MegaSack DRAW - 6pm Christmas Eve - LIVE on our YouTube Channel
Following on from my [url= https://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/cycling-after-a-heart-attack/ ]recent heart attack[/url] I attended my first Cardiac Rehab. group today. My activity is still very limited but following on from a few very short walks they've been talking about pushing my heart rate into the 91-115bpm range (resting heart rate is around 70bpm).
Although a HRM isn't essential I was wondering about getting one, primarily so as I don't overdo it when I start cycling again (although this will be very limited for sometime).
From what I gather chest monitors seem more accurate than wrist (optical) ones and something ANT+ that would pair up with my Oregon gps makes sense.
Should I stick with Garmin or all they all much of a muchness? All I really need is the ANT+ pairing although many seem to work independently allowing for downloading of metrics later; all I really need is heart rate (some seem to be fitness trackers in their own right).
I think there are all much of a muchness, mine is a Wahoo Tickr. Connects to all my devices fine with zero fuss. Cost me about £35 from Amazon.
I've also had a couple of garmin ones in the past, again works absolutely fine. Connects to everything with no bother.
You may be surprised at how little cycling you can do to keep your heart rate in that range. My resting heart rate is just over 50, but I can get up to over 110 just riding with my kids.
From what I gather chest monitors seem more accurate than wrist (optical) ones
They are, but if you're not pushing hard efforts you probably won't see any difference between the two as it's only high peaks the optical ones seem to miss.
I have a Polar Vantage watch, excellent battery life, can get a week out if it with 24 hr HR recording. I only use a HR strap if I'm going on a hard ride where I care about whether I maxed out at 191 or 186 etc....
I like the Wahoo Tickr. It has flashing lights that tell you that it's working - blue for Bluetooth and red for ANT+ - saves you wondering if the battery is flat or not / there's a signal. Mine's been stone reliable, but I've had others that work fine from Polar and someone I can't remember.
DC Rainmaker does a lot of in-depth HR monitor stuff on his website if you want to get more nuanced:
I got this mega cheap one from Amazon for Zwift, seems good so far https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07D4J5VDK/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
You may be surprised at how little cycling you can do to keep your heart rate in that range.
It's early days (my fourth week following discharge and I'm allowed 30 minutes of walking) and that level is not far off doing very little - over time it'll get pushed higher (although I'm a little confused as to why the Cardiac Rehab. folk want me to push my heart rate up, whilst the GP wants to push my Beta Blockers as high as I can tolerate to slow my heart rate down - I'm seeing the GP in a couple of days so might try and clarify).
I've never bother with heart rate as a purely recreation rider (I've always pitched my intensity at a 'keep fit but still fun' level) but I guess that I'm going to need to be careful from now on.
With respect for your current plight, having a resting HR of 70 previous to your attack puts you in the 'not very fit' category anyway, does it not?
You may be surprised at how little cycling you can do to keep your heart rate in that range.
Also this. I'll cruise at 90 to 110 just doing the mowing and gardening.
With respect for your current plight, having a resting HR of 70 previous to your attack puts you in the ‘not very fit’ category anyway, does it not?
The resting rate of 70bpm was done this morning at the group after I'd climbed a fairly step set of stairs (in hospital is was around 60bpm); I've no idea what my heart rate was prior to the attack.
Fitness is relative and although I wouldn't put myself forward as a hardcore athlete I was cycling 70 miles a week on my portly 28lb Singular Swift (including getting said tank up Cheddar Gorge). I also work in a physical job and at 51 (52 in a few weeks) didn't think that I was doing too badly (a lifestyle questionnaire done at the surgery prior to the attack yielded a lifestyle risk of under 5% which isn't bad and I'd like to think that it was better than average).
Again, the target heart range is what was given to me in the first session of cardiac rehab. prior to which my level of activity started with 15 minutes of walking which has now progressed to 30; any immediate cycling would be on the flat, at slow speeds and for similar durations until I get the go ahead to increase.
It's been estimated that I should be able to get back to my prior level of fitness in about 6 months (although I believe that I've lost about 40% of my heart's pumping ability) and I thought that a monitor would enable me to take things carefully rather than chase records or optimum fitness (apparently my heart is still scarring).
Ah, ok, so not your true resting heart rate at all. Makes more sense now.
My Father in laws cardiac output dropped to 15% at his worst, but they reckon he's back up to 90% post injury. We found they weren't too good and telling him how much would come back, I guess because they can never be sure.
I think in your shoes I'd use a chest monitor, I use a wrist based one for running which is fine but can be a tad erratic in some of it's readings. If I was recovering from a heart problem I'd want reliability!
You could also buy a watch and pair it with the chest strap if you didn't want to use the Oregon all the time.
Like kevinshuffle above, I have a Coospo H6 from Amazon, been great.
I would think an optical would be adequate for your needs. I have a Polar OH1 on an arm strap. I generally link it to my Polar V650 computer but it can also record in standalone mode to be be later downloaded to Polar Flow website or app.
In terms of HR range when cycling, a "recovery ride" (glass cranks) for me is around 90-120 bpm.
Wahoo Tickr for me too. Sorry to use a cliche, but they just work, and very well too.
ANT+ and Bluetooth makes it very versatile, comfy strap, very low profile, accurate...blah blah blah
I had to get a monitor on doctors advice too, due CAD. Went for Garmin instinct plus chest strap and delighted with it. The strap is much more accurate when active than the wrist optical pickup.
My tickr is less noisy than my garmin. I also have a PowerCal which gives an estimate of power, which isn’t as bad as many believe.
I’d go tickr for the Bluetooth. Then you can connect to iOS later. I do this in Zwift.
One of these...
.. hooked up to my Garmin Etrex 35 touch.
Works a treat
I'd get a Wahoo TICKR Fit - it goes on your forearm rather than chest, comfortable to wear and easier to put on/take off than a chest strap. Seems to give consistent results with other HRM's that I've used
My Father in laws cardiac output dropped to 15% at his worst, but they reckon he’s back up to 90% post injury. We found they weren’t too good and telling him how much would come back, I guess because they can never be sure.
That's good to know, thanks for sharing that. I'm getting mixed messages regarding the damage done and have been told that is may be recoverable (and I should be getting another echocardiagram as a follow up) but also that it's permanent.
It sounds like there's a degree of uncertainty so I'll keep my fingers crossed!
I've had a Wahoo TICKR for a couple of years and it does just seem to work every time, with no fuss. It seems better in that respect than the Polar H7 it replaced.
It does go through batteries at a reasonable rate (as in I probably replace once a month or so), but it just takes one very cheap and standard CR2032 cell.
My Garmin watch has an optical HR sensor. When it's working it does tally well with the TICKR but it is sensitive to the tightness of the watch and position. I wouldn't want to rely on it really, although it would be OK most of the time.
The latest iWatch can generate cardiograms on demand. Chap at work got one after having a heart attack. When he feels his heart going a bit odd, he takes a trace and emails it to his Cardiologist, all from his watch. Quite impressive functionality.
The £25 one from Argos works well, uses a chest strap but you don't notice it after a couple of minutes. Only downside is that it can only store one set of results.
Chest straps are the most accurate. Wrist watch optical hr isn’t great for mountain biking, because of the movement of wrist and vibration.
I don’t like wearing chest straps, they’re not the most comfortable.
So I’ve opted for a optical arm strap. Very similar results to a chest strap. Not quite as accurate, but near enough. The polar OH1 is probably the best one. I find it comfortable wearing it around bicep. It’s ant+ and Bluetooth and connected to my Garmin Watch first time.
