So confused...HRM

mommaski4

I am looking to buy an inexpensive Heart Rate Monitor with chest strap to see how I am really doing on my walks/runs and video routines.

I thought I had it narrowed down to two but now , the Duo 1010 or the Polar FS3. (They have them in the package in the local sporting goods store but not out on display) But when I look into them, or many others I have now looked at online when checking out ratings, I seem to be getting more confused. None of them list that they have a calories burned feature which I really want.

I want:
Easy to read display
Chest strap for better accuracy
Calories burned feature
Must fit a not-tiny wrist (not necessarily large but I am no tiny, fit athlete either)
Stop watch would be nice

I am scraping together money to buy one so it MUST be inexpensive. Any suggestions?

Mesmereyes

bump....I'd love to see what others reccomend

jrich1

I would hate to say if you buy a cheap HRM, you are going to get just that.. look for a Polar with a chest strap, I spent about $90 on mine, you might look on craigslist or something if money is a concern, probably look at spending around 75-100 bucks for one.

I have a Polar FT7 and I love it.

balance9

I've tried many, including Polar and Omron (the least expensive -- no calories).I absolutely love my Garmin FR60 womens HRM. It is around $100, but it is super-simple to set up, give me calories, heart rate, and I bought the optional ANT that uploads my data to my computer so I can see progress over time. The lilac color is cute too:flowerforyou:

The Polar F6 was OK, but the "fat burning zone" bugged me since, given what I know about exercise, its a bit of a myth Also didn't like the pre-calculated heart rate zones based on age algorhythm...another myth. It does calculate calories though.

mrsyac2

Polar FT4 very similar to the FT7 (actually came out the same time) and its cheaper. I actually don't know what makes them different. The regular Polar F4 and F6 are good too. Check out Amazon.com you can get pretty sweet deals. the watches are adjustable by the way.

Cina04

I got a HRM w/ chest strap @ walmart for 47.00 - - - No issues with it!

mizyvee

I have been looking too. I have tried two from Big 5 and have had to take them back. One of them I forget the name was only the watch and no chest strap. If I worked out at the gym, it usually worked fine but if I ran outside it would stop registering period. The next one was with the chest strap. Oregon scientific SE302. It worked very well for a week and then would not register my heart rate whether I was standing still or exercising. On the Oregon Scientific I don't know if I just got a bad one or they are all bad, it worked beautifully when it was working. 1st one on sale @ $49.99 & Oregon Scientific on sale @ $39.99 both at Big 5 Sporting Goods. Original pre-sale prices on both were over $100.

HealthyChanges2010

The inexpensive ones won't typically be the ones that show the calories burned but merely show you if you're staying in your HR zone. The prices go up as you ad more features...

I'm waiting to get one that might be a bit more costly but one I can use in the pool and other features I'd like, to me it's worth spending more for a quality one. Which means saving a bit here and there but I'd rather buy one good one than a number of cheap ones that don't work long and then need to replace them.

A case of if it's to good to be true (price wise) it probably is. Lots and LOTS of options in the archives and thoughts from other members on what's worked for them. Just look under HRM or Polar or whatever other brand you see ppl mentioning alot.

I agree totally, it's very confusing until you narrow it down to what you think is the type you feel is best for you and the price you can afford.

I've become very partial to the Polar brand FT7 in particular as quite a number of members & friends on here have found they love that model and haven't had an issue with it and have only good things to say about it. So likely I'll be getting that one, This will all of course be after car repairs...ugh

Good luck:drinker:

JustAmy

I've had this one since April and love it and have had no problems at all with it! It keeps track of the length of my workout, the average heart rate, the peak heart rate and the calories burned per workout for you, love it!

http://www.amazon.com/Timex-T5G971-Unisex-Personal-Monitor/dp/B000P8VWQS/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=watches&qid=1285170046&sr=8-6

ChubbieTubbie

I got mine from walmart for around $35...It's a sportline watch that tracks time and calories. It isn't very fancy, but it does the job.

svgarcia

so glad this topic came up cuz I just bought a sportline S12 frm walmart. it's doesn't have a chest strap, u wear it like a watch- has stop watch, pedometer, calories burned, all kinds of feature etc...I got it for $45 & I'm gonna return it. the calores burned is not accurate. I did an intense 30 min cardio workout & it said I burned 24 calories.

SHBoss1673

I do believe all Polar's track calorie burn. I think the Garmins forerunners all do, I believe the Timex personal trainer does as well.

Not sure about any others.

I wouldn't go with a no-name brand, you get lower quality and less sophisticated calorie formulas with them, they can be wildly inaccurate.

All HRM's are just predictions, the better ones test those formulas against direct oxygen measurement machines from labs, others just use generic average formulas and do little, if any quality control. Go with a company that stands behind it's products, it may cost you 20 bucks more, but in the long run you'll come much closer to actual calorie burn.

Cina04

so glad this topic came up cuz I just bought a sportline S12 frm walmart. it's doesn't have a chest strap, u wear it like a watch- has stop watch, pedometer, calories burned, all kinds of feature etc...I got it for $45 & I'm gonna return it. the calores burned is not accurate. I did an intense 30 min cardio workout & it said I burned 24 calories.

Was it set up right? For 2 bucks more you can get one w/ a chest strap. I have a sportline. At first I had to play around w/ it to figure it out and determine which setting to use. After that it's works great for me.

bonsweetcandie

I also have a Polar HRM. I have the FT4 and it works amazingly. I've been using it for 4 months now and I can't imagine working out without it. In fact, I have a noticeably not as effictive work out if I do forget it.
As for cost, I'm in Canada and got mine at Sport Chek for about 120 bucks. Completely worth it though in my opinion. :happy:

mommaski4

Thank you all for the input! I still have a lot of thinking to do. The reason I am hesitant on the Polar is the inability to replace the battery. As I said, I had it narrowed down and then started thinking about calories too wondering if they all did it. Well, of course I started looking on various websites and getting more and more confused by the click! The ratings on most varied so greatly. It seems people either love or hate their HRM.

I realize that you get what you pay for. While I would love to have a better one, I don't want to wait on it. I am trying to start running and would really like to monitor my heart rate while doing it. (I think I may be resting too long between jogging sessions; I want the HRM to show where my heart rate is before I run again.) Plus I am spending too much time doing math during my run/walk sessions. ;-)

ErrataCorrige

Plus I am spending too much time doing math during my run/walk sessions. ;-)

lol, I do this too! I stopped at the park the other day to scratch math in the dirt. ha ha

I am doing research on HRM's too. Confused just like you. Let us know what you go with and how you like it.

Lindsay7360

I have the Polar F6

LOVE IT! Easy to use and has all the features you're looking for.

I got mine for about $85. Search on-line and buy from whoever has the best price, that's what I did.

H_82

I didn't want to buy an expensive one either, but didn't want a POS either...so I caved & got a Polar FT60. Have used it twice so far & love it! Well worth the money, in my opinion.

ErrataCorrige

I just picked one up on Macys.com. They are having a 10% sale, and free shipping for over $99, using the code: HOTLIST. I was going for the Polar FT4, but with the shipping discount it ended up being just $5 more for the FT7!

HealthyChanges2010

I just picked one up on Macys.com. They are having a 10% sale, and free shipping for over $99, using the code: HOTLIST. I was going for the Polar FT4, but with the shipping discount it ended up being just $5 more for the FT7!

Excellent choice!

HealthyChanges2010

Thank you all for the input! I still have a lot of thinking to do. The reason I am hesitant on the Polar is the inability to replace the battery. As I said, I had it narrowed down and then started thinking about calories too wondering if they all did it. Well, of course I started looking on various websites and getting more and more confused by the click! The ratings on most varied so greatly. It seems people either love or hate their HRM.

I realize that you get what you pay for. While I would love to have a better one, I don't want to wait on it. I am trying to start running and would really like to monitor my heart rate while doing it. (I think I may be resting too long between jogging sessions; I want the HRM to show where my heart rate is before I run again.) Plus I am spending too much time doing math during my run/walk sessions. ;-)

Why can't you replace your battery? It's easy to do, check the archives for a great place to send them if you'd rather not do it yourself... $10! Azdak shared a great source :flowerforyou:

HealthyChanges2010

I do believe all Polar's track calorie burn. I think the Garmins forerunners all do, I believe the Timex personal trainer does as well.

Not sure about any others.

I wouldn't go with a no-name brand, you get lower quality and less sophisticated calorie formulas with them, they can be wildly inaccurate.

All HRM's are just predictions, the better ones test those formulas against direct oxygen measurement machines from labs, others just use generic average formulas and do little, if any quality control. Go with a company that stands behind it's products, it may cost you 20 bucks more, but in the long run you'll come much closer to actual calorie burn.

Someone gave me an early Polar model, brand new in the box, I read through the whole thing and it doesn't track the calorie burn from what I read. Unfortunately...

It wasn't a gif per se...but passed along to me as something someone didn't use and thought I might. If I remember right it was an early model Polar 1 or 2 (I'm not familiar with how they term the earliest models, so I may be wording that wrong) I passed it back as it kept track of your HR zone only.:ohwell:

If you feel I might be mistaken and all Polars track burns, wow, how awesome that would be if I could use that one, But I didn't see anyway to set anything up like that.

Azdak

I do believe all Polar's track calorie burn. I think the Garmins forerunners all do, I believe the Timex personal trainer does as well.

Not sure about any others.

I wouldn't go with a no-name brand, you get lower quality and less sophisticated calorie formulas with them, they can be wildly inaccurate.

All HRM's are just predictions, the better ones test those formulas against direct oxygen measurement machines from labs, others just use generic average formulas and do little, if any quality control. Go with a company that stands behind it's products, it may cost you 20 bucks more, but in the long run you'll come much closer to actual calorie burn.

Someone gave me an early Polar model, brand new in the box, I read through the whole thing and it doesn't track the calorie burn from what I read. Unfortunately...

It wasn't a gif per se...but passed along to me as something someone didn't use and thought I might. If I remember right it was an early model Polar 1 or 2 (I'm not familiar with how they term the earliest models, so I may be wording that wrong) I passed it back as it kept track of your HR zone only.:ohwell:

If you feel I might be mistaken and all Polars track burns, wow, how awesome that would be if I could use that one, But I didn't see anyway to set anything up like that.

The basic models --used to be A1, now FT1 do not count calories. The FT4 does not allow manual input of VO2 max. That's why I usually recommend the F6, FT7 (not F7).

IsMollyReallyHungry

The Polar F6 was OK, but the "fat burning zone" bugged me since, given what I know about exercise, its a bit of a myth Also didn't like the pre-calculated heart rate zones based on age algorhythm...another myth. It does calculate calories though.

Can you explain what you mean about fat burning zone and pre-caculated HRZ based on age are myths? Please anyone. Thanks!

IsMollyReallyHungry

Thank you all for the input! I still have a lot of thinking to do. The reason I am hesitant on the Polar is the inability to replace the battery. As I said, I had it narrowed down and then started thinking about calories too wondering if they all did it. Well, of course I started looking on various websites and getting more and more confused by the click! The ratings on most varied so greatly. It seems people either love or hate their HRM.

For Polar it is best to go to a dealer to have them replaced. I go to a watch repair man I have went to for years and he is good. but I found out from MFP that you should have the batteries changed by a Polar dealer.

BTW - I have a old Polar A5 and it is wonderful! I have had it for over 7 years now and I just replaced my chest strap a few months ago. I know the calories is off but I definitely recommend Polar brands. I figure since many of the machines in the gym use Polar that says a lot. And Polar chest strap work at the gym with the HRM on the machine even if you don't have on your watch. And you don't have to hold on to the machine sensors.

And whoever said that the more it does, the more they cost is correct. All Polars do not count calories.

I have never had a sportsline but I had a friend who had a Polar and she tried the sportsline from Wal-Mart and she took it back to Wal-Mart within a months time. She hated and kept her Polar. She was just buying one and was going to give the Polar to her husband. I think sportline may good for a 1st HRM but if you have a Polar 1st you can not go to sportline.

Good luck!

bonsweetcandie

Thank you all for the input! I still have a lot of thinking to do. The reason I am hesitant on the Polar is the inability to replace the battery.

The Polar HRM I have allows you to replace the battery on both the computer (the watch part) and the chest strap. My mom has an older model though that you can't replace the battery on the chest strap. Maybe these are reviews for older models you were reading?

Either way I think the decision to buy a HRM is a great one. They really do change the way you work out.

AJWaddlesOn

I purchased the Polar FT4 about a month ago and I love it. I was looking for the same features you listed - unfortunately there is no stop watch. I purchased it on heartratemonitorusa.com for about $90. It is the BEST investment. And you can change the battery yourself. Good luck!

AJWaddlesOn

The Polar F6 was OK, but the "fat burning zone" bugged me since, given what I know about exercise, its a bit of a myth Also didn't like the pre-calculated heart rate zones based on age algorhythm...another myth. It does calculate calories though.

Can you explain what you mean about fat burning zone and pre-caculated HRZ based on age are myths? Please anyone. Thanks!

I would like to know this information too - news to me! Thanks!

adrienc

The basic models --used to be A1, now FT1 do not count calories. The FT4 does not allow manual input of VO2 max. That's why I usually recommend the F6, FT7 (not F7).

Thanks Azdak! I was just trying to figure that out myself and you just made my life easier. I will go for a FT7 then

Azdak

The Polar F6 was OK, but the "fat burning zone" bugged me since, given what I know about exercise, its a bit of a myth Also didn't like the pre-calculated heart rate zones based on age algorhythm...another myth. It does calculate calories though.

Can you explain what you mean about fat burning zone and pre-caculated HRZ based on age are myths? Please anyone. Thanks!

I would like to know this information too - news to me! Thanks!

One is a "myth", the other is an oversimplification.

Maximum heart rate varies widely across the population. There is a wide range of "normal" (like plus or minus 20-30 beats/min) for individuals of the same age, and variations in the degree of HRmax decline with aging. So, there is at least a 1 in 3 chance that a "training zone" that has been automatically calculated for you when you set up an HRM will not be right for you.

Whenever anyone buys a HRM, they should initially just wear it and observe their HR response to their usual exercise routine. Then compare the numbers with your sense of perceived effort. One can also look up various field tests to try to determine HR response to exercise, but not everyone is fit enough to do that.

The traditional "fat burning" concept is a myth. That concept states that if you do lower-duration, longer duration workouts you will not only burn more fat during exercise, you will train your body to burn more fat at rest. Doesn't happen. In fact, a review article I recently posted the link to suggests that exercise is not very effective at all at burning fat (it does contribute to a negative calorie balance which is a primary stimulus of increased fat oxidation).

One should include longer, less intense endurance workouts in one's routine but that's because it helps with overall fitness and endurance.

alana1966

I bought the Sportline S12 and having the same problem - 35 minutes of circuit training and it said I burned 57 calories... Do you have to periodically press the heart rate button to measure your rate during a workout? Also, I tried it on the exercise bike and it said I burned about 14 calories when the bike computer said around 200... I was thinking maybe it was only good for walking/running? Maybe I'm not using it right??