%
- when I peaked at 193bpm what stopped me was not my legs (where I should be feeling the lactic acid building up) but a feeling of lack of air coming into my lungs - so my lungs are stopping me somehow (I know my lung size/performance is my a weak point)
- I've just got a weird body and the usual heart rate zones don't apply, and I should configure the top zones to be much closer together (i.e. put Zone 5 to 185bpm where things start hurting not the 174bpm that the formulas say, 193 x 90% = 174)

This doesn't cause me any particular medical concerns - I must have been like this for 30 years before getting the heart rate monitor and I'm still alive! Its just annoying that having bought a heart rate monitor for training, it doesn't seem to work for me!

Although I've had two weeks off for Xmas, I've been back cycling now for one/two weeks. I cycle 5 days a week to & from work, totaling about 40 miles per week. The monitor and standard zones seem to work well for my husband.

Ok by the looks of it you are using the FHR method (Fetal Heart Rate) for women it is 226 not 220, so max heart rate would technically be 196. The reason for having such a high heart rate can also come from weight, if you are heavier than normal your HR goes up. There is many factors behind this

 

[VamP]

 

[Dusty Bin]

Ok by the looks of it you are using the FHR method (Fetal Heart Rate) for women it is 226 not 220, so max heart rate would technically be 196. The reason for having such a high heart rate can also come from weight, if you are heavier than normal your HR goes up. There is many factors behind this

seriously - what?

 

[jsstbs]

Check your base layer, static can do funny things to a HRM, try a loose cotton tee shirt as an experiment. Also make sure you have good skin contact to the strap, sorry but saliva works well. Don't ask me how I know these things but let's say I spent a few months riding slowly expecting to have a heart attack!

Thanks for the advice. Gave it a go with a looser T shirt this morning but had to wear a few more layers on top! Didn't seem to make much difference though Maybe it'll work better in summer when I can wear less layers.

 

[jsstbs]

There are reported issues with the Garmin chest straps. One solution is to replace the Garmin strap with a Polar Wear-link strap (transfer the Garmin transmitter to the Polar strap) as detailed here. Assuming your strap is as detailed in the linked article.

I tried to train with an HRM ( I've used a few) as a runner from time to time for over a decade and gave up. I just couldn't keep within the zones, largely due to changing terrain. In the end I would just use it for additional info and perhaps to keep within a max target.

I established my max HR by sprinting say 100m, possibly up an incline, repeating several times. This was just over 200 bpm and I could get nowhere near this on the bike. It makes sense to me that a true max heart rate is independent of activity (running/cycling......) but I have seen reference to differing max heart rates for each activity.

I'm now wondering if I should establish different zones when cycling based on my max cycling heart rate, rather than the higher figure I could obtain running?

Thanks for the tips. You might be right about the running - will go out and give it a try.

 

[jsstbs]

Why you bothering with HR zones when you are only doing 40 miles a week?

(1) I ride a fixed route to & from work five times per week, week in and week out - if I'm doing this anyway, why would I not want to take the opportunity to improve my performance/fitness? (2) As a woman you might anticipate that there are specific reasons why I might want an objective measure of my level of exercise (3) If I want to want to wear a HRM for a 0.4/4/40/400 mile ride, then that's what I'll do, thanks very much!

 

[Fab Foodie]

(1) I ride a fixed route to & from work five times per week, week in and week out - if I'm doing this anyway, why would I not want to take the opportunity to improve my performance/fitness? (2) As a woman you might anticipate that there are specific reasons why I might want an objective measure of my level of exercise (3) If I want to want to wear a HRM for a 0.4/4/40/400 mile ride, then that's what I'll do, thanks very much!

1. Alternative answer ... why would you?
2. I've no idea 'why as a woman' you might need objective measure of your level of exercise, but I'm happy to be enlightened.
3. You asked for peoples thoughts, we don't really give that much of a stuff what you wear .....

You could just ditch all the tech mumbo-jumbo and just enjoy riding your bike, listen to the birds, enjoy the view and feel generally self-satisfied and smug about it.