Garmin Fenix 3HR - FAKE HR

[Irvin85]

So I have now used this watch for a bit more then two months now and I must say I am honestly disapointed in it.

Don't get me wrong it is a wonderful piece of equipment but if you want a watch that gives you Heart rate rather opt for the one with the Heart rate strap.

 

The Optical Heart rate meter is so inaccurate.

 

Here is my story

 

Early January after about 2 months of minimal to no excercise I decided to give the wattbike a go

 

After about 30min I thought to myself, damn but I am not that unfit as my heartrate was around 140 but I felt terrible, I almost blacked out.

 

Luckely for me I still had my Polar RCX5 so I decided to use both my watched the next time. One will give me Optical HR from my wrist and the other from my chest strap.

 

So after the next wattbike session I realised that I am indeed really unfit and that that the Optical HR is not working.

I took the watch to Navworld and they exchanged it for me under warranty

 

Now with new Garmin fenix 3HR I decided to do 3 different test in 2 days.

 

1. Gym workout (High intensity bodyweight training)

2. Running

3. 15min Arm Cycle and 15 min Rowing.

 

1. Gym Workout

 

The garmin never seem to get a proper reading during the short but intense workout.

it was only 16min long.

Here are the stats :

Garmin - Average HR 89 Max HR 111

Polar - Average HR 137 Max HR 161

 

2. Running (Treadmill)

 

The Garmin never went near my actual hearrate, I was giving it my all and I am very unfit at the moment so Hearrate was close to max

 

Here are the stats:

Garmin - Average HR138 Max 160

Polar - Average HR 160 Max 179

 

3.Rowing

 

I started of with a Hand cycle, fast short movements and for a moment n thought that the garmin have eventually waken out of the summer hibernation and started working but the moment that I started rowing it all went pear shaped.

 

Here are the stats:

Garmin - Average HR 138 Max HR 165

Polar - Average HR 157 Max HR 176

 

No this looks quite close especially if you take the latter two workouts into consideration but it you look at the heartrate graphs you will see what slump in heartrate it showed when I was actually pushing it the hardest.

 

Conclusion

 

The optical HR sensor is as inaccurate as Zuma's state of the nations adress.

The more you move the higher your heart rate is on the watch, So if you are stationary on a Wattbike and do not move yourarms alot then your hear rate will probably be very low.

 

On the last workout it was clear that the Optical HR sensor should be renamed to an optical movement sensor.

 

 

[EmJayZA]

Well. ****. Now I am not going to trust the readings which is going to make me question my training. Will also test and report back. 

[mon-goose]

haven't heard great comments on the optical hr on any unit. Think it's more of a gimmick. If you want true HR capabilities then go for the strap

[Speeltyd]

I am a bit confused....what is Optical HR?

I have a Garmin Vivoactive HR which measures HR on my wrist. Have had it for 6 months now, am very active, and the HR readings are spot-on. I often use it together with my chest-strap monitor linked to my CycleOps trainer, and even sometimes together with my Edge520. Always the same.

[mon-goose]

think it's called optical, maybe wrong.  Basically the hr that it takes on your wrist under the watch

[Patchelicious]

If you want accurate data, rather stick to the chest based straps for now.

 

Wrist based HR is like traffic signs in JHB, they are more a suggestion than the truth.

[Irvin85]

The bad thing is Garmin does not come back to me regarding my issues. 

 

The Optical HR is suppose to measure the Blood flow to your hand by the use of infrared lights. 

They say tattoos or even a hairy arm may cause it to be inaccurate but I do not have hairy arms or any tattoos. 

 

I will try and return the watch over the weekend. Not sure if I should just get the normal one now or another brand. I quite liked Garmin up until recently. 

Service is shocking but I will recommend Navworld any time of the day. 

[jules1976]

If you want accurate data, rather stick to the chest based straps for now.

 

Wrist based HR is like traffic signs in JHB, they are more a suggestion than the truth.

too Funny Patches

[AdrianDJ]

My girlfriend just got the forerunner 35, and when testing the optical HR against her strap its almost exactly the same. slightly more delayed but pretty darn acurate. 

 

Could you send a picture of where on your wrist you are wearing it? 

[Irvin85]

My girlfriend just got the forerunner 35, and when testing the optical HR against her strap its almost exactly the same. slightly more delayed but pretty darn acurate. 

 

Could you send a picture of where on your wrist you are wearing it? 

Yes i will do so, but I have moved it around, taken it off changed the wrist. Tried everything. 

 

Is she wearing to different watches to compare it at the same time? 

[lerouc]

I recently got a FR 225 and i must agree, used it with a belt and compared it to the results and it was out with 1 bpm. Also read up quite a bit about it on DCrainmaker and his testing was also that Garmin's optical HR is spot on compared to a belt.

 

Maybe your unit is faulty? Is it maybe not too loose? Have you given it to someone else to wear and compare?

[Irvin85]

I recently got a FR 225 and i must agree, used it with a belt and compared it to the results and it was out with 1 bpm. Also read up quite a bit about it on DCrainmaker and his testing was also that Garmin's optical HR is spot on compared to a belt.

 

Maybe your unit is faulty? Is it maybe not too loose? Have you given it to someone else to wear and compare?

This is my second unit with the same issue. I have tightened it so that it cannot move on my arm and have made it loose so that it moves. same issue. 

 

It simply doesn't give accurate readings. Maybe I am not human without a pulse at my arm

[Rudi Pollard]

I have a Forerunner 235 which uses the same sensor as the Fenix3HR and I have none of these problems. I have compared it to my chest strap on the Edge 520 on multiple occasions and it was at most 2 bpm off the chest strap.

 

The only circumstances where I have seen a drop like your graphs is when I use it in a pool. Then it is way off, but they never advertised that it would provide accurate HR metrics while swimming so its not a deal breaker.

 

BTW, navworld is the official Garmin walk in service center in Gauteng. Any garmin related issues are handled by Navworld.

[Irvin85]

I have read that you are suppose to wear it just above the wrist bone. Now maybe I am using it wrong or something and I am willing to test it to make sure. 

 

Should I move it up so that the strap is just above the wrist bone or should the unit sit directly on the wrist bone? 

 

Any help is welcome, As I really do like the watch but this HR issue is driving me insane. 

[JanJan]

It may not have any influence, but maybe try to wet your wrist surface before you put on the watch. There may be some conductivity issues similar to chest straps.

 

The weirdest is that the profile looks the same as the Polar, except  20-30 bpm less.

[Skott5]

It's needs to sit firmly against your skin to work properly.

Some guys like to wear their watches a bit looser and then it wont work accurately.

 

The HR function is meant as a convenience tool, to measure HR without a strap. I doubt it was designed to be the most accurate HR device around.

I found mine to be pretty good.