Polar HRM

Options
2»

Replies

  • Chain_Ring
    Chain_Ring Posts: 753 Member
    Options
    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
    Chain_Ring Posts: 753 Member
    Options
    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
    Chain_Ring Posts: 753 Member
    Options
    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
    FatFreeFrolicking Posts: 4,252 Member
    Options
    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
    IHateThinkingOfAUsername Posts: 568 Member
    Options
    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
    Chain_Ring Posts: 753 Member
    Options
    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
    Biggirllittledreams Posts: 306 Member
    Options
    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
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Options
    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
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Options
    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
    Chain_Ring Posts: 753 Member
    Options
    Mr. Perkins you have been blocked. Goodbye.
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Options
    OP ... what activities do you perform? Knowing that helps guide you towards the best option.

    Honestly, if you're not a fairly avid cyclist the Garmin 510 is probably NOT the best option for you.
  • drosebud
    drosebud Posts: 277 Member
    Options
    As well as my Polar FT4, I also use a Garmin Forerunner 110 for running outside as it has a GPS (unlike the Polar).

    If you aren't wanting to track distance, and just want it for gym cardio work to track cals/HR/whatever then the GPS is a waste of money, and the Polar will do just fine.

Categories