Polar HRM

heatherv89

Hey all, just wondering, as I'm in the market (choosing between FT4 and FT7 although either way I'm sure it will be fine) I saw a reviewer saying that the HRM does not have a stop watch? Is this the case? Are you not able to track how many calories you have burned in, for example, a 30 minute time frame or however long? Just curious.

spfldpam

I've had the Polar FT7 for almost a year now. I am able to see how many calories I burn during the time frame I hit the watch to start and stop along with fat burn, fitness burn and ave heart rate and max heart rate on the FT7. You just have to remember to hit the watch when you start your workout and then hit it again to pause if pausing during the workout to run to bathroom or switch clothes to go into the pool or whatever and then hit the watch again to resume the timing. I love my Polar FT7. It works great in the water too doing pool exercises or swimming. Just don't hit any buttons with the watch under the water they recommend.

pleasegivemeanynamesoicanjoin

Hi there, I have a polar FT7 and have used it for over a year now - i find it brilliant, and it tracks how long a workout has been, calories burnt (accurately with the HRM) and average heart rate and minimum too. Their websites brilliant for tracking workouts too. Its also fully waterproof so you can wear the watch and HRM for swimming/ canoeing etc.
Alice x

drosebud

I've got an FT4 and love it. I press start at the beginning of an exercise and press another button when I'm done. It then shows how long I've been exercising for. You can toggle the display according to what you want to see when exercising: HR (BIG, which is good for me as my eyesight is naff), time, and a mix. I normally just have it set on HR. It also give max + avg HR for the exercise and stores (up to 20, I think) so you can look at past exercises.

eemurphee

I have the FT7....Got it about 3 weeks ago. I love it!!! I'm loving tracking how many calories I burn in my training sessions (~ 1hr), which I can see on the watch. Like another user stated, make sure you don't forget to hit start! I've cautious myself about 5 minutes in and forgot to start my watch, but oh well! Love this thing!

scubakat67

Hi. I have a Polar FT4 - actually revived my old FT4s as well with a new chest strap so I'd have an extra (nice for those days when you run in the morning, then do strength/weights in the afternoon, sucks putting on a damp chest strap). I have had many varieties of HRMs, but always come back to Polar. The FT4 tracks my HR, calories, average HR, and more features that I don't use, as I'm mostly interested in keeping my HR in the proper zone and knowing how many calories burned. You can compare the two models on Polar.com which will give you a chart showing the different features. I believe the big difference is the FT7 has more advanced features for training and may link to a computer (not sure).

Chain_Ring

Neither. Buy a Garmin instead. It'll make all other devices look like toys.

BusyRaeNOTBusty

I have a FT4 and my husband had an FT7. I didn't miss any of the extra features his had.

Curleycue0314

I have the FT4 and don't miss the extra functions that the FT7 has. It still gives me the total time and the average HR and everything that I need. I wear it anytime I'm doing any type of workout, including mowing the lawn! Best thing ever!

Biggirllittledreams

Question - do you need to wear the chest strap 24/7 to get a accurate reading? I want one, as i was a fool, and didn't do much research before buying a Fibtit. Since the Fitbit really only measures the movement of your arms - and i'm a cashier so it's very often screwy - i was looking to find a device that could measure my calories burned/heart rate/etc., but didn't want to wear a chest strap 24/6.

Are any of the Polar models like that?

pleasegivemeanynamesoicanjoin

I think to get accurate calories burned you need to wear a Heart rate monitor. I only use mine during exercise so havent worn my for more than an hour. Without the HRM calories burned will only be an estimate.
Having used a Garmin, I do think Polar's are better, easier to use and better value for money - Garmin heart rate straps are notorious for being faulty and unreliable. x

BusyRaeNOTBusty

Question - do you need to wear the chest strap 24/7 to get a accurate reading? I want one, as i was a fool, and didn't do much research before buying a Fibtit. Since the Fitbit really only measures the movement of your arms - and i'm a cashier so it's very often screwy - i was looking to find a device that could measure my calories burned/heart rate/etc., but didn't want to wear a chest strap 24/6.

Are any of the Polar models like that?

No. Polar HRMs are not designed to give calories for your entire day. They'll measure your heart rate but the conversion to calories burned only works during cardio exercise.

Kevalicious99

Those models are similar. Not familiar with the FT7 but no stopwatch in the FT4 .. but remember that the calorie burn numbers from these devices are prone to error, sometimes big errors.

That is due to the fact that they can only do one thing .... measure your heart rate.

The calorie burn number is a math calculation .. and can be very very out. I just find it funny how people here think that these devices are so precise.

So just be aware of that .. if something sounds like it is out, it probably is.

For example .. my FT4 (which I have since given away .. as it was just not accurate), said I burned 1998 calories for walking about 3 hours. I am 162 lbs .. and that amount of calorie burn is just not even close, even though I am a pretty fast walker.

But if you want to measure the amount of work / effort you are doing by measuring your HR .. then they are great devices.

RachelSteeners

I recently got the FT4. It works a treat

Chain_Ring

Those models are similar. Not familiar with the FT7 but no stopwatch in the FT4 .. but remember that the calorie burn numbers from these devices are prone to error, sometimes big errors.

That is due to the fact that they can only do one thing .... measure your heart rate.

The calorie burn number is a math calculation .. and can be very very out. I just find it funny how people here think that these devices are so precise.

So just be aware of that .. if something sounds like it is out, it probably is.

For example .. my FT4 (which I have since given away .. as it was just not accurate), said I burned 1998 calories for walking about 3 hours. I am 162 lbs .. and that amount of calorie burn is just not even close, even though I am a pretty fast walker.

But if you want to measure the amount of work / effort you are doing by measuring your HR .. then they are great devices.

This is precisely why you should by a Garmin, it will use many other metrics in addition to HR to calculate your calorie burn. Might I recommend the Edge 510?

Chain_Ring

And yes it costs quite a bit more. You get what you pay for and you pay for what you get.

dixiech1ck

I have both the FT4 and the FT7 and I find the FT4 to be far superior than the 7. Just my personal preference but I don't need all the hoity toity dings and whistles. Just tell me what I've burned and where my fat burn is located during my workout. I also have the Garmin 310XT and got the heart rate strap and pod and it is waaaaaaaaaaay off what my caloric burn is. When I questioned the representative at an expo, he got all defensive saying that Polar products are crap and that my Garmin was spot on. No way that I'm 190 lbs, run for 2 hours and only burn 550 calories. Not possible. Was saying my HR was 112 BPM running at a 10:30 pace. I can get my BP up higher than that just sitting at my desk.

Good luck!

Check out DC Rainmaker for any recommendations on HRM's and Garmins.

JonathanLepoff

It doesn't have a separate stop watch but it times your exercise periods when you are monitoring your heart rate

brianpperkins

Neither. Buy a Garmin instead. It'll make all other devices look like toys.

Unless the person doesn't need a GPS in which case the low end Garmins are useless to them (not to mention more expensive that the FT4 or FT7). Olathe, Kansas puts out less pro-Garmin propaganda than you do.

jessieleah

I just got my FT7 and I've used it once so far, but I really like it! Easy to use, feels comfortable. I was in the same boat as you when it came down to choosing between the ft7 & ft4. I went with the FT7 because it was only $5 more than the FT4 that I could find.

Soccer_Chick

And yes it costs quite a bit more. You get what you pay for and you pay for what you get.

Alright...I am finally going to bite! I have been using Polar for several years and have always LOVED them, but I am going to take a look at the Gramin website today and see what I'm missing!
Thanks!!

Chain_Ring

And yes it costs quite a bit more. You get what you pay for and you pay for what you get.

Alright...I am finally going to bite! I have been using Polar for several years and have always LOVED them, but I am going to take a look at the Gramin website today and see what I'm missing!
Thanks!!

Good choice!

Chain_Ring

I just got my FT7 and I've used it once so far, but I really like it! Easy to use, feels comfortable. I was in the same boat as you when it came down to choosing between the ft7 & ft4. I went with the FT7 because it was only $5 more than the FT4 that I could find.

Doh! Shoulda bought a Garmin.

Chain_Ring

Neither. Buy a Garmin instead. It'll make all other devices look like toys.

Unless the person doesn't need a GPS in which case the low end Garmins are useless to them (not to mention more expensive that the FT4 or FT7). Olathe, Kansas puts out less pro-Garmin propaganda than you do.

U mad bro?

FatFreeFrolicking

Those models are similar. Not familiar with the FT7 but no stopwatch in the FT4 .. but remember that the calorie burn numbers from these devices are prone to error, sometimes big errors.

That is due to the fact that they can only do one thing .... measure your heart rate.

The calorie burn number is a math calculation .. and can be very very out. I just find it funny how people here think that these devices are so precise.

So just be aware of that .. if something sounds like it is out, it probably is.

For example .. my FT4 (which I have since given away .. as it was just not accurate), said I burned 1998 calories for walking about 3 hours. I am 162 lbs .. and that amount of calorie burn is just not even close, even though I am a pretty fast walker.

But if you want to measure the amount of work / effort you are doing by measuring your HR .. then they are great devices.

This is precisely why you should by a Garmin, it will use many other metrics in addition to HR to calculate your calorie burn. Might I recommend the Edge 510?

Garmin's are useless unless you are a person who spends countless hours hiking and biking in the middle of nowhere.

Most people do not need or care to have the information a Garmin provides, unless they are avid hikers or bikers.

P.S. Why would you recommend a BIKE computer to someone that you have no idea what kind of exercise they do? Unless they are an avid biker, it's pointless for them to buy a Edge 510.

IHateThinkingOfAUsername

If a stop watch is important consider the FT1.
It has it's downfalls - it only records 1 exercise period (not a problem for me, I log it straight in MFP so I don't need it to remember them for me).

But it works in the water (have worn it swimming and for aquacise). It has a chest strap. It has a single button that you do everything with - start and stop exercise, and show your last work out stats. Whilst exercising when you move it close to the chest strap it scrolls between current heart rate, time since starting exercise, and actual time. After exercising when viewing your history it shows you how long you were exercising for, your average heart rate, and your maximum heart rate.

It meets my needs perfectly.

Chain_Ring

Those models are similar. Not familiar with the FT7 but no stopwatch in the FT4 .. but remember that the calorie burn numbers from these devices are prone to error, sometimes big errors.

That is due to the fact that they can only do one thing .... measure your heart rate.

The calorie burn number is a math calculation .. and can be very very out. I just find it funny how people here think that these devices are so precise.

So just be aware of that .. if something sounds like it is out, it probably is.

For example .. my FT4 (which I have since given away .. as it was just not accurate), said I burned 1998 calories for walking about 3 hours. I am 162 lbs .. and that amount of calorie burn is just not even close, even though I am a pretty fast walker.

But if you want to measure the amount of work / effort you are doing by measuring your HR .. then they are great devices.

This is precisely why you should by a Garmin, it will use many other metrics in addition to HR to calculate your calorie burn. Might I recommend the Edge 510?

Garmin's are useless unless you are a person who spends countless hours hiking and biking in the middle of nowhere.

Most people do not need or care to have the information a Garmin provides, unless they are avid hikers or bikers.

P.S. Why would you recommend a BIKE computer to someone that you have no idea what kind of exercise they do? Unless they are an avid biker, it's pointless for them to buy a Edge 510.

Pointless? Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. I use my 510 for biking, hiking and running. All I am saying is Garmin is superior to Polar.

Biggirllittledreams

Question - do you need to wear the chest strap 24/7 to get a accurate reading? I want one, as i was a fool, and didn't do much research before buying a Fibtit. Since the Fitbit really only measures the movement of your arms - and i'm a cashier so it's very often screwy - i was looking to find a device that could measure my calories burned/heart rate/etc., but didn't want to wear a chest strap 24/6.

Are any of the Polar models like that?

No. Polar HRMs are not designed to give calories for your entire day. They'll measure your heart rate but the conversion to calories burned only works during cardio exercise.

Thank you for that tidbit of informaiton! I was looking online, and not only was the information lacking there, but i kept going to health stores that sold the Polar FT4/7, and they couldn't answer my questions either. Appreciate it!

brianpperkins

Neither. Buy a Garmin instead. It'll make all other devices look like toys.

Unless the person doesn't need a GPS in which case the low end Garmins are useless to them (not to mention more expensive that the FT4 or FT7). Olathe, Kansas puts out less pro-Garmin propaganda than you do.

U mad bro?

Not mad at all. Are you capable of intelligent, on topic discourse?

brianpperkins

Those models are similar. Not familiar with the FT7 but no stopwatch in the FT4 .. but remember that the calorie burn numbers from these devices are prone to error, sometimes big errors.

That is due to the fact that they can only do one thing .... measure your heart rate.

The calorie burn number is a math calculation .. and can be very very out. I just find it funny how people here think that these devices are so precise.

So just be aware of that .. if something sounds like it is out, it probably is.

For example .. my FT4 (which I have since given away .. as it was just not accurate), said I burned 1998 calories for walking about 3 hours. I am 162 lbs .. and that amount of calorie burn is just not even close, even though I am a pretty fast walker.

But if you want to measure the amount of work / effort you are doing by measuring your HR .. then they are great devices.

This is precisely why you should by a Garmin, it will use many other metrics in addition to HR to calculate your calorie burn. Might I recommend the Edge 510?

Garmin's are useless unless you are a person who spends countless hours hiking and biking in the middle of nowhere.

Most people do not need or care to have the information a Garmin provides, unless they are avid hikers or bikers.

P.S. Why would you recommend a BIKE computer to someone that you have no idea what kind of exercise they do? Unless they are an avid biker, it's pointless for them to buy a Edge 510.

Pointless? Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. I use my 510 for biking, hiking and running. All I am saying is Garmin is superior to Polar.

You're actually advocating what Garmin markets as a "Purpose-built Bike Computer" for hiking and running to a person who is looking for a HRM ... not a GPS system?

Chain_Ring

Mr. Perkins you have been blocked. Goodbye.