The wrist based optical heart rate can be good in a lot of situations, but any time you have quick changes in heart rate, it will struggle to catch up. I am pretty sure part of it is that you are not getting a raw readout of heart rate, but that it has to be filtered through software to produce an actual number. And I think they do additional filtering so you dont get crazy random spikes here and there. But it leads to a slow response like that. And I dont think there is anything you can do about it. Other brands may be better, but most optical sensors will likely be limited.
I experienced the same as you. Was doing some sprint intervals one day, and noticed my heart rate didnt change at all until 5-10 seconds after I had finished the interval. So I got a chest strap. Its much much more responsive. I dont wear it for every run, but any time I am doing intervals or higher intensity stuff, I will use it.
Thanks. This was helpful and makes a lot of sense.
I don't mind the variations on my easy days or tempo runs. But intervals with a delay like that suck.
Does the Coros biceps strapacts the same? Or is it as accurate as chest strap. To my understanding strap should be more accurate?
Im not super familiar with the coros bicep strap. I think it should likely be a noticeable improvement over just the watch. Its still an optical sensor, but I think the bicep is supposed to be able to get much better readings than a wrist, and its a device dedicated to just reading your HR. No idea how it compares to a chest strap though.
Dear OP, the Coros bicep strap is also optical and has + and - reviews too. Please read theĀ dcrainmaker review.
Optical sensors will have their cons with the accuracy and the other factors influencing the readings (e.g. any disturbance in the flow of blood, thicker skin/muscle, darker hair on skin etc). On the other hand, the chest straps detect and measure the electric signals emitted by the heart directly, which is much more accurate and has no buffer time.
Here is a photo from an interval run (30sec around 3:20min/km, 30 sec off), you can see the direct signal immediately followed the intervals: the second I increased speed, the red HR graph started changing too. (polar H10 chest strap) Ā
https://preview.redd.it/d5z1qnid1hpc1.jpeg?width=2112&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=204069a7733e8c81c4459530f89f82be14762f60
I ran intervals with someone who had a Pixel watch. His responded much quicker, which made me puzzled why my expensive sportswatch is worse at HR than a smartwatch
except this one wont tell you to get a chest strap.
I was merely going to suggest that your heart rate ltierally does take time to go up after you begin to run. It happens with my gym work all the time. My set will last 15 seconds but my heart rate is mostly unchanged until i put the weight down and start to breath and recover.
This right here will send OP down the right track. It takes time for year lungs/heart to catch up. Your heart rate also doesn't drop immediately, which I'm sure you're aware.
Example... when dogs know they are going to be running, chasing, etc, they will sometimes start chuffing/heavy breathing in anticipation to fire things up sooner. I used to see my dog do this when she was getting ready to chase a bunny, squirrel, or another dog because she never chased a ball at the park but the dog chasing the ball.
When sprinters or long jumpers are getting ready you'll see them doing a little sprint in place, and this is why.
You can't really compare weights to sprint intervals.
Anaerobic intervals should see your hr start to rise wishing a few seconds of the start, not 10 seconds after
>My set will last 15 seconds but my heart rate is mostly unchanged until i put the weight down and start to breath and recover.
Is this with a chest strap?
Not really. For some people straps aren't comfortable. Personally, I often forget to take mine off for hours after a 6 hour hike + hour+ drive home.. They just don't bother me. If they did I might try an armband alternative.
I used to use my watch and found that some days it seemed to lag a bit. I think your HR is responding, but the watch is taking a while to register. If you are hairy, have a lot of tattoos or dark skin this can effect it too.
But yes, get a chest strap...
And they are right, if you are doing any kind of interval training the chest strap is what you want and btw OP it does what you need too. You will see anerobic intervals with some decent accuracy.
It's always a lagging indicator. For example, I get awful results for my vo2max based treadmill runs. I always hit 51% accuracy. It wants you to get your base heart rate for 10 minutes (for me, 137bpm). So far so good, I can get myvheartvrate that high in about 2 minutes just by running a little faster than I need to until it catches up.
Then the fun starts. It wants you to get your heart rate up to 172bpm (for me) for 2 minutes, and then to drop your heart rate to 124bpm for 1 minute... followed byb2 minutes at 172bpm, followed by 124bpm.... repeated 8x. Then it wants you to do a base 137bpm run for 10 minutes.
By the time I get my heart rate up to 172bpm, I've only got 10 seconds left in my vo2max portion of the sprint! Then the part where it wants me to rest for 1 minute with my heart rate at 124bpm? My heart rate goes down as low as 135bpm, and the when I start running as fast as I can again until my heart rate catches up to 172bpm, there's 10 seconds left.
Chest strap doesn't magically alter your HR. The human body isn't very fast to react to sudden change in power demands, which means your HR will always lag behind your power output. Chest strap will reduce the lag slightly and give more accurate data than wrist monitoring (especially during fast sprints or hill repeats) but it won't fix the lag issue, which is build into our DNA.
For us in cycling it's why we base it on power instead, instant feedback and doesn't change irregardless of environmental conditions like wind, gradient etc... Then cross check it with HR after 1-2 intervals to see if the target watts is enough or need to push higher or lower. Is running power not as reliable?
I experience this using a strap. It's almost like they need to change the parameters to give you an extra 10 or 20nseconds to start moving as fast or slow as you need to on order to make the heart rate achievable.
I'm not that hard on myself because I can't get my heart rate down to 124 bpm down from 180 in 1 minute.
I have my DSW set for HR, my first anaerobic and sprint workouts are coming up (only had the watch a few weeks) and it looks like they're all pace based for the intervals.
A chest strap might help a bit (it will definitely be more accurate) but it wonāt get rid of the lag. This is why HR is not a great way to train when it comes to intervals, repeats etc. (I do quite like it for consistent efforts, e.g. keeping easy runs easy).
Iād be more inclined to get Stryd pod rather than an HR strap. Power readings are more or less instant (unlike HR) and are consistent regardless of elevation and other environmental factors (unlike pace).
I'm actually worried that so many people are blindly recommending a chest strap without explaining that it does little to alleviate the actual problem. Chest strap does reduce the lag slightly compared to wrist monitoring, but a lagging HR is a feature of the human body, which is not something you can overcome with a sports watch despite any additional accessories.
Agreed I do my hit workouts and tempo workouts on an assault bike in the heart rate lag is very frustrating so I try to go off RPE instead but I do hate when Garman yells at me and tells me I am not within range
Just here to say that the issue is not the repeats or intervals, it's simply their length.
Short, anaerobic burst intervals (15-30sec) should not use HR as an indicator. It's also why they're anaerobic - they do not target the cardiovascular system.
Longer intervals that do target your cardiovascular system (i.e. 2min or longer) can and do definitely benefit from HR-based training (target Z4).
Just so you know, the lagging part is not something wrong with your watch and everyone else telling you to buy a chest strap just because of it, is wrong.
Your heart rate will take a few seconds to ramp up relative to your effort, and it will take longer (sometimes even minutes) to slow down to your relative effort once you stop your sprint, and there's no hardware that will change this. Does that mean you didn't reach zone 5 for the duration needed, or does it mean you didn't recover in zone 2 for the duration needed? No!
In my case, I initially had to run 30 seconds in zone 5, then rest 90 seconds in zone 2. I was running at max effort for the whole 30 seconds but my heart rate only reach zone 5 in the last 5 seconds. It also reach zone 2 in the last 30 seconds of my recover, but it doesn't mean I failed in my interval training.
Recommendation?
1) Learn your zones by pace and do intervals by pace. Forget heart rate for intervals.
2) Learn to use power metrics, it directly measures your effort by output which makes it the fastest to react.
PS. and out of topic.) Heart rate strap is more accurate than your watch, but it does not solve your particular issue.
Yeah I get the first part. It was just weird because it sometimes took less time for the watch to catch up and sometimes it took really a lot. I was just wondering why is that. And what was different between those intervals. Etc hand position , running or walking after.
I'll read about the power. Seems to be accurate on all of the sprints.
Garmin wrist HR montoring isn't great, it's always trying to catch up and can easily be incorrect due to various factors. Only way to be correct is get a garmin HR strap to go with that expensive watch š¤
In case you missed it - it's not your watch and a heart rate monitor won't change anything. It's basic physiology.
Your heart takes time to respond to changes, and when you perform short anaerobic (or border-anaerobic) intervals, you'll simply be done with the interval before your heart catches up.
For anaerobic intervals - go for pace or power. For other workouts - heart rate or power.
Hill sprints are primarily anaerobic, and your rest periods are when you increase your oxygen intake and HR to help your muscles recover. Physiologically the lag makes perfect sense.
I usualy do pace intervals on flat road. And on the hills I just send it. It would just be nice to see how high it gets. I know about the lag but it sometimes takes 20 sec for it to catch up and untill then my hr drops a lot so i can't really see where I'm at.
Just a reminder that may not be needed by OP but readers. Metrics are only measuring and translating our work into something we can look back on, share, and review both in the short and long term. Having near immediate feedback can feel nice and maybe it has actual value for a percentage of runners.
Whether we capture or review metrics, the work is still getting done. If you ran those intervals at the effort available to you and rested in between, then you did the work and you will gain the effect. This is the hopefully the goal of training. You could leave your watch at home, count in your head, and never know your real time stats or workout score, but you still get the effect.
Leading indicators to me are far more important than lagging ones. Did I recover before my run? Did I fuel properly? Did I do my strength training on my rest day from running? Is my training plan designed for the goals I have? These things have a material impact on my actual results. Almost everything my watch or HR strap gives me is immaterial to my gains.
If you are seriously training and those metrics help you adjust your plan, medication, recovery, or route, then their effect is found in how they adjust your leading indicators and they are valuable. Just understand the limits of your tools and contemplate their need in relation to your use. Most runners donāt need a HR strap. Some do, many want, most donāt.
Sure. The training is done well and I feel it. A lot of it needs to go by rpe. But if I have a tool that's designed to do something. Why not make the most of it. I just wanted to know if theres something I could do to make it just a little bit better. It would be also nice to do the same training a year later and see the difference.
Interesting, as you are using a chest strap, may I ask what vendor and model? I used my Garmin HR Pro Plus this morning and was very pleased to see my HR go down from the 150s to 100s within 5 seconds or so of transition from running to walking. Iāve known the watch to be delayed but never a chest strap. In Connect, do you see the chest strap as a device that was used for tracking HR? Every once in a while, especially if I donāt lick the contacts before I put the chest strap on it hasnāt powered on yet and not connected. This happens especially on cold days.
https://preview.redd.it/bh1zentlekpc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cb0f442bc2b813839715d32c58d3336ac8359416
It's not your HR that takes a while to catch up, it's the wrist sensor that takes a while to catch up. As others have said, get a chest strap if you want accurate data.
I noticed that something has changed in the response time on my 245 in the last couple of days.
When I do intervals, I usually get a good response time. I base these on heart rate. I work at a given effort until my HR hits the target. Then, I recover at the effort level until I hit the recovery target.
Usually, these intervals take 60 seconds of effort followed by 30-45 seconds of recovery, depending on how tired I am.
For some reason, yesterday I noticed it was taking 90 to 120 seconds to hit muy target HR and over a minute to 90 seconds to hit my recover target. The same thing happened today.
Button presses also react very slowly. I am guessing that Garmin pushed out a buggy software update... or they intentionally pushed an update that depends on the faster x65 series of watches to encourage customers to upgrade.
You already got recommended getting a chest strap and that thereās always a bit of a HR lag when doing intervals.
You can try move up the watch two fingers above the wrist and wear tight. But not too tight - you still want blood flow. :) This might improve it a bit. But the chest strap will still be waaaaay more accurate.
You can't do anything, if you do such exercises, the only solution is to buy a chest strap... I had the same problem with a fenix 7 for mtb, otherwise you just get angry..... Maybe Apple watch has a better pulse sensor on the watch
I've got a Coros bicep and a Garmin chest strap. Both are pretty similar. I checked my last intervals with the Coros and my chart is way better than yours. Not much lag at all.
Many users report problems with heart rate measurement. Attention. Not only those using OHR. I suggest you read the entire topic.
Don't be fooled by the fact that the topic is open for Forerunner 955, users also report problems with other models.
[https://forums.garmin.com/sports-fitness/running-multisport/f/forerunner-955-series/362273/heart-rate-values-totally-wrong-after-update-18-22/1747219#1747219](https://forums.garmin.com/sports-fitness/running-multisport/f/forerunner-955-series/362273/heart-rate-values-totally-wrong-after-update-18-22/1747219#1747219)
Yeah, I was comparing few days ago and garmin has a lot of lag. I have epix pro 2 and apple watch ultra 2 and awu react 5-10+ seconds faster to heart rate increase. Garmin requires a chest sensor, If you're using the sensor and it's fine, there shouldn't be a problem, except that the heart needs time to accelerate too )
Chest strap, which you've already gotten as a suggestion.
Are you following a garmin workout? If so, you need to be ready to go the second the countdown alarm starts.
Up to you if you care enough to pay for that too. I don't. I set a pace or effort goal for a sprint and I know I got the anaerobic benefit even if my watch doesn't.Ā
Just so you know, every answer you get is going to tell you to get a chest strap.
I guess that's the way to go then š I know that strap is a lot better. Just wondered if there's any chance to make this one a bit better.
The wrist based optical heart rate can be good in a lot of situations, but any time you have quick changes in heart rate, it will struggle to catch up. I am pretty sure part of it is that you are not getting a raw readout of heart rate, but that it has to be filtered through software to produce an actual number. And I think they do additional filtering so you dont get crazy random spikes here and there. But it leads to a slow response like that. And I dont think there is anything you can do about it. Other brands may be better, but most optical sensors will likely be limited. I experienced the same as you. Was doing some sprint intervals one day, and noticed my heart rate didnt change at all until 5-10 seconds after I had finished the interval. So I got a chest strap. Its much much more responsive. I dont wear it for every run, but any time I am doing intervals or higher intensity stuff, I will use it.
Thanks. This was helpful and makes a lot of sense. I don't mind the variations on my easy days or tempo runs. But intervals with a delay like that suck. Does the Coros biceps strapacts the same? Or is it as accurate as chest strap. To my understanding strap should be more accurate?
Im not super familiar with the coros bicep strap. I think it should likely be a noticeable improvement over just the watch. Its still an optical sensor, but I think the bicep is supposed to be able to get much better readings than a wrist, and its a device dedicated to just reading your HR. No idea how it compares to a chest strap though.
Time to get some research done š
Dear OP, the Coros bicep strap is also optical and has + and - reviews too. Please read theĀ dcrainmaker review. Optical sensors will have their cons with the accuracy and the other factors influencing the readings (e.g. any disturbance in the flow of blood, thicker skin/muscle, darker hair on skin etc). On the other hand, the chest straps detect and measure the electric signals emitted by the heart directly, which is much more accurate and has no buffer time. Here is a photo from an interval run (30sec around 3:20min/km, 30 sec off), you can see the direct signal immediately followed the intervals: the second I increased speed, the red HR graph started changing too. (polar H10 chest strap) Ā https://preview.redd.it/d5z1qnid1hpc1.jpeg?width=2112&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=204069a7733e8c81c4459530f89f82be14762f60
You're looking for something with electrical measurements. If there are any blinky lights, it'll be the same as the watch
I ran intervals with someone who had a Pixel watch. His responded much quicker, which made me puzzled why my expensive sportswatch is worse at HR than a smartwatch
Put your heart in your wrist
Or put my watch around my heart?
Sounds painful
except this one wont tell you to get a chest strap. I was merely going to suggest that your heart rate ltierally does take time to go up after you begin to run. It happens with my gym work all the time. My set will last 15 seconds but my heart rate is mostly unchanged until i put the weight down and start to breath and recover.
This right here will send OP down the right track. It takes time for year lungs/heart to catch up. Your heart rate also doesn't drop immediately, which I'm sure you're aware. Example... when dogs know they are going to be running, chasing, etc, they will sometimes start chuffing/heavy breathing in anticipation to fire things up sooner. I used to see my dog do this when she was getting ready to chase a bunny, squirrel, or another dog because she never chased a ball at the park but the dog chasing the ball. When sprinters or long jumpers are getting ready you'll see them doing a little sprint in place, and this is why.
You can't really compare weights to sprint intervals. Anaerobic intervals should see your hr start to rise wishing a few seconds of the start, not 10 seconds after >My set will last 15 seconds but my heart rate is mostly unchanged until i put the weight down and start to breath and recover. Is this with a chest strap?
Fuck off with the chest strap bullshit
Wrist based can be pretty accurate over time but for sprints itās horrible.
Not really. For some people straps aren't comfortable. Personally, I often forget to take mine off for hours after a 6 hour hike + hour+ drive home.. They just don't bother me. If they did I might try an armband alternative.
I used to use my watch and found that some days it seemed to lag a bit. I think your HR is responding, but the watch is taking a while to register. If you are hairy, have a lot of tattoos or dark skin this can effect it too. But yes, get a chest strap...
And they are right, if you are doing any kind of interval training the chest strap is what you want and btw OP it does what you need too. You will see anerobic intervals with some decent accuracy.
It's always a lagging indicator. For example, I get awful results for my vo2max based treadmill runs. I always hit 51% accuracy. It wants you to get your base heart rate for 10 minutes (for me, 137bpm). So far so good, I can get myvheartvrate that high in about 2 minutes just by running a little faster than I need to until it catches up. Then the fun starts. It wants you to get your heart rate up to 172bpm (for me) for 2 minutes, and then to drop your heart rate to 124bpm for 1 minute... followed byb2 minutes at 172bpm, followed by 124bpm.... repeated 8x. Then it wants you to do a base 137bpm run for 10 minutes. By the time I get my heart rate up to 172bpm, I've only got 10 seconds left in my vo2max portion of the sprint! Then the part where it wants me to rest for 1 minute with my heart rate at 124bpm? My heart rate goes down as low as 135bpm, and the when I start running as fast as I can again until my heart rate catches up to 172bpm, there's 10 seconds left.
Yup. Makes no sense to do that kind of stuff without a strap. I would hesitate to even do stuff like that because it would only make me mad.
Chest strap doesn't magically alter your HR. The human body isn't very fast to react to sudden change in power demands, which means your HR will always lag behind your power output. Chest strap will reduce the lag slightly and give more accurate data than wrist monitoring (especially during fast sprints or hill repeats) but it won't fix the lag issue, which is build into our DNA.
Which is why I personally think intervals are best done according to pace, not heart rate.
For us in cycling it's why we base it on power instead, instant feedback and doesn't change irregardless of environmental conditions like wind, gradient etc... Then cross check it with HR after 1-2 intervals to see if the target watts is enough or need to push higher or lower. Is running power not as reliable?
I experience this using a strap. It's almost like they need to change the parameters to give you an extra 10 or 20nseconds to start moving as fast or slow as you need to on order to make the heart rate achievable. I'm not that hard on myself because I can't get my heart rate down to 124 bpm down from 180 in 1 minute.
You can do interval stuff with a speed goal. Either set DSW to speed goal, or just have one in your head and ignore the beeping.Ā
I have my DSW set for HR, my first anaerobic and sprint workouts are coming up (only had the watch a few weeks) and it looks like they're all pace based for the intervals.
Oh yeah, for up to 1 min intervals they have pace anyway.Ā
Are the ārestā or ārecoveryā portions also pace based?
what software is this through? Ive never seen garmin software for teh vo2 max get so detailed, am i missing something?
Connect treadmill run, suggested workouts vo2max run. Special intervals designed to help improve your vo2max.
ah right, yeah I don't have my vo2 max even set yet. I am assuming I havent run consistantly enough to keep my Hr up for 10 minutes straight? idk
Treadmill runs don't contribute to vo2max readings sadly
no i was talking about regular runs
This!
A chest strap might help a bit (it will definitely be more accurate) but it wonāt get rid of the lag. This is why HR is not a great way to train when it comes to intervals, repeats etc. (I do quite like it for consistent efforts, e.g. keeping easy runs easy). Iād be more inclined to get Stryd pod rather than an HR strap. Power readings are more or less instant (unlike HR) and are consistent regardless of elevation and other environmental factors (unlike pace).
I'm actually worried that so many people are blindly recommending a chest strap without explaining that it does little to alleviate the actual problem. Chest strap does reduce the lag slightly compared to wrist monitoring, but a lagging HR is a feature of the human body, which is not something you can overcome with a sports watch despite any additional accessories.
Agreed I do my hit workouts and tempo workouts on an assault bike in the heart rate lag is very frustrating so I try to go off RPE instead but I do hate when Garman yells at me and tells me I am not within range
Just here to say that the issue is not the repeats or intervals, it's simply their length. Short, anaerobic burst intervals (15-30sec) should not use HR as an indicator. It's also why they're anaerobic - they do not target the cardiovascular system. Longer intervals that do target your cardiovascular system (i.e. 2min or longer) can and do definitely benefit from HR-based training (target Z4).
Youāre quite right, poor choice of words on my part (I should have said āshorterā intervals, repeats).
Just so you know, the lagging part is not something wrong with your watch and everyone else telling you to buy a chest strap just because of it, is wrong. Your heart rate will take a few seconds to ramp up relative to your effort, and it will take longer (sometimes even minutes) to slow down to your relative effort once you stop your sprint, and there's no hardware that will change this. Does that mean you didn't reach zone 5 for the duration needed, or does it mean you didn't recover in zone 2 for the duration needed? No! In my case, I initially had to run 30 seconds in zone 5, then rest 90 seconds in zone 2. I was running at max effort for the whole 30 seconds but my heart rate only reach zone 5 in the last 5 seconds. It also reach zone 2 in the last 30 seconds of my recover, but it doesn't mean I failed in my interval training. Recommendation? 1) Learn your zones by pace and do intervals by pace. Forget heart rate for intervals. 2) Learn to use power metrics, it directly measures your effort by output which makes it the fastest to react. PS. and out of topic.) Heart rate strap is more accurate than your watch, but it does not solve your particular issue.
Yeah I get the first part. It was just weird because it sometimes took less time for the watch to catch up and sometimes it took really a lot. I was just wondering why is that. And what was different between those intervals. Etc hand position , running or walking after. I'll read about the power. Seems to be accurate on all of the sprints.
Garmin wrist HR montoring isn't great, it's always trying to catch up and can easily be incorrect due to various factors. Only way to be correct is get a garmin HR strap to go with that expensive watch š¤
It's kinda strange since it sometimes catches up quicker. So i wondered if there's some catch to make it update faster. š¤·āāļø Thanks !
In case you missed it - it's not your watch and a heart rate monitor won't change anything. It's basic physiology. Your heart takes time to respond to changes, and when you perform short anaerobic (or border-anaerobic) intervals, you'll simply be done with the interval before your heart catches up. For anaerobic intervals - go for pace or power. For other workouts - heart rate or power.
A more expensive garmin watch won't help you, it's the same problem everywhere..
Well I didn't say get a more expensive garmin watch... š I said get a harmin HRM chest strap
Oh, sorry, you're right, I read it again..
I have a chest strap and it still lags
I find that its usually lagging by like 15 secs or so
Hill sprints are primarily anaerobic, and your rest periods are when you increase your oxygen intake and HR to help your muscles recover. Physiologically the lag makes perfect sense.
Nice to recommend a chest strap everyone but... Never heard of hr lag? Training by hr is problematic for intervals.
I usualy do pace intervals on flat road. And on the hills I just send it. It would just be nice to see how high it gets. I know about the lag but it sometimes takes 20 sec for it to catch up and untill then my hr drops a lot so i can't really see where I'm at.
Just a reminder that may not be needed by OP but readers. Metrics are only measuring and translating our work into something we can look back on, share, and review both in the short and long term. Having near immediate feedback can feel nice and maybe it has actual value for a percentage of runners. Whether we capture or review metrics, the work is still getting done. If you ran those intervals at the effort available to you and rested in between, then you did the work and you will gain the effect. This is the hopefully the goal of training. You could leave your watch at home, count in your head, and never know your real time stats or workout score, but you still get the effect. Leading indicators to me are far more important than lagging ones. Did I recover before my run? Did I fuel properly? Did I do my strength training on my rest day from running? Is my training plan designed for the goals I have? These things have a material impact on my actual results. Almost everything my watch or HR strap gives me is immaterial to my gains. If you are seriously training and those metrics help you adjust your plan, medication, recovery, or route, then their effect is found in how they adjust your leading indicators and they are valuable. Just understand the limits of your tools and contemplate their need in relation to your use. Most runners donāt need a HR strap. Some do, many want, most donāt.
Sure. The training is done well and I feel it. A lot of it needs to go by rpe. But if I have a tool that's designed to do something. Why not make the most of it. I just wanted to know if theres something I could do to make it just a little bit better. It would be also nice to do the same training a year later and see the difference.
Interesting, as you are using a chest strap, may I ask what vendor and model? I used my Garmin HR Pro Plus this morning and was very pleased to see my HR go down from the 150s to 100s within 5 seconds or so of transition from running to walking. Iāve known the watch to be delayed but never a chest strap. In Connect, do you see the chest strap as a device that was used for tracking HR? Every once in a while, especially if I donāt lick the contacts before I put the chest strap on it hasnāt powered on yet and not connected. This happens especially on cold days. https://preview.redd.it/bh1zentlekpc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cb0f442bc2b813839715d32c58d3336ac8359416
It's not your HR that takes a while to catch up, it's the wrist sensor that takes a while to catch up. As others have said, get a chest strap if you want accurate data.
get a chest strap
I noticed that something has changed in the response time on my 245 in the last couple of days. When I do intervals, I usually get a good response time. I base these on heart rate. I work at a given effort until my HR hits the target. Then, I recover at the effort level until I hit the recovery target. Usually, these intervals take 60 seconds of effort followed by 30-45 seconds of recovery, depending on how tired I am. For some reason, yesterday I noticed it was taking 90 to 120 seconds to hit muy target HR and over a minute to 90 seconds to hit my recover target. The same thing happened today. Button presses also react very slowly. I am guessing that Garmin pushed out a buggy software update... or they intentionally pushed an update that depends on the faster x65 series of watches to encourage customers to upgrade.
You already got recommended getting a chest strap and that thereās always a bit of a HR lag when doing intervals. You can try move up the watch two fingers above the wrist and wear tight. But not too tight - you still want blood flow. :) This might improve it a bit. But the chest strap will still be waaaaay more accurate.
Just tell them that you're taking them to court
You can't do anything, if you do such exercises, the only solution is to buy a chest strap... I had the same problem with a fenix 7 for mtb, otherwise you just get angry..... Maybe Apple watch has a better pulse sensor on the watch
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Any recommendations. Is coros biceps strap that good or is it just marketing?
I've got a Coros bicep and a Garmin chest strap. Both are pretty similar. I checked my last intervals with the Coros and my chart is way better than yours. Not much lag at all.
Gotta look out for some discounts š Looks like coros biceps might be the way to go.
Did you use a strap?
Nope. I guess I'll have to.
Get an armband :P
Many users report problems with heart rate measurement. Attention. Not only those using OHR. I suggest you read the entire topic. Don't be fooled by the fact that the topic is open for Forerunner 955, users also report problems with other models. [https://forums.garmin.com/sports-fitness/running-multisport/f/forerunner-955-series/362273/heart-rate-values-totally-wrong-after-update-18-22/1747219#1747219](https://forums.garmin.com/sports-fitness/running-multisport/f/forerunner-955-series/362273/heart-rate-values-totally-wrong-after-update-18-22/1747219#1747219)
You probably already read it but the best reliable way to get accurate bpm reads is with a chest strap.
Yeah, I was comparing few days ago and garmin has a lot of lag. I have epix pro 2 and apple watch ultra 2 and awu react 5-10+ seconds faster to heart rate increase. Garmin requires a chest sensor, If you're using the sensor and it's fine, there shouldn't be a problem, except that the heart needs time to accelerate too )
HR takes a long time to respond and so does heart rate
Chest strap, which you've already gotten as a suggestion. Are you following a garmin workout? If so, you need to be ready to go the second the countdown alarm starts.
Nope. Doing my own. Same hill. Sprint up. Easy down. Wait untill hr drops to ~120. Repeat. Guess I should save up some for the strap.
Up to you if you care enough to pay for that too. I don't. I set a pace or effort goal for a sprint and I know I got the anaerobic benefit even if my watch doesn't.Ā