3 ms·

My suspicion is that Apple switched monitoring types to better manage battery life and to continue to walk the fine line of the Apple Watch not actually being a

My suspicion is that Apple switched monitoring types to better manage battery life and to continue to walk the fine line of the Apple Watch not actually being a health device (from an FDA perspective)

quitit 2y ago
It's very likely the case, since heart rate measurement is a significant burner of apple watch battery. As a comparison when using a bluetooth chest strap with my apple watch the battery life during a 90 minute workout barely drops at all. The chest strap also provides a much higher frequency of reads, making it more useful for workouts that involve lots of heart rate change such as weights training and crossfit. The Apple watch's heart rate monitor is great for a wrist-worn device, but it's lower frequency of reads make it better suited to exercises where the heart rate doesn't change drastically such as swimming, jogging, walking, rowing, elliptical etc.
- malshe 2y ago
  The bluetooth chest strap sounds interesting. Can you please share the brand name of the one you are using?
  - quitit 2y ago
    I use the wahoo fitness brand chest strap. I like it because it's barebones, clipping on the strap activates it and then it's just a standard bluetooth health device that the watch can see and utilise. When paired to the watch, the built-in sensor switches off, which is easy to confirm visually. For comparison: Where the watch's in-built sensor will give me around 12 readings a minute the strap gives me 60 (and this one is around 10 years old now). That's quite useful for HIIT, as well as getting a better judgment for how your heart rate is recovering after brief periods of intensity.
    - quitit 2y ago
      I thought to add: I checked to see if this brand still exists and it seems they do and it’s now a rechargeable device yielding a good IP rating. No word on how many readings it performs a minute other than “real time”.
      - malshe 2y ago
        Thanks
  - labcomputer 2y ago
    Any BLE HR strap should work. They all use a CR2032 coin cell that lasts several months. * The Wahoo chest strap is more comfortable and more convenient to don and doff (it uses a snap at the front) and easier to change the battery. Main disadvantage is that the battery door is a known weak point (but you can 3D print a replacement) and can leak sweat inside, which causes galvanic corrosion on the circuit board. Also, it is sensitive to battery condition: silently stops transmitting, or transmits bad data when the battery is low. * The Garmin chest strap is less comfortable because the strap bunches up. Also, the plastic hook rubs on your ribs. It's less sensitive to battery condition and gives accurate low battery warnings, but you need a tiny torx (maybe a T1 or T2?) to replace the battery, which is annoying. On the other hand, the battery needs changing less frequently than on Wahoo's strap. I haven't tried Polar's chest strap, but it looks to be designed like Wahoo. Wahoo's arm strap (optical, like Apple Watch) seems to have less reliable data (like all optical straps). The battery only lasts ~6-8 hours, and requires a proprietary cable to charge. If you have any other fitness devices, like a bicycle GPS head unit or a GPS running watch, I would look for straps that are dual protocol (BLE / ANT+). ANT+ just works better than BLE: Easier pairing, lower energy consumption, fewer data dropouts.
    - malshe 2y ago
      Thank you. I will check out Wahoo.

quitit 2y ago

It's very likely the case, since heart rate measurement is a significant burner of apple watch battery. As a comparison when using a bluetooth chest strap with my apple watch the battery life during a 90 minute workout barely drops at all. The chest strap also provides a much higher frequency of reads, making it more useful for workouts that involve lots of heart rate change such as weights training and crossfit. The Apple watch's heart rate monitor is great for a wrist-worn device, but it's lower frequency of reads make it better suited to exercises where the heart rate doesn't change drastically such as swimming, jogging, walking, rowing, elliptical etc.

malshe 2y ago
The bluetooth chest strap sounds interesting. Can you please share the brand name of the one you are using?
- quitit 2y ago
  I use the wahoo fitness brand chest strap. I like it because it's barebones, clipping on the strap activates it and then it's just a standard bluetooth health device that the watch can see and utilise. When paired to the watch, the built-in sensor switches off, which is easy to confirm visually. For comparison: Where the watch's in-built sensor will give me around 12 readings a minute the strap gives me 60 (and this one is around 10 years old now). That's quite useful for HIIT, as well as getting a better judgment for how your heart rate is recovering after brief periods of intensity.
  - quitit 2y ago
    I thought to add: I checked to see if this brand still exists and it seems they do and it’s now a rechargeable device yielding a good IP rating. No word on how many readings it performs a minute other than “real time”.
    - malshe 2y ago
      Thanks
- labcomputer 2y ago
  Any BLE HR strap should work. They all use a CR2032 coin cell that lasts several months. * The Wahoo chest strap is more comfortable and more convenient to don and doff (it uses a snap at the front) and easier to change the battery. Main disadvantage is that the battery door is a known weak point (but you can 3D print a replacement) and can leak sweat inside, which causes galvanic corrosion on the circuit board. Also, it is sensitive to battery condition: silently stops transmitting, or transmits bad data when the battery is low. * The Garmin chest strap is less comfortable because the strap bunches up. Also, the plastic hook rubs on your ribs. It's less sensitive to battery condition and gives accurate low battery warnings, but you need a tiny torx (maybe a T1 or T2?) to replace the battery, which is annoying. On the other hand, the battery needs changing less frequently than on Wahoo's strap. I haven't tried Polar's chest strap, but it looks to be designed like Wahoo. Wahoo's arm strap (optical, like Apple Watch) seems to have less reliable data (like all optical straps). The battery only lasts ~6-8 hours, and requires a proprietary cable to charge. If you have any other fitness devices, like a bicycle GPS head unit or a GPS running watch, I would look for straps that are dual protocol (BLE / ANT+). ANT+ just works better than BLE: Easier pairing, lower energy consumption, fewer data dropouts.
  - malshe 2y ago
    Thank you. I will check out Wahoo.