GPS vs HRM vs Armbands Pros & Cons

Frisky_CoastalNative

Hi Everyone!

Ok, I'm looking for information and advise. What is anyones opinions, experiences or recommendations between the three.

Thank you in advance

jukemaster

It really depends on whether you're trying to just track calories or if you want data to use in increasing your performance. I use GPS and HRM to understand my burn and to also understand my weak spots under various conditions.

GPS: Awesome if you run/cycle a lot and want to track your performance at various distances and elevations. If you're using GPS for that reason, you'll want to integrate an HRM into the system too. I like the Garmin products for HRM and GPS, but make sure you do your research since some of them are good and others are just ok. Expect to spend $300 on such a combo... don't cheap out. If you have a smartphone, look to whether it can connect to ANT+ devices or if you can add an ANT+ dongle. If so, you can use your phone for GPS and connect an HRM via the ANT+ connection. You can also connect an HRM via bluetooth, but I haven't had the greatest luck with those.

If you're just thinking of GPS for a means track distance without much effort, rather than utilizing the data for performance improvement, then just use a smartphone app live off the estimates of calorie burns. But I think a GPS + HRM combo is the ideal if you want to track your burn and your performance.

HRM: The points I made above apply here, but I'll add that HRM is the most cost effective way to get a calorie burn estimate for exercise that has you at an elevated heart rate. If you're doing work that puts you under maybe 130 BPM, the HRM won't be so great. For your information, the best way to calculate calorie burn is a combination of measuring heart rates, oxygen consumption, and skin temperature. Devices that measure all those together are way too expensive. I've seen some skin temp systems that incorporate HRM, but even those cost a couple grand. I've also seen skin temp systems that don't use an HRM, but I don't know enough about them to say whether they work well (think of it like a FitBit, but with a skin temp sensor). At any rate, I love HRMs to determine the effectiveness of a workout. Get a chest strap for an HRM. The watches alone are not accurate. If you do get an HRM, also get a bottle of HRM electrode gel. HRM instructions will tell you to wet the electrodes. That usually works, but the gel is never a never fail item. A bottle lasts a while and is only a few bucks. If you're only interested in determining calorie burn from a workout, then the HRM is key. A polar HRM strap and watch combo usually works well for this purpose.

Armbands: I assume you're talking about something like a jawbone or fitbit or similar. I used to think these were neat, but it's really overkill given that the calorie burn measurements are based on movement rather than heart rate. These seem like fancy pedometers to me these days. At best, it's just going to be able to give you a burn estimate with a wide error rate. If you want to record your steps and see if you toss and turn a lot in your sleep, it'll work, but I wouldn't use this for running or any sort of intense workout. It's certainly not the kind of data you could use to improve performance.

My favorite item is the Motorola MotoACTV with an ANT+ HRM chest strap. It can be expensive, but I love the features and it thought it was like a step up from the Garmin products. You can read about it at http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2011/11/motorola-motoactv-in-depth-review.html. That site actually has a ton of reviews that you might be able to use to figure out if any sort of tech is right for you.

SPNLuver83

I don't know what the other 2 are really but I've had great results with justing an HRM!

Frisky_CoastalNative

Thank you very much...this was helpful information