Boring, Boring, Boring. Review Data Comparison

I have to say I am getting VERY VERY bored while trying to pick fault with the accuracy of the WAHOO TICKR FIT optical armband

A few weeks ago my opinion was that the Polar OH1 probably very, very slightly edged it in terms of accuracy over the Scosche Rhythm+.

But now I can’t find any way, so far, to say that the OH1 has that same slight advantage over the new TICKR FIT.

Have you ever had an interesting time trying to compare 3 numbers? I mean, like, trying to compare 25 with 25. And with 25 being the third number? That’s pretty much what it’s turning into.

Here are today’s effortsrunning tickr fit cycling tickr fit

Actually I can pick fault. I also tried to pair the Tickr Fit with the Android version of Bioforce HRV (a waking HRV app I used to use a lot). It didn’t pair. Could be my android phone which is a little notorious at pairing or simply there is no HRV capability in the TICKR FIT

Leave a Reply here

2 Comment threads
12 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
5 Comment authors
WebvanBorisgingerneilthe5krunnerJustin Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

That’s awesome if they are this accurate (hoping the rhythm 24 is the same).

Perhaps the things it does beyond HR for its root device is the defining attribute (OH1 might bring other/future functionality/metrics to only polar watches–like how HRM-Tri/run does advanced running metrics power to garmin watches alone)?

If not, and they can indeed give back the exact same HR info, all it comes down to from my point of view is:

-Battery life
-physical fit of device
-device pairing choices.

So far that I’ve read, the tickr fit is 30 hours of battery, the same price as the OH1 (and $20 less than the rhythm 24) dual band and fits on the arm just like the competition.

So…Winner, Winner, Chicken dinner?


I suppose you could try 1k laps on the track to see if they still keep up with the HRM ?