Affordable but good HRM's??

terraskye

i have a budget of around 80-100CDN and I would like to find a good HRM that I can get up here in Canada. I'd love a Garmin but no way can I afford it though right now. I've seen those Mio ones at Costco but I've heard HRM's with a chest strap is bettter..

I don't plan on running any marathons but want to make sure that I'm making the most of my workouts.


TIA
Fiona

Azdak

I am not as familiar with the Garmins, but, in general, my opinion is that, if you cannot afford at least a Polar F6, or a Suunto "t" series HRM, you are better off saving your money until you can afford one, rather than compromising on an inferior product.

terraskye

That is a good point..I think I can order an F6 from Amazon.com in two weeks so I'll wait until then

cdsledge09

This is a little off the topic of your original post, but I was wondering why the HRM's with the chest strap are considered better than those that you can just touch the face of the watch for your heart rate? It is my understanding that the touch face watches and the chest strap work with similar ECG technology? I have a sportline solo, which is undoubtedly not the most costly or sophisticated watch, but it gives me as accurate a heart rate as the chest strap on my elliptical machine. I am not confident about the calorie readings that it gives which is why I am looking for another HRM, but I really don't want to wear a chest strap if I can help it. Please advise. :flowerforyou:

623Hernandez

I am interested in getting a HRM too. I would love to avoid a chest strap also! I doubt I could ware one anyway. I would love some advice about that option too!!!

robin52077

because the chest strap is constantly updating itself.

For example...you touch your watch and you are at 89% max HR, which is a high burn rate, then you inadvertently slow down a bit, which slows your calorie burn, but you haven't re-touched your watch yet, so the calories are counting at the higher rate even though you are not earning it. If you touch it at 60% HR, then start to work harder without re-touching, then you are actually earning MORE calories than it will read...
In order for the watch to be comparable to the strap, you have to touch it about every 30 seconds! SO that way it is always counting the appropriate calories per minute based on your HR for THAT minute, not 5 minutes ago, which could have been a different HR...

Make sense?

Azdak

This is a little off the topic of your original post, but I was wondering why the HRM's with the chest strap are considered better than those that you can just touch the face of the watch for your heart rate? It is my understanding that the touch face watches and the chest strap work with similar ECG technology? I have a sportline solo, which is undoubtedly not the most costly or sophisticated watch, but it gives me as accurate a heart rate as the chest strap on my elliptical machine. I am not confident about the calorie readings that it gives which is why I am looking for another HRM, but I really don't want to wear a chest strap if I can help it. Please advise. :flowerforyou:

If all you want is to occasionally look at heart rate while you exercise, then any monitor will do. If you want to collect any data--average HR, time in zone, etc., a chest strap model is usually necessary, but, again, any brand will do. If you work out at a gym and want to use heart rate interactive programs on the machines, a chest strap is necessary.

Calorie readings from HRMs are often only rough estimates under the best of circumstances. However, there is a qualitative difference in brands like Polar (F6 and above, NOT the F4), Suunto, and I believe some higher-end Garmin models compared to cheaper models. They use better technology and are more accurate--or as accurate as HRMs can be. Just because an HRM has a "calorie counting" feature, doesn't mean it's any more accurate than MFP tables or numbers from machines.

cdsledge09

because the chest strap is constantly updating itself.

For example...you touch your watch and you are at 89% max HR, which is a high burn rate, then you inadvertently slow down a bit, which slows your calorie burn, but you haven't re-touched your watch yet, so the calories are counting at the higher rate even though you are not earning it. If you touch it at 60% HR, then start to work harder without re-touching, then you are actually earning MORE calories than it will read...
In order for the watch to be comparable to the strap, you have to touch it about every 30 seconds! SO that way it is always counting the appropriate calories per minute based on your HR for THAT minute, not 5 minutes ago, which could have been a different HR...

Make sense?

Sure. I thank you both for the good info. I am going to just have to try to adjust to the idea of wearing a chest strap, I guess. I don't run any marathons, and I am not a serious athlete, so I'll have to decide if the cost is worth it for me. Thanks again. :flowerforyou:

cdsledge09

I am not as familiar with the Garmins, but, in general, my opinion is that, if you cannot afford at least a Polar F6, or a Suunto "t" series HRM, you are better off saving your money until you can afford one, rather than compromising on an inferior product.

There are actually several T series Suunto HRM's and a couple are just a little over $100.. Is there one in particular I should look at, or are any of the T series a worth purchase? Keeping in mind, I just want to monitor during my 30 min to 1 hour workouts and know that I'm maximizing my efforts. I won't be doing triathalons etc. Thanks again for any info that you can, or are willing to provide. :flowerforyou:

terraskye

Thanks everyone!! I was able to find a Polar F6 locally here in Alberta and I'll be picking it up tomorrow...Its 91+tax and after 30% off:) Yea!!!

ropsnik

I have been using a Polar HRM for about 6 months and rely on it for monitoring all of my workouts. It only malfunctioned once and it was my fault. When I started losing weight, I found that I needed to adjust the chest strap. Go to the Polar web site and view their products. I think any HRM would be a better tracking tool than what you will find in the gyms on the exercise equipment.

Supermel

I just found a HRM at sears in the states (I'm canadian but am in a border city) for 1/2 price, so $54.99 US. I got the polar F6 and love it. I thought i would hate the chest strap and honestly its awesome. Just feels the bottom of my sports bra and i completely forget it is there. Enjoy yours. I just got my thursday and LOVE IT. The default settings on here for calorie burn were a bit off for me, so this has been a terrific investment.

terraskye

I just found a HRM at sears in the states (I'm canadian but am in a border city) for 1/2 price, so $54.99 US. I got the polar F6 and love it. I thought i would hate the chest strap and honestly its awesome. Just feels the bottom of my sports bra and i completely forget it is there. Enjoy yours. I just got my thursday and LOVE IT. The default settings on here for calorie burn were a bit off for me, so this has been a terrific investment.

I checked sears.com (as I could have it sent to a friend in the US ) but i couldn't find it at the cheaper price everyone had mentioned..It was still around 109$ US

cindyangotti

I am glad you got the polar F6. I use it and have no complaints.