probably need to use the same machine over a period of time and see if you ever get over 140. I can't imagine there is some ceiling above which the machine will not record. could be that as your effort increased, the contact with the hand grips become intermittent and could not record the increase. you could try wearing your regular HR strap while on the machine and compare readings.
my regular? ha ha. never had one. would i be asking these stupid questions if i had.
You could always check the grip reading by counting heart beats manually for 6 seconds, and multiplying by 10.
Thanks for the suggestions. I wonder if it means I have an efficient heart and poor pulmonary function - that certainly would be consistent w my experience at heavy exertion levels. Will investigate further.
Max hr declines with age ... rule of thumb is 220 minus age ... which puts me at ... calculating ... 168 ... but i see 175 during races ... garmin max shows 197 but i consider that an erroneous reading
So by the rule of thumb I would be @ 157 which is not really that far off, I remember seeing a spike of 145 at the very end, and probably almost impossible to get to max on an elliptical.
I'm not agreeing with you there. I have no trouble hitting max (177) on an elliptical. That 220-age thing is a very loose rule. The only way to know is to spike it as best you can while wearing a reliable HR monitor.
I don't know, maybe thats where those 225 rev/min legs come into play. Of course, I wasn't trying to go all out, just survive a series of 5 min. I-pace intervals.
next time try going all out and see if you can break 140 bpm . . . !
the HR's on the cardio equip are totally unreliable with the hand grip sensors. probably worse than useless.
Counter to conventional wisdom, my max rate has actually gone up over the last 3 years by 5 bpm, especially with the speed work this spring. Not a lot, but it hasn't gone down.
The garmin straps/pods are affected by static elect. A dry HR strap, low humidity and cold temps will affect the HR reading for the first mile or so, for me. I often see 190's within a block of leaving the house. If I stop running, it drops back to reasonable almost instantly. My original strap and pod also had issues near high voltage transmission lines.
I just got a monitoring device as part of a study at work. It's a Basis Peak, which is supposedly the very cutting edge on these things. Measures a ton of stuff all from the wrist. I'll let you know how the readings come out.
Both on inclined treadmill test at cardiologist (all wired up) and at Y on Stair Step, 140 is also a barrier for me. The hand-grip sensors on Stair Step give "believable" data -- not jumping around and reflect my slow versus fast intervals with each "Bottom" rate a bit higher than previous one. I thought the 140 max might be my statin drug. Also, I blame my 140 max (sucking air) with my slowdown from 8 to 10 minute miles -- impressed that you can do your sprints and paces at 140 max. Hiking and cycling feel fine.
Ricka - I noticed the same thing, that the rate went up at each interval, which seems to be consistent w/ 'believability' and parallel the fact that each interval was getting harder, even though the other variables remained the same.
What benefits does knowing ones heart rate actually have? From all this, I'm getting a) the data are not necessarily consistent or to be trusted b) and/or it is just a number that tells you what you already know from experience and/or distracts you from paying attention to what you are doing:)
An accurate read on HR can be very useful to keep from overcooking the early pace in a long event. Other than that, I agree: it's interesting information, but I don't know what you do with it.
HR is a measure of intensity, JD lists it as an alternate way of making sure you are doing the intended amount of work for the type or workout . . . E, M, R, etc. personally, I look at HR but don't use it to guide my workout. use time/distance for running and power/watts for cycling.
This discussion thread is closed.