NOTE! Part deux of review up, check it out
Abbreviations
2.20 – The stable software used and recommended for use in the f3hr (as date 21.4.2015)
2.93 The beta software that I am testing out at the moment on the f3hr (date 21.4.2015)
235 – Garmin Forerunner 235 watch
ant + – Wireless technology for low energy transfer of heart rate data
app – Application, this is will be confusing as Garmin uses the term App for workouts like Swimming, running, rowing, running etc. But also the term app is used for applications that can be downloaded from Garmin Iq a store similar to Google play or Apple app store. My use of “app” refers to the workouts.
appIq – An application one can download from the Garmin Iq store, for example Garmin Tides
bpm – beats per minute, i.e how many times ones heat beats during 60 seconds.
bt – Bluetooth
bt-strap – Heartate chest strap that transfers heart rate data over Bluetooth (low energy)
f3hr – Garmin Fenix 3 HR watch
fw – firmware
hr – heartrate
hrm-run / strap – Garmins heart rate monitoring strap, there are two straps named hrm-run the one I use is the one with a red sealant. This strap transfers running dynamics (see running dynamics) and heart rate data via ant + protocol.
Ohrm – Optical heart rate monitor
Ohr – Optical heart rate
rd – Garmins running dynamics; Vertical oscillation, Ground contact time, Cadence, Ground contact time balance, stride length and vertical ratio. Read more here.
sr+ – Scoshsche Rhytm +, seen as one of the absolute best optical heart rate monitors, worn on forearm…not wrist.
strap – heart rate monitor on chest strap, general term for both ant + and bt straps.
sw – software
TT ms c – Tomtom Multisport Cardio watch, unlike the Garmin watches that have an own, proprietary ohrm called Elevate, the TT ms c uses ohrm tech from Mio global.
Foreword
Already two Garmin forum users have noticed that I have change my 235 to F3HR and there were questions on my opinion/reason to change.
Therefore I posted here a “short” review and experience summary. This text is completely partial, biased and based on my personal experiences only. I will mention GPS accuracy, but the main gist is in Optical Heartate monitoring.
As an ohrm comparison I will use my TomTom Multisport cardio (same ohrm tech as the TT runner cardio… not same tech as TT spark).
I posted the comparison/review here as the Garmin forum is a bit inflexible with attached images and using font sizes etc.
Why I changed from 235 to f3hr
The TL;DR reason for changing:
running dynamics, awesome design, better memory, more screens, battery life.
The long story:
For me the 235 was ok. But as I went to a gait lab…I learned that I have to do a lot of work on GTC balance and vertical oscillation/ratio… un-fortunately the 235 does not have rd info.
I also felt that even though the 235 looks “nice” I wanted a premium look as I am a lot in business meetings etc and can’t be bothered to change watches.
A bonus was naturally more memory, more screens (2 on the 235 vs 10 on the f3hr…I’m a data-junkie) and having more sport profiles (like skiing and swimming). The 235 has Biking/Biking indoor, Running/running indoor/Other.
What I miss most in the 235 are 2 things: light-weight and the nice, soft & elastic band.
Comparison of 235 & f3hr
I’m not going to comment yet on how elevate tech compares to the TT ms c
When it comes to ohrm data/reading quality on the f3hr …well I am a bit disappointed.
As you can see from my reviews on Garmins own forum, it does an ok job… most of the time.
But, the quality compared to 235 ohr is not “pay several hundred euros/dollars more for the watch“, better.
I have tried the Elevate ohrm on the 235 in all sports; Running/Running indoor/Cycling/Cycling indoor/Other.
What I noticed was that the watch was fast in finding my hr (YAY!) and at a first glance seemed to give good data (double yay). However when I started testing the 235 against a bt-strap, I went from yay! To; what the actual fuck?
The readings were, at best 80% Correct during the workout, sometimes only 10% of given bpm measured by the 235 was “all ower the place”. All hope is not lost and you should not rip your 235 to pieces. In the chapter named “Doing sports; 235 vs f3hr vs TT ms c vs strap” I will tell you more about accuracy and why the 235 isn’t all bad.
As mentioned, I didn’t really expect much of the ohrm in the f3hr, based on my 235 experience. The both watches use the same tech. However when reading on the Garmin forum, users were saying that the ohr measurements were good…so I had a little glimmer of hope.
I did not jump ship to the f3hr due to ohrm… I got the f3hr mainly for the running dynamics. Therefore I can not say that a ohrm par with the 235 would have been a deal-breaker.
Now, someone might ask me why didn’t you change to the 630 then? Because; fuck that. (I hate touch screen on watches)
How do the ohrm in the f3hr and 235 compare
Leaving the 235 behind I had firmware 4.20 which as said was sometimes “ok”, sometimes “bad”.
So not much better, not much worse.
The only clear improvement on the 2.20 sw compared to the 235 is Cadence lock, the 235 is infamous for creating cadence locks, I am one of the few fortunate ones who only created cadence lock once or twice…but the forums are full of users complaining of this happening “all the time”. (cadence lock, for those not in the know is when your 235 lies to you…it reads your cadence i.e the steps/minute value as your hr)
The bpm readings given by the f3hr, running 2.20 compared to the 235. Not better, not worse. The 2.93 sw gives hope of improvement. When biking the bpm is quite correct 90-95% of the time. I tested for a power walk/light jog and again the bpm was in the 90-95% correct area. When I have the time and energy I will do a half marathon pace run and compare hrm-run bpm to frh3 ohrm bpm. So keep your eyes up for a short update-post-thingy.
And when comparing both 235 and f3hr to both the to the TT MS Cardio and/or strap… the Elevate ohrm is abysmal.
I will be using metrics in my reports as in my country we do not use mile/feet etc.
Doing sports; 235 vs f3hr V.S. TT ms c V.S. strap
Am I a TomTom fan-boy? No, not really. I pledge allegiance to no brand. I have owned; Crivit sports HR-Watch, Polar FT7, Polar FT70, TomTom Multisport Cardio, TomTom Runner Cardio, Garmin Forerunner 235, Garmin Fenix 3 HR. Many brands, many different watches.
That said however, I say that when it comes to ohrm I hold the TT ms c as “a golden standard”, the holy grail of wrist-based hr monitoring. I know that some of you will say that no, Scosche rhytm + is the ohrm “king of the hill”. I would not know, reviews say that it is…but I haven’t tested it so I can’t be sure. Also it is not a wrist-worn device, it is mounted on the forearm or around the biceps, hence not relevant in a wrist-ohrm review/comparison.
Why do I say that the TT ms c is the “golden standard”? Simple, it can be trusted…period.
All wrist-ohrm have problems comparing to a strap. The main reasons being that a) It is mounted on an extremity (the wrist) and can not react to fast elevations/drops in bpm readings, like the strap (which next to your heart & instantaneous). And b) The ohr measures blood flow (speed) with led lights & sensor…basing a bpm on the flow speed. As blood flow does not react “as fast” to the changes in bpm. The strap again measuring bpm with electric current next to heart is fast in reacting.
Therefore even if it seems I am harsh on the ohrm, I understand the limitations of the tech. This is the reason why I am using the TT ms c as “comparison tool” and the comparison to strap is just there to show how much the Garmins are off.
Red = hrm-run. Blue = f3hr Hr 2.20 comparison by Garmin forum member bizonxx, thank you.
The TT ms c. comparison of same workout. Notice the lack of erratic spikes.
The TT ms c is off by 1-5 bpm and is “slow” to react in interval/sprint training. When doing a slowly increasing sprint (from 6:00/min to 4:15/min in 2 minutes) the TT ms c is 2-4 seconds behind both hrm-run and bt-strap. The same goes for slowing down. In a fast sprint (6:00/min to 3:20/min in less than 30 sec), the TT ms c is slower…it can take up to 20 sec for the watch to catch up. Same goes for hitting the brakes fast to rest/easy tempo.
235 and f3hr (2.20) are much slower. In “slow sprints” the Garmins take 10-15 sec to “get with the times” and in fast sprints the spike might come 10 sec AFTER you have done the sprint. Another problem is that there are erratic spikes here and there…and that a drop to real rest hr can take up to 2 min!
When it comes to steady-pace runs the TT ms c is never off more than 2-3 bpm, and even this deviation is rare.
The Garmins are correct or within acceptable 2-3 bpm “off” values 75-85% of the time, both the 235 and f3hr 2.20 tend to quite often show a 10 bpm count higher than a strap gives and there are some 180 bpm (on a 145-158 bpm pace run) spikes here and there.
The f3hr 2.93 however is 95% within 5 bpm value of “real” bpm on even paced runs. Intervals/sprints are par with the 2.20 sw. In biking however the 2.20 shows spikes (due to uneven roads…probably), these spikes are almost gone in the 2.93 sw.
Ehen it comes to non static exercise, e.g weight lifting, crossfit, kettlebels etc etc …all wrist-ohrm have problems. The flexing and releasing of forearms and wrists is murder on ohr readings. But the TT ms c comes the closest by at least being correct about 60-70% of the time.
How good is the ohr for different sports?
Scale: Very bad, bad, ok, good, very good. (Where very good = max 2-4 bpm off 5% of the time and no more than 10 sec late to elevated/dropped hr)
Running in/out sprints/intervals
Tt ms c – very good. 235 – Ok. F3hr 2.20 – Ok. F3hr – Ok
Even-pace running in/out
Tt ms c – very good. 235 – Ok. F3hr 2.20 – Ok. F3hr – Good
Cycling out
Tt ms c – very good. 235 – Ok. F3hr 2.20 – Ok. F3hr – Good
Cycling in (spinning classes)
Tt ms c – good. 235 – bad. F3hr 2.20 – bad. F3hr – Ok
Gym workout (lifting weights etc)
Tt ms c – good. 235 – bad. F3hr 2.20 – bad. F3hr – bad
Crossfit
Tt ms c – bad. 235 – very bad. F3hr 2.20 – very bad. F3hr – very bad
Kettlebell training / Girya
Tt ms c – ok. 235 – very bad. F3hr 2.20 – very bad. F3hr – bad
Should you buy the F3HR ?
Depends….
If you own a 235 or TT ms c:
for the OHRM? – No
For the look – Yes
For the better memory – yes (better space for data fields etc)
For the more versatile options (like bg color, using 3d speed, having altimeter, compass, navigation tools) – yes
For the band/comfort – no, unless you will buy a good watch band from the after market.
For running dynamics – Yes
However, do not buy it if you only want to do wrist-hr training.
The ohr on the F3Hr just isn’t that much better than the 235.
I use the ohrm on “business trip workouts” and non-serious training but not for hr-workout. Basically when having erratic hr data is not a big deal but when it is still “fun” to get a somewhat value of where your hr bpm has been.
The TT ms c was used for all types of workouts and runs. I trusted the TT completely, even in sprints…the F3hr? Not so much. I will be wearing the f3hr and my TT ms c as control when doing my marathon run in August. Unless the elevate sw gets much, much better/reliable.
Why did I jump the ship from the TT ms C, if it is so great? Well, as a ohrm device it is the holy grail…but as a running watch, it is bad. The TomTom mysports site gives quite basic data, the exporting data tool is an on/off thing, there are no running dynamics, you can only see “three data screens”, you can not download workouts, you can only do two-part intervals, etc, etc.
Conclusion
The choice is entirely up to you however. If you do choose to pull the trigger on the F3HR…look it up on eBay. I bought a bundle, new for 569 euro with shipping. Good price, considering bundle retail is 699 euro.
GPS – Well, in short they all seem quite good, distances vary within 50 m so not bad.
…
Ps. If the 235 would have had the running dynamics…I probably would not have jumped ship. Even though the F3hr is a gorgeous and awesome watch
65280pt - Anton's not so serious blog on running and shit 