Best HRM for runners or triathletes?

SERinDC

Does anyone have a recommendation for a heart rate monitor that measures mileage in addition to heart rate/calories burned? My sense from other posts and looking online is that Polar does not offer this and I would have to go with a Garmin model, but I'm not entirely sure.

If anyone has a specific model that they really like, please let me know. Also, if there are triathletes out there, do you use a different watch for running and swimming or same watch? I've seen there are "lap watches" for swimming that are pretty cheap, but I assume there are one-stop shop watches that do everything. The ironman watches seem like they would do everything, but their reviews online are not the best.

Thanks!

catlady100

Hi. I have a Garmin 301 for running. It was a gift, so I haven't done any research or looked at any pros/cons of this watch. I'm still learning how to use it, but so far I really like it.

hth.

therealangd

I have a Garmin 305. I love it for running. It has a GPS function. It offers training functions.

It does have a chest strap to record heart rate, but the calorie burn is based off a calculation and not your heart rate. It is used solely for training purposes.

SERinDC

Ok - great, thanks! I'm leaning toward one that's better for training than calorie count, so it sounds like I'll be going with a Garmin.

RyanPerry2012

I have the Garmin 405 and while the price tag was significant, I can honestly say it has transformed how I run. And while some may claim the GPS can be off at the start of a run, I have never had such an issue. The 405 is kind of a compromise between button-based and touchscreen, in which you touch the bezel around the screen in certain spots to navigate menus. I was recommended to go with the 405 as opposed to the touchscreen models because they can be ultra-sensitive, and I am kind of glad I did. Even my shirt sleeve rubbing the bezel of the 405 is enough to change screens if I don't lock the display during a run. However I'm hard-pressed to think of any complaint about it.

SERinDC

I have the Garmin 405 and while the price tag was significant, I can honestly say it has transformed how I run. And while some may claim the GPS can be off at the start of a run, I have never had such an issue. The 405 is kind of a compromise between button-based and touchscreen, in which you touch the bezel around the screen in certain spots to navigate menus. I was recommended to go with the 405 as opposed to the touchscreen models because they can be ultra-sensitive, and I am kind of glad I did. Even my shirt sleeve rubbing the bezel of the 405 is enough to change screens if I don't lock the display during a run. However I'm hard-pressed to think of any complaint about it.

Great -- that model does look really great. Now I'm trying to decide if I should buy one ASAP since I have a half marathon in two weeks or just wait until after the race so I have time to adjust to using it...decisions, decisions! Thanks for all the input everyone.

RyanPerry2012

For what it's worth, I personally found it very user-friendly and was mostly accustomed to it by my second run. If you take full advantage of the online features, the data it records can potentially be extremely useful to you in analyzing your runs and preparing for future training. Especially during a long distance run such as a half marathon, it breaks down your lap splits so that you can see exactly where you may have sped up or slowed down, anytime after you complete the race and upload the data - because you have more to focus on during the race.

Also, if you have goal paces in mind that you'd like to aim for, I've found it quite accurate in estimating each mile split. Without it, I may have run my first race slower than planned because I would not be completely aware of my current pace. I can definitely say that seeing that probable split time on my watch lit a fire under my feet on several occasions and served as a positive reassurance when I was beating my planned splits.