I’ve noticed Strava’s HR Zone scheme is fat at the lower end and thin at the top, whereas other schemes (such as used by Golden Cheetah) are the zones are equally spread.

I’ve got my MAX HR as 180, never seen more than 179 (other than in less-than-ideal circumstances).

Reaching Z5 on Strava is infrequent for me, ie on a 52 mile ride it was reached for 4s (174~180), whereas in the equi-distant scheme (162~180), 17 minutes.

Which is the more meaningful? If you had to pick one or the other?

Have also seen some riders appear to set their Z1 on Strava more like what I imagine their Z2 to be (I could be wrong, but 130 seems a bit high for ‘Active Recovery’)?

130 is Z3 for me based on my own reading of my resting and maxHR.

Guess I’ll need to research myself, here looks like a good place to start:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaerobic_exercise

There’s a few ways of setting zones. Percentage of HRmax, or percentages of HRR, etc.

It’s pointless comparing you to someone else though, as we all have very different resting and max, and differing levels of training such that our recovery from high to low is very different. Also really only matters if you’re actually going to train against heart rate. I use zones based on lactate threshold HR, which for me is a tested 168 and make that the top of Zone 4.

Zone 1: 116-133 Active recovery
Zone 2: 134-149 Aerobic
Zone 3: 150-159 Tempo
Zone 4: 160-168 Threshold
Zone 5: 168-190 VO2Max

Most of my running training is in 2, then zone 5 for 5k, 4 for 10k, 3/4 for half, and 3 for marathon. In bike races I go on feel because I find it very hard to hit max on a bike.

How did you arrive at your max out of interest?

How did you arrive at your max out of interest?

Not had it properly measured. I started with the 220-age formula but increased it slightly to 185. From looking at the measurements (including commutes) for the past few months I decided to set it back down to 180 recently. I’ve occassionally reached 179 on rides/races.

Also really only matters if you’re actually going to train against heart rate.

I’m using it to gauge how much effort I’m putting in, and am finding it quite useful for knowing how much more effort I could be putting in or when to ease off on rest days etc. Definitely has value. I am training, if I admit to it, but am amateur, and just enjoying it, will just be happy if I can finish above average in the races I enter.

Not had it properly measured. I started with the 220-age formula but increased it slightly to 185. From looking at the measurements (including commutes) for the past few months I decided to set it back down to 180 recently. I’ve occassionally reached 179 on rides/races.

When you hit 179 did you feel like you were going to throw up and die? If you didn’t, your max is likely higher that 180. FWIW, I’m 39, so on the old ‘rule’, my max should be 181. But as I’ve said, 5k races, plus a medical fitness test on a hospital ECG have proven it to be at least 190.

I’m using it to gauge how much effort I’m putting in, and am finding it quite useful for knowing how much more effort I could be putting in or when to ease off on rest days etc. Definitely has value. I am training, if I admit to it, but am amateur, and just enjoying it, will just be happy if I can finish above average in the races I enter.

That’s perfectly reasonable training by heart rate. It’s a useful measure of when you’re working too hard as well as not hard enough. In my example above, I know if I go into zone 4 in a marathon, I’m going to struggle at the end. If I keep to 3, then I’ll be good. If I’m supposed to be doing an ‘easy’ run/ride, I never go out of 2 and ideally keep at the low end of it, otherwise I won’t be recovering.

When you hit 179 did you feel like you were going to throw up and die? If you didn’t, your max is likely higher that 180.

I’ve never been quite sure of how big a pinch of salt to take with the old throw up and die thing. I reached 179 the other week for 4s on a cat4 climb and while I didn’t feel like vomiting, it was errr, hmmm, well I didn’t feel like I was going to die exactly, but had the climb been any longer it would have been likely.

But then I was suprised another weekend, when during a social ride in the Surrey Hills, my HR hit 179 on a descent, BKB (although it was the end of a 2nd moderately long week in a row, and 85% of my riding is much tamer by comparison) and death and vomit were far from my thoughts – I was more concerned about getting down in one piece as the group I was with weren’t hanging around for long on it.