Should I take it back?

I have a Polar F6 and I love it. I don't know about any others, but I would definitely recommend the Polar!

Wow, that makes it sound like the Timex is hard to set up. Polar HRMs ROCK (I have the FT40, got it on sale on ebay, brand new!) and are super easy to set up. I strongly recommend going with the more reputable brand, Polar!

I also got the timex for christmas. I'm not sure if its the exact same as yours but it may be. There isn't a setting for gender (maybe cause it's the "womens" they decided they didn't need that) or height but to set weight you press mode button until it says HRM setup then press the stop/set button then you can set like your heart rate maximum by hitting the start/split button then hit mode and you can enter your weight. I like mine so far even though I also did as Santa for the polar. Hope this helps.

I bought a Timex T5G971 and found out it wasn't accurate at all - burning 4 calories a minute doing nothing - no way. I just got a Polar FT7 and I like it better. It is definitely more accurate. I did a 30 Day Shred with both (not at the same time) and there was about a 100 calorie difference - the Polar being the lower number.

I just looked over the whole instruction manual (I'm a dork like that sometimes with all this tech stuff). It's in there. But the instructions are a bit obscure as they only go over how to do it for one of the groups, but there are other groups, one of them is Weight, another is maximum heart rate, and another is heart rate display. I didn't see a group for height or age though. I'd still go with the polar, it looks easier to set up and if the Timex truely doesn't have height, or age you're results won't be as accurate.

I'd go with an FT7 from polar, they are easy to use, and they are going for about 85 bucks on amazon, and amazon is an authorized reseller from polar so the manufacturers warranty stays intact. the only thing I'd say about that is, buy some electrical conduction gel to go with it. It's cheap, only about 6 or 8 bucks, and it'll keep your watch from losing sensor signal to the strap. Overall you'll get it for about the same price and it's a decent HRM (not AWESOME but pretty good).

here is a link for an FT7 on amazon
http://www.amazon.com/Polar-Womens-Heart-Monitor-Watch/dp/B001U0OFDM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1293738914&sr=8-1

I also got the timex for christmas. I'm not sure if its the exact same as yours but it may be. There isn't a setting for gender (maybe cause it's the "womens" they decided they didn't need that) or height but to set weight you press mode button until it says HRM setup then press the stop/set button then you can set like your heart rate maximum by hitting the start/split button then hit mode and you can enter your weight. I like mine so far even though I also did as Santa for the polar. Hope this helps.

You can't set your height? Then it's... to be blunt... fairly useless.

Think of it this way: You have 2 women. "Jenny" is 5'3", 200 lbs. She's extremely obese. "Ann" is 5'11", 210 lbs. Depending on her build, she's anywhere from a normal BMI to slightly overweight.

Jenny is going to burn more calories doing everything than Ann is. Breathing, walking, everything. Her effort will be higher. And while yes, her heart rate will reflect that, it won't be AS accurate as if you take height and age into account.

Height may be used in the Polar algorithms to enhance the accuracy of their equation a little, but, overall, it is not considered a major factor in calculating the energy cost of an activity. None of the prediction equations from the American College of Sports Medicine, for example, use height in any way.

There has been some recent research reported that suggests that taller people use less oxygen when running than shorter people, but that is counter to decades of other research and, while it might provide new insight, needs further investigation.