Having a problem getting heart rate during my exercise routine

[Gmouse]

I have a personal trainer 3x a week, and do some TRX, weights, balance and core strength, and a few other exercises. I would like to get my heart rate during this time, but, seems to be almost impossible to get the watch to allow me to get measurements either continually, or as needed (by pressing the screen or similar). I've tried getting a few apps to help with this, but, none of them seem to do any better than the native app.

I can deliberately use the glance to go to the heart icon...then wait...until I get some kind of a reading (which then changes about 10 seconds after it appears, so, doesn't seem like it was being tracked), but, seems I shouldn't have to do that. What I need, is for some way to start it continually reading, so when I raise my wrist to look, I get my current heart rate. This just doesn't seem to much to ask, but, certainly seems to be too much to actually work.

What is the best way to make this work right? Do I need to use the native apps, or download one that works better? I'd also like to have it appear on the watch face, so I also have the time, and not JUST the heart rate.

Thanks!

 

[exxxviii]

Use the native Workout app and then select the "Other" workout type. It will display HR on the screen whenever you look at it.

 

[Newtons Apple]

I have two Apple watches and neither will track my HR dependably. I an be in the middle of a run and it will say my HR is like 67bpm or have no reading at all. I have worn both watch loose and tight and up and down my arm and they still, without warning, fail to track my HR at times.

After this post expect to see people claiming their AW does their HR perfectly and all the time but it has not been my experience from the day they were introduced to now.

 

[BlueMoon63]

I have two Apple watches and neither will track my HR dependably. I an be in the middle of a run and it will say my HR is like 67bpm or have no reading at all. I have worn both watch loose and tight and up and down my arm and they still, without warning, fail to track my HR at times.

After this post expect to see people claiming their AW does their HR perfectly and all the time but it has not been my experience from the day they were introduced to now.

Definitely start a workout using the workout app and pick other for what you are doing. That will force the watch to constantly check your heart rate instead of waiting for you to remain still for readings at specific time intervals. If you don't use the workout app and you are moving, it won't check your heart rate at all until you bring up the glance and then it can take 10-20 seconds to read and maybe the second reading to get your accurate pulse.

I think Newton is right that some have had problems and others have not. I've had a few instances where the heart reading was poor and I didn't ensure my watch was away from my wrist and attached tightly, but claiming requires proof. Here are examples with actual pictures. The first is weight lifting... The second is golfing... The third is another golf outing... The fourth is another weight lifting...

I don't think I have ever had a perfect workout but I expect more trouble while golfing and all the jolts against my arms but I am claiming the watch works and providing pictures for proof instead of just saying it works.

I will add that I have used a Fitbit as well and had slightly better results with a few less readings but nothing spectacular. Heart rate between the two were usually the same or within a beat or two but the Fitbit would have crazy high readings over 200 instead of dropping to 55.

 

[Gmouse]

Use the native Workout app and then select the "Other" workout type. It will display HR on the screen whenever you look at it.

Thanks, but, I've done that, and it takes up to 7 seconds for any initial display (other than the static, really old rate) then it typically seems to update and change 2-3 times over the next 10 seconds or so. I don't get why it just doesn't track it all the time...
[doublepost=1465522112][/doublepost]

I have two Apple watches and neither will track my HR dependably. I an be in the middle of a run and it will say my HR is like 67bpm or have no reading at all. I have worn both watch loose and tight and up and down my arm and they still, without warning, fail to track my HR at times.

After this post expect to see people claiming their AW does their HR perfectly and all the time but it has not been my experience from the day they were introduced to now.

I have to agree...for as much money as I paid, seems like this would work a LOT better and more stabile.
[doublepost=1465522197][/doublepost]

Definitely start a workout using the workout app and pick other for what you are doing. That will force the watch to constantly check your heart rate instead of waiting for you to remain still for readings at specific time intervals. If you don't use the workout app and you are moving, it won't check your heart rate at all until you bring up the glance and then it can take 10-20 seconds to read and maybe the second reading to get your accurate pulse.

I think Newton is right that some have had problems and others have not. I've had a few instances where the heart reading was poor and I didn't ensure my watch was away from my wrist and attached tightly, but claiming requires proof. Here are examples with actual pictures. The first is weight lifting... The second is golfing... The third is another golf outing... The fourth is another weight lifting...

I don't think I have ever had a perfect workout but I expect more trouble while golfing and all the jolts against my arms but I am claiming the watch works and providing pictures for proof instead of just saying it works.

I will add that I have used a Fitbit as well and had slightly better results with a few less readings but nothing spectacular. Heart rate between the two were usually the same or within a beat or two but the Fitbit would have crazy high readings over 200 instead of dropping to 55.

Thanks.

 

[exxxviii]

Thanks, but, I've done that, and it takes up to 7 seconds for any initial display (other than the static, really old rate) then it typically seems to update and change 2-3 times over the next 10 seconds or so. I don't get why it just doesn't track it all the time...

Hmmmm. I get what you are saying about the initial 7 seconds when you start a workout. Pretty much every HRM does this. But, once the workout is active, they typically update pretty quickly. I have never studied mine that closely, but I have done a crapton of exercise of all kinds of intensities, and my watch has always been within 1 BPM of other HRMs (I always workout with a Garmin alongside my AW, and I use both chest strap and a Rhythm+ HRMs with the Garmin.) Keep in mind that any HRM averages a recent few readings, so it will not change instantaneously. Perception that it is updating every few seconds may be normal for all HRMs. Do you have any reason to believe that it is inaccurate during the periods that you are not seeing changes?

 

[Gmouse]

Hmmmm. I get what you are saying about the initial 7 seconds when you start a workout. Pretty much every HRM does this. But, once the workout is active, they typically update pretty quickly. I have never studied mine that closely, but I have done a crapton of exercise of all kinds of intensities, and my watch has always been within 1 BPM of other HRMs (I always workout with a Garmin alongside my AW, and I use both chest strap and a Rhythm+ HRMs with the Garmin.) Keep in mind that any HRM averages a recent few readings, so it will not change instantaneously. Perception that it is updating every few seconds may be normal for all HRMs. Do you have any reason to believe that it is inaccurate during the periods that you are not seeing changes?

I'm not directly comparing it with some external HR measuring device, if that's what you mean, but...would stand to reason that if it's continually reading, even if not continually displaying, I would not see the wide variances I do when I view it for the first long number of seconds. I know I have an exercise bike at home with a chest-based HR measuring device, and...it just reads pretty steady (increasing as I ramp up, decreasing as I cool down) and not wild fluctuations like I see on the watch. I probably should mention that I AM just standing still, not moving or shaking my arm or wrist, when trying to get a reading--as I know others have mentioned any motion screws up the readings.

Thanks!

 

[jonnysods]

It's all these concerns and issues that have me waiting for the next gen. Really hoping to hear that their sensors are much improved. I wonder if the Fitbit HR has the same issues? Is it just the nature of a wrist worn HR sensor?

 

[Julien]

I'm not directly comparing it with some external HR measuring device, if that's what you mean, but...would stand to reason that if it's continually reading, even if not continually displaying, I would not see the wide variances I do when I view it for the first long number of seconds. I know I have an exercise bike at home with a chest-based HR measuring device, and...it just reads pretty steady (increasing as I ramp up, decreasing as I cool down) and not wild fluctuations like I see on the watch. I probably should mention that I AM just standing still, not moving or shaking my arm or wrist, when trying to get a reading--as I know others have mentioned any motion screws up the readings.

Thanks!

You are doing anaerobic constrictive exercises. Optical has a hard time reading the pulse when the tissue/blood flow is constricted. You should get and pair a BT HR strap.

 

[Newtons Apple]

It's all these concerns and issues that have me waiting for the next gen. Really hoping to hear that their sensors are much improved. I wonder if the Fitbit HR has the same issues? Is it just the nature of a wrist worn HR sensor?

Not sure about it's absolute accuracy but my Fitbit Charge HR seldom does not show my HR, even when worn so loose that it slips over my wrist bone.

 

[BarracksSi]

If you have the free time to look at your HR, you ain't working out hard enough.

 

[Newtons Apple]

If you have the free time to look at your HR, you ain't working out hard enough.

Wow, that is profoundly funny.

 

[BarracksSi]

Wow, that is profoundly funny.

Can't remember where it was from -- SNL, maybe -- but when I was a kid, we had, "That was SO funny, I forgot to laugh! Hyuk yuk yuk!"

 

[NavySEAL6]

I usually always have periods where the HR drops ridiculously as said above. I think it's a limitation of the optical HRM technology. A Bluetooth chest strap is probably way more accurate

 

[risenphoenixkai]

The optical sensors on the back of the Apple Watch only update HR readings every 10 seconds or so. Any constriction in blood flow to your extremities (as is common during weight lifting and similar exercises) will result in inaccurate readings. The solution to both of these issues is to pair the Watch with a Bluetooth chest strap - you'll get constantly updated HR readings that will be far more accurate.