Spiking heart rate monitor issues

[Cugel]

It's a fairly recent occurrence. I'm had nearly 300hrs of using this HR monitor so I'm quite experienced in knowing how my heart now responds to training input. My HR maximum, prior to this tech issue, was 185bpm, and that genuinely feels close to my max and was on an all out hill climb. I'm also 38, so it roughly aligns with the rule of thumb (220 minus age).

I saw 196bpm on Friday whilst steadily pedalling up a gentle incline. It's not an accurate measurement.

If you're now "....quite experienced in knowing how my heart now responds to training input" why do you bother having the HR monitor? Your problem with it seems to be just another of those pointless diversions suffered by many a gizmo user: a diversion from cycling to data-parsing.

On the other hand, if the HR monitor tells you something and you treat the data as faulty rather than providing a useful indication of something, haven't you discovered a rather large hole in the justification for having such an instrument? What if the spikes are an indication of various effects coming on because of overtraining? No good having gizmo data if you just believe it when it tells you OK rather than not-OK.

And perhaps you can listen to your body without the gizmo? Many of us did so before gizmo became yet another wallet-drainer feasting on the cycling masses. One gets quite good at it. In fact, going by my quote of you above, you seem to be doing it!

It's entirely possible (and much more enjoyable) to improve your cycling prowess to a purpose or desire by just cycling. Millions did it before the gizmo sellers began to alter our brains concerning how "essential" it is to measure every aspect of one's life and it's bodily functions.

Cugel

[Jon in Sweden]

...
The electrode gel is a good call. I wonder if (in the meantime) whether vaseline might work too?

I wouldn't expect petroleum jelly to be sufficiently conductive, with or without added salt.

Jonathan

Good know, thank you.

It's a fairly recent occurrence. I'm had nearly 300hrs of using this HR monitor so I'm quite experienced in knowing how my heart now responds to training input. My HR maximum, prior to this tech issue, was 185bpm, and that genuinely feels close to my max and was on an all out hill climb. I'm also 38, so it roughly aligns with the rule of thumb (220 minus age).

I saw 196bpm on Friday whilst steadily pedalling up a gentle incline. It's not an accurate measurement.

If you're now "....quite experienced in knowing how my heart now responds to training input" why do you bother having the HR monitor? Your problem with it seems to be just another of those pointless diversions suffered by many a gizmo user: a diversion from cycling to data-parsing.

On the other hand, if the HR monitor tells you something and you treat the data as faulty rather than providing a useful indication of something, haven't you discovered a rather large hole in the justification for having such an instrument? What if the spikes are an indication of various effects coming on because of overtraining? No good having gizmo data if you just believe it when it tells you OK rather than not-OK.

And perhaps you can listen to your body without the gizmo? Many of us did so before gizmo became yet another wallet-drainer feasting on the cycling masses. One gets quite good at it. In fact, going by my quote of you above, you seem to be doing it!

It's entirely possible (and much more enjoyable) to improve your cycling prowess to a purpose or desire by just cycling. Millions did it before the gizmo sellers began to alter our brains concerning how "essential" it is to measure every aspect of one's life and it's bodily functions.

Cugel

I love numbers. I'm 99% sure I'm on the autistic spectrum and I've always thrived on numbers. Part of the enjoyment (not a major part, but significant nevertheless) of cycling for me in the small and incremental improvements in metrics.

I should add that I don't cycle with headphones, and I find cycling meditative, but the Garmin in front of me and the information it displays is important to me, and it's important that it's accurate

[axel_knutt]

In order:
Interference from power lines/trains/radios
Poor/dry contacts, or chest hair
Low battery
Faulty monitor

Then by the time you’ve eliminated all those:
Arrhythmia.

It's a fairly recent occurrence.

So was my arrhythmia when it started.

My HR maximum, prior to this tech issue, was 185bpm, and that genuinely feels close to my max……
I saw 196bpm on Friday whilst steadily pedalling up a gentle incline. It's not an accurate measurement.

My record is 260, and that’s from a heart whose ‘maximum’ was 170.

The spikes tend to be when I'm not exerting myself particularly.

So were mine. In my pre-diagnosis days I would get symptomless stuff on the monitor which looked like the interference from power lines I was familiar with, but it started about 10 mins after leaving home, and then persisted continuously until the end of the ride.

I'm increasingly thinking that it's a contact issue.

So did I. And batteries. And Faulty monitor.

Perhaps a lack of sweat.

I found that if I daubed the electrodes with spit at the start of a ride, they remained in contact even if they were dry by the end.

More than likely contacts and IME especially in cold weather.
In the last 30 yrs I’ve had a Garmin, aWahoo, a Scosche and currently a Polar H10.
The first two the straps got tired and experienced spikes as they got older. The Scosche was completely useless and eventually got a full refund for it. It spiked on every descent
The current H10 is the best I’ve had, easily makes contact, comfortable to wear, never misses a beat. I do now follow care instructions and wash it after every few rides. I’m guilty of not doing that with those early purchases.

I have a Polar M52 and a Polar FT4, the former has a disposable moulded plastic belt, which is excellent, the latter a fabric belt with metal gauze woven into it, and it’s useless. The fabric belts wear out so quickly it works out cheaper to use the disposable ones. The body of the FT4 wrist unit is broken now as well, whilst the M52 is 10 years older, and just keeps on going (daily, as a wristwatch).

The only reason I bought the FT4 was that I thought the M52 was faulty, but the FT4 turned out to be just as good at revealing my arrhythmia. Every time I’ve called an ambulance it’s been on the strength of the HRM, not just my symptoms, and it’s never been proved wrong yet.

[rjb]

I've mentioned this before. When heart rate monitors became popular a colleague in the cycling club tried one and during the cafe stop we all discussed why he was getting erratic readings with the 2 brands he tried. Someone suggested he spoke to his doctor.
Next week at the cafe we learn that after his doctor checked him over he was given an urgent referral for further investigation which resulted in him having a pacemaker fitted a couple of days later.
The moral is get yourself checked over.

[wirral_cyclist]

I've mentioned this before. When heart rate monitors became popular a colleague in the cycling club tried one and during the cafe stop we all discussed why he was getting erratic readings with the 2 brands he tried. Someone suggested he spoke to his doctor.
Next week at the cafe we learn that after his doctor checked him over he was given an urgent referral for further investigation which resulted in him having a pacemaker fitted a couple of days later.
The moral is get yourself checked over.

This was what about half a dozen Eureka riders found!

[thirdcrank]

Cognitive dissonance?

[Jon in Sweden]

I appreciate all of your concern, but I'm very certain that it's a technical issue with the monitor.

The spikes have coincided largely with periods of lower effort (ie, lower perspiration) in very cold (ie sub zero) weather. I am certain that the belt is struggling with contact to read my heart rate.

I have pulsatile tinnitus in my left ear too (I've always had it), so I can hear my heart most of the time. There has been no change to it's sound.

I'll try cleaning the contacts and using a DIY contact gel too.

Many thanks

[ElCani]

I have had HR monitors that gave erratic readings (spikes, dropouts etc) due to faulty/unreliable hardware, but I’ve also caught a (potentially) serious health condition (Graves disease) early by noticing my HR was much higher than normal. This was apparent first during exercise, but then when I checked my normal HR (recorded by my Apple Watch) I saw the same thing there. When this happened it was the consistent nature of the recorded data that immediately suggested a health problem rather than a device problem. Plus I was able to cross reference data recorded by my watch and my Garmin.

Anyway, as other I’ve said… while you probably do have a hardware issue, if you’re in any doubt, get checked out.

[cycleruk]

Try a bit of spit on the pads. Rubbed in with your finger.

[Audax67]

Try a bit of spit on the pads. Rubbed in with your finger.

The time-honoured solution, so to speak.

[Jon in Sweden]

Just back from a half hour run. I'm new to running (second run in 10 months) so I was a bit sweaty. No spiking issues at all on the monitor. Average HR 155, max 170.

I did clean the contacts with degreaser before I left. I think that helped.

[Jon in Sweden]

Second test yesterday on a short, brisk gravel ride.

I put on one more layer than usual, got a bit sweaty (it was minus 4) and HR monitor worked perfectly.

I am 100% certain that it was a contact issue now.

Thanks for all the help folks

[rogerzilla]

Riding under 400kV power lines caused mine to display 199bpm for a few seconds.

[softlips]

It's a fairly recent occurrence. I'm had nearly 300hrs of using this HR monitor so I'm quite experienced in knowing how my heart now responds to training input. My HR maximum, prior to this tech issue, was 185bpm, and that genuinely feels close to my max and was on an all out hill climb. I'm also 38, so it roughly aligns with the rule of thumb (220 minus age).

I saw 196bpm on Friday whilst steadily pedalling up a gentle incline. It's not an accurate measurement.

If you're now "....quite experienced in knowing how my heart now responds to training input" why do you bother having the HR monitor? Your problem with it seems to be just another of those pointless diversions suffered by many a gizmo user: a diversion from cycling to data-parsing.

Cugel

Keeping an eye on HR can be extremely useful and can alert a user to arrhythmias such as VT or rapidly conducted AF.

The monitor looks at the intervals between T-waves but to do this needs good contact - a poor contact can result in over counting or under counting. I'd recommend using water rather than spit due to the latter breaking down the HR strap over time.

[Audax67]

Riding under 400kV power lines caused mine to display 199bpm for a few seconds.

Quick! Form an action group of Concerned Citizens and get Monbiot involved.