Using a fitness watch to assess V02 max trending.
I’ve been learning that VO₂ max is perhaps the strongest predictor of health and longevity, so, basically, rather important AND it falls pretty fast with age - (that’s me!) having got into an SL bike 3 years ago for injury rehab, I know my fitness is not what it was 5 years ago (that is, before a disc herination meant 18 months off any bike and nerve damage has affected one calf muscle a lot, so, no running for me).
I spotted an informative YouTube video (yeah, they were selling a static CAROL bike) but their conclusions seemed to be properly based on research.
The 5-Minute Workout That Boosts VO₂ Max, Brain Health & Longevity | Ulrich Dempfle
Their preferred option = 3 x weekly sprint workouts consisting of only 2 x 20 seconds maximal effort each. That’s it, by all means do the cardio zone 2 type stuff all we mountain bikers do (because its great to be out on a bike), but don’t expect it to even maintain VO2 max - and certainly not to increase it.
Back to watches:
I realise that no watch can give a really accurate VO2 max reading and “even” the Apple Watch might be up to 15% out. But, a watch could help with “trending “ I hope?
A bit of reward to trying the sprint workouts.
I understand that they dont work for biking, but for running (not for me) walking and hiking. I can do the latter two.
Has anyone looked into alternative watches, I’m not really a “watch guy", normally I dont wear one and I don't run (as I can't due to sciatic nerve damage).
Apple Watches are pretty spendy, is there an alternative that’s “as” accurate for VO2 max?
appreciate your opinions, thanks
You'll get a VO2 Max reading for cycling if you are using a power meter or a smart trainer.
I've seen a few videos showing that Garmin etc are actually pretty close to "properly" measured VO2 Max but, as you say, a trend will be useful even if individual readings/devices aren't 100% accurate.
I use a Garmin watch and Edge bike computer, but I'm just into the Garmin ecosystem anyway. Polar, Wahoo etc will all be just as good. I'd view an Apple watch as a smart watch first, fitness tracker second, so have a look at what functions attract you and decide from there.
Any fairly recent Suunto / Polar / Garmin / sportswatch with chest strap will give you enough data to track improvements in VO2. None of them provide lab quality results as you would need breathing gas analysis and blood analysis for that but the watches are close enough to see trends.
For me the optical HR on watches is not accurate but there is huge variation how this works on each individual.
I did a submaximal vo2 max test in a health check and it was within 3 points of my garmin one
by all means do the cardio zone 2 type stuff all we mountain bikers do
I do not recognise my historic mtb riding choices as 'all zone 2 riding' at all, it's more like 3 hours of interval training.
Now I have an e-bike, it's more like zone 2 unless I'm solo or with other eebers.
Have a garmin forerunner. Itsnquite accurate on me, but I have a friend who's data quality with watches are poor compared to a chest monitor, so you pay your money, you take your chances.
No idea where the idea of zone 2 riding comes from. This is standard for my rides (using a chest monitor, but with only the watch is very similar)
I do not recognise my historic mtb riding choices as 'all zone 2 riding' at all
Me neither. Most of my rides seem to be about 50% in zone 4.
Typical example of a solo ride for me.
Personally i've found that riding an MTB in Z2 is pretty much impossible.
I've been getting back into running, unfortunately timed with not bike commuting much - I was waiting for a replacement bike and now I have it 'life' is getting in the way of commutes (should resolve itself later this week). Anyway, 2 5k's in the last week and my V02 max has been dropping and got worse after these. When I was commuting 3 days a week before I was in the blue, as it stands I'm about to fall out of green into orange. Garmin ratings by the way. Fingers-crossed my commute from the car shop and back tomorrow gives me a bump back up.
Yeah point taken on x zone 2 - I don't ride at a level where a conversation would be hard a lot of the time so I guess that’s at least Z3. Still, my point (re the video) about V02 max optimisation remains also my watch question. I'm not a Garmin or Wahoo ecosystem type of customer.
I wonder if a good chest strap connected to an iPhone app could do it? That. would be rather nice. NO watch purchase needed! Google isn't helping me a lot here it listed Myworkout GO listed but I got no further in knowing if it works with a chest strap.
Then there's: https://www.myworkout.com/en/personal
The 'my workout' app https://apps.apple.com/no/app/myworkout-4x4-cardio-training/id6497329690 seems a bit cardio centric though. still, if it measures VO2 with a strap, great
I do not recognise my historic mtb riding choices as 'all zone 2 riding' at all
Me neither. Most of my rides seem to be about 50% in zone 4.
Yeah, but we could be doing better with 2 x 20 second sprints, 3 times a week. Living longer, spending more time on the sofa and, best of all, not going out into that nasty, unsafe, unpleasant outdoors and having to interact with people, weather, nature. Mugs, we're all mugs!
IdleJon Yeah, but we could be doing better with 2 x 20 second sprints, 3 times a week. Living longer, spending more time on the sofa and, best of all, not going out into that nasty, unsafe, unpleasant outdoors and having to interact with people, weather, nature. Mugs, we're all mugs!
But isn't it fun getting out on a bike! I'd just like to be fitter to enjoy it (and life) better
spending more time on the sofa
Oh i do a fair bit of that when i'm not riding.
Helps keep me in the top 5% of VO2 for my age.
I’d like a link to the research in this VO2 max stuff. That’s not sarcasm.
It’s and odd one as VO2 max isn’t that trainable. One thing i read suggested that the research is saying lots of longevity genetic
Any way the most concrete thing I’ve found is that if you want a long life play tennis. It corresponds much betterv with longevity than going to the gym
Anyway, 2 5k's in the last week and my V02 max has been dropping and got worse after these.
You can have different values for bike and running, especially as it's correlated to maximum heart rate in the Garmin calculation.
I'm somewhat skeptical of consumer-level VO2 Max metrics as, in my case at least, the numbers seem to fluctuate for no apparent reason.
I'm been riding fairly consistently for many years (granted, I'm not following a dedicated training plan) and tracking my data via a Garmin Edge 530 (with chest strap HRM).
My numbers are all over the place and the peaks and troughs don't seem to coincide with more exertion or rest periods. For instance, my health/fitness has been fairly consistent over the last six months (no illness or injuries) and Garmin shows this:
Obviously, over summer I was able to do some longer rides but even in November I'm getting in decent milage (though metres climbed is how I monitor my progress as my rides tend to be short and steep)
Garmin seems to base its calculations on how much high aerobic exercise you get. If you are doing long, slow rides it does nothing for your VO2
Interesting, and there are enough data points to show VO2max is an indicator of longer live. Good VO2max is probably a surrogate marker for good/ improved cardiac health which is good for longer life.
VO2max is just one metric, and after a year of trainer road I have realised that there are other aspects of cardiovascular health that are worth paying attention to......ability to keep riding at lower HR for longer, ability to maintain FTP for longer without blowing up....
I was doing lots of Sunday MTB as above when I was ragging it, lots of Z4, and feeling blitzed for days. Now I can ride same Sundays and for longer with less Z4, and more Z2/3 and feel great. My VO2 has improved but only a couple points, but overall I am much fitter and enjoying my rides more, and posting PBs on segments and better results than since 2012 (I am amazed and chuffed).
You can improve VO2 w HIIT, and that is good, but volume Z2 is also valuable. Both routines target different aspects of CV physiology.
The other thing to realise is that changes to our biology take time so you'll only really see changes over a 4-6 week period of consistent training.
I use Polar, and I don't know how good that is (their research papers suggest v comparable to real VO2), but I am looking at the trend. Despite being 60, I have managed to maintain my VO2 at the same level over years.
You don't need to know you your VO2 max to train your VO2 max.
I think it's wishful thinking that a comparatively short interval session is going to work miracles for your vo2 max. Mine was measured in a lab test at 73 and that was the result of a lot of work...
Im also cynical of some of the calculation via Hr and bike power alone. My high vo2 came from running, and my running max hr was circa 200 at the time (age 29). My cycling max was circa 135 as i lacked the legpower to max the HR out. So when you see various numbers , think how you interpret numbers..
This is what you pay a good coach for. But there are a lot of bad coaches who just take the numbers and dont think
We have a fitness test at work based on Vo2 max. My Garmin watches over the years are always way too conservative, usually by 4 to 8 points. Better than being optimistic though!
We have to achieve over 42 and I have found a mixture of running and interval training is the best way to hit the target. On the treadmill I do the majority of my run at a steady pace then the last km or so with a minute on at full speed, minute off at walking pace. Another good one is the rowing machine with 500m rounds. 100m steady, 100m full blast, steady, full, steady.
Im also cynical of some of the calculation via Hr and bike power alone. My high vo2 came from running, and my running max hr was circa 200 at the time (age 29). My cycling max was circa 135 as i lacked the legpower to max the HR out.
My running VO2 max is usually 5% or so higher than my cycling VO2 max. As you suggest, I think that's just a measure of how well I'm applying my muscles 😊 For comparison, intervals.icu reports that I'm in the top 10% of my age group for running power, but in the lower 30% for my cycling power.
No idea where the idea of zone 2 riding comes from. This is standard for my rides (using a chest monitor, but with only the watch is very similar)
How are you getting those zones?
Your zone 4 maximum value should be your estimated Lactate Threshold Heart Rate, obtained by regular ~6 weekly tests where you ride with as high an average heart rate as you can for 20mins+ and take 98% of that number.
If you rode like that example data, with ~72mins of z4+ every ride, you would quickly send yourself to overtraining hell unless you only did two or at maximum three rides like that per week.
They are whatever garmin has decided, I only do one ride like that each week combined with running. Seems to work fine for me, the heart rate zones seem to match with my running levels fairly well
Ampthill
My running VO2 max is usually 5% or so higher than my cycling VO2 max
Mine is the opposite - my running VO2 max value which is always a consistent pace is 2-3pts lower than my Zwift 'races' which I give solid efforts on.
*I watched a YouTube video from one of the cycling pages which compared a person's Garmin watch VO2 max with a lab CPET value .. the Garmin value gave a full 10 PTS higher reading.
My Garmin VO2 max shows me as in elite category, where as I know my fitness is far from that in real life. So, I'd say the Garmin value is a good starting point to monitor VO2, but is not a real life accurate score.
Have you actually watched that? That magic workout is designed for people with a very low level of activity. If that's all you do then you'll get an increase from not much to much *1.5, but you won't keep on improving at much of a rate, if at all
If you're really trying to improve your VO2 on a bike, weekly 4x8min effort sessions are more beneficial than weekly 8x4min effort sessions, with ~3mins recovery between each VO2 interval.
It takes me a good minute or two Z5 power to get my HR into VO2 territory - and usually only by the second or third interval.
So as above, longer intervals and progression.
They are whatever garmin has decided, I only do one ride like that each week combined with running. Seems to work fine for me, the heart rate zones seem to match with my running levels fairly well
What age are you off you don't mind me asking? Just wondering what your max hr is
175, garmin has my lhtr at 158 for running and 161 for cycling
Although I have gotten higher heart rates than that on various runs and rides with a chest strap. So I don't entirely think the 220 minus age is accurate for me
So I don't entirely think the 220 minus age is accurate for me
I don't think it's entirely accurate for anyone, but your Max HR will be higher than your LTHR. Which is being used to set those zones?
Good question. I think lhtr but that was what the watch picked. So I don't know if those are accurate or not. Either way a quick calculation doesn't have the zones herringbone that far out. Maybe 5bpm lower, unsure really
You can fix a lot of the above 'zone' problems (example 49 minutes in zone 4? you should be placing op 10 in tour stages, or 'Personally i've found that riding an MTB in Z2 is pretty much impossible.' ) if you assume that you're underestimating your max HR. You need to test yourself for that number... not assume it from age.
How can your running VO2 max be different to your cycling one. The highest number is your VO2 max - the lower numbers from other sports come from not being strong enough to reach VO2 max
How can your running VO2 max be different to your cycling one.
Different sports use different amounts of muscle, so you'll be able to consume more oxygen. If you're cycling, it's your legs that are consuming that oxygen, but if you're XC skiing your legs are plus your arms and core. Running uses more muscle mass than cycling.
175, garmin has my lhtr at 158 for running and 161 for cycling
Although I have gotten higher heart rates than that on various runs and rides with a chest strap. So I don't entirely think the 220 minus age is accurate for me
Your max hr and lactate threshold are virtually the same as mine (about 1 or 2 different) but your Garmin zones are completely different
Oh well, have reset them on my watch to see what happens. Can't say it really bothers me, but reality is that my night rides will still likely be a lot of zone 4 and 5. That's just what happens, if I want zone 2 I will have to get an ebike
Why?. How can you not just use an easier gear or go slower??
For your max 173 hr it should be piss easy to stay at less than 121 for the majority of a ride?
That's boring, why would i bother
My garmin gives a VO2max number, the number itself is nonsense (at least 10 points too high, possibly more) but the trend does seem to follow my training quite well. It's based on running cos that's what I do, I think the problem is that the running power estimate is massively unrealistic. I am not routinely doing 500W for a parkrun! There must be some scaling factor that's a bit off.
I think Garmin just give a much higher than accurate VO2 to possibly not avoid discouraging people exercising .. if someone has been doing relatively easy work outs 2-3x weekly and their Garmin watch is showing their VO2 max as average it may demotivate people: whereas show them a VO2 of touching elite, and that may make them keep at it to maintain.
As crazy as it sounds, ego regarding such things plays a big role.
To Molgrips - i personally see the difference across sports as a measure of muscle development, and probably reflected in lthr than VO2 max which is a mwasure of aerobic capacity. I clocked 73 running,- no way could i achieve that cycling as i didnt have the power .
I should probably reread on this but at some point you have to lock something across sports , and id have thought vo2 max makes most sense.
@grahamt1980 my average hr in the past year is 123bmp involving lots of ups and downs in the peak district. I'm usually fastest or second fastest of the group up hill and an average fitness 47 year old. Z4 or z5 how are you actually getting there, what's your locale/riding/bike
Why?. How can you not just use an easier gear or go slower??
That really is a very odd thing to say.
May as well ask why folks even bother to ride bikes.
I would have thought from you being a member on here for a while you would understand why folks might want to try and push on with a ride.
Are you looking for some sort of medal? Bikerevive?
Maybe I'm just shit and slow then. Sorry but not going to get into comparisons on here as it is about as pointless as suggesting people can just ride a bit slower to make sure they hit zone 2.
I like riding fast and my rides are basically intervals. Ultimately everyone is different and their heart rates are individual and depend on a number of factors. The only real measure is improvement over time
No not at all just confused by the numbers. I'm not sure whether high hr for z2 is a good thing or low hr z2 is good tbh. Just confused that someone with samr lactate threshold using a Garmin gets given such different numbers by Garmin. I assumed that Garmin would use the same algorithm on ask devices, maybe t
Most rides are 2hrs, 25-30km, 400-500m of ascent
I've been sitting at the VO2 max of 57 for months. I think the last two marathons and even a 50k run haven't really managed to shift it past 57.
I had some dental work done and I couldn't run on doctors orders for seven days. They didn't say anything about the turbo trainer so I absolutely hammered that hard from day 2 🙂
Six days after the dental surgery I started running again- nothing spectacular just a few 10K runs (a few weeks ago when I was training for the last marathon I was averaging about 120 to 130 kilometers a week running) my Garmin suddenly told me that my VO2 max had dropped to 56......
I was not impressed. I'm starting to doubt the accuracy of my watch (mainly because it's going in the direction I don't agree with 🙂 )
my Garmin suddenly told me that my VO2 max had dropped to 56......
Yeah, this mystifies me as well. I go thru this loop with Garmin all the time:
- Garmin tells me my ride was "unproductive" and I need to do more riding at high intensity
- I go out and blow the doors off and upload my ride
- My VO2 Max goes down...
Case in point:
This shows my last ride as benefiting "base":
And this is the actual ride, which shows the vast majority of my ride as Zone 3 & 4....
This ride basically involves about an hour of climb/traverse/climb/traverse then another hour of consistent, steep climbing followed by about an hour's (road) descent.
AIUI, zones 3 & 4 are considered 'high aerobic' by Garmin so f++k knows what I'm doing wrong. The only way to game the system seems to do some rides with virtually no zone 1 or 2...it's only when I do those types of rides (on a turbo) that my VO2 increases.
As far as I can see, the fact that I free-wheeled downhill after the strenuous effort means my ride is "unproductive" and my VO2 score is "ruined". 🤷
(How the hell do you delete extra images from posts in STW?!?!)
How can you tell the difference between a VO2 max of 56 or 57? Effectively noise separating them. Also, there is no real reason why training should increase VO2 max , cause beyond a point it's hard to increase, and just tweaking your training won't do it. What did you do differently that you thought might do it? I don't think ultra training will as you're too far below an. threshold. Go do a proper, 3 or 4 month 5k training plan - that will do it.
I don't believe all these rides with people spending hours in zone 4 are using correctly calculated zones else this thread is a gold mine for people recruiting for world tour teams. You know that if you want 15 mins of zone 4 go and run a 5K at full race, then keep going for 45 minutes. Your max is underestimated. Also are you calculating zones of maz, range between min and max, or LTHR - garmin can calculate any of those if you ask it. People - what does Garmin think your max HR is?
I'm not gonna pretend I know the difference between a point of VO2 or the answer to your questions, but I'm trying to see a trend in the right direction (which is, basically, ride hard, get fitter - or at least not lose fitness).
The only consistent trend that I can determine from Garmin's is that far "too much" of my riding it considers "Unproductive"
As it happens, I only have a passing interest in this as I'm NOT following a training plan - I just find it amusing from a marketing point of view, as it hardly encourages the general population to use Garmin products! 😀
Incidentally, Garmin make some really odd design choices with their products. For instance, on my Edge 530, I found they prioritize running VO2 and HR zones over cycling VO2 and HR zones in the UI. Recently, I discovered my "running" HR max was correct (169) but for reasons I don't understand, my cycling HR max was wrong (189). And I don't run, so God knows why they are on the 530 or how the cycling values were wrong (I suspect an errant firmware update)
They also make it incredibly difficult (unless you know where to look) to actually set or check your max HR or HR zones. You can't see them or set them in Garmin Connect, for instance, unless you connect the device. Why - that's just incredibly dumb....??
HR zones are critical to training so why are they buried so deep in obscure menu options?
(Granted, all this may have changed with later devices as the newer UI is a lot better than my 530...)
How can you tell the difference between a VO2 max of 56 or 57? Effectively noise separating them
In those examples, Garmin is actually rounding to the nearest whole number. It could be 56.51 one day and 56.49 the next but you'd see a drop of 1. Some watches and some trend graphs do show it more accurately though.
40 minutes of being in zone 4 means you should be on a world tour team?
Dear God do you really think that heart rate equals power output? 100% of the tdf field would probably be in z1 maybe bottom of zone 2 for the same effort i have to put in.
What a dumb comment
This is a typical ATB ride for me, even at the high heart rate I’m not out of breath just run out of muscle power! I had to push for a short distance yesterday, breathing was very heavy but heartbeat only 120, I wish I understood all this.. 
I have a garmin 255, it never even updates the vo2 max. I just use it for cycling really. Does it update it better for running?
It is getting to turbo trainer time though, maybe it'll update then
It is getting to turbo trainer time though, maybe it'll update then
If you don't use a power meter or a turbo trainer/software package that provides power readings then you won't get cycling VO2 Max.
@wheelsonfire1 that looks like a lot of time in Z5. Given that the zones are probably set from your Max HR value, how have you set that (if at all)?
I’d spend a lot of time in zone 5 if my wheels were on fire!
Is Garmin reliant on receiving the occasional max effort to help determine MHR?
Just thinking it may be set low if folk aren't be riding flat out once in a while - kind of garbage in, garbage out.
Or it's defaulting to 220 minus age, either way a lot of time in zones above look really high.
@scotroutes I may look into the settings although the maximum bpm I have had in recent years was 172, my resting rate is mid forties and I’m 65….
The usual maximum that I see these days is 168.
the maximum bpm I have had in recent years was 172, my resting rate is mid forties and I’m 65….
The usual maximum that I see these days is 168.
Not too dissimilar to me. My Z5 starts at 157 though (90% of max) and, applying that calculation, I'd expect your Z5 to start around 151-152. It would be worth trying some sort of Max HR test to see where it truly lies and then resetting the zones accordingly.
@scotroutes thank you for the input, I’m a casual user of these statistics just gained from logging ride details, pictures, weather etc. I occasionally glance at my watch when riding and if the bpm looks a bit high then I’ll “have a minute” and look at the view!
Tangentially related to this, I've just realised that Garmin considers "Anaerobic" as a Power Zone but not a Heart Rate zone - I was always under the impression that HR Zone 5 was "Anaerobic"...
I did an FTP test yesterday and my HR was in Zone 5 for most of the test and I was expecting Garmin to bump my Anaerobic Load Focus numbers up, but, no, it just considered that session as High Aerobic, and deemed my training as "Unproductive" (again!) as I have Anaerobic shortage 🤷
(And my VO2 went down again, though as my FTP dropped, that's probably correct 😕)
HR Zone 5 is 'maximum' above 90% - at least for Garmin anyway, lots of different models around.
As far as I'm aware their anaerobic measure is power only and is time spent above 120% FTP
So if you want to address your anaerobic shortage, go and do some sprints 😀
For instance, on my Edge 530, I found they prioritize running VO2 and HR zones over cycling VO2 and HR zones in the UI. Recently, I discovered my "running" HR max was correct (169) but for reasons I don't understand, my cycling HR max was wrong (189).
Well that would explain why all your zoning is out if you don't calculate against a reliable max HR number. What have you actually measured your max HR as? And how did you test it? Interesting your running number is lower, but again have you ever done a running max test (3 *2 minutes hill, walk down recovery and vomiting on the 3rd is a standard test)
My max HR (169) is based on the highest heart rate I've seen recorded. It was probably at the end of an old FTP test when I've emptied the tank during the last minute of the 20 minute test, or during a Zwift crit race.
My last FTP (2 days ago) saw a max HR of 163 and I doubt it would go higher, so I may have to reduce my settings on the 530...
I've never been "professionally" measured and I don't run so I've never done a running test!
Edited to add:
This is from Garmin's website (first Google result) where their own user guide refers to HR Z5 as "Anaerobic" yet their own "Exercise Load" metric does not...
I have a fairly similar min and max heart rate. So I just had a look at a few recent activities for zones... and they seem to differ depending on the activity!
Zone 5 for gravel and hiking is > 148bpm
Zone 5 for MTB and walking is > 172bpm
I know a few really hard technical lung-busting hills for me regularly see ~155bpm. Almost broken is ~163bpm.
I don't recall seeing 172 except when i've had glitchy chest straps that seem to double my heart rate!