Heart Rate Monitor Suggestions?

Options
JackieAlicia92
JackieAlicia92 Posts: 1 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Hi there! I've recently decided to get back into a diet and fitness regimen to lose some weight. I have a pretty good idea of how to do most things, because I've lost a decent amount of weight in the past and have the benefit of knowing what works for me. Back then, I used the Polar FT4 HRM to track the calories I burned exercising. It was simple enough to use and worked well for me, plus it was super affordable.

I still have that heart rate monitor, but am very much bored with it, and it's so old that the battery dies often. I need a change, preferably a watch that tracks burned calories AND has GPS tracking for my runs. I'm willing to spend a little more money than I did for my old HRM as long as the product is good quality and delivers what I need. Do you guys have any suggestions/recommendations?

Replies

  • IsaackGMOON
    IsaackGMOON Posts: 3,358 Member
    edited August 2015
    Options
    Suunto Ambit or a Garmin.
  • Upstate_Dunadan
    Upstate_Dunadan Posts: 435 Member
    Options
    I have a Polar M400 and love it. There are quite a few recent threads on the topic and I've posted my thoughts on them. Just search M400 and you should find a few good recent discussions on the watch.
  • RacquetChick
    RacquetChick Posts: 164 Member
    Options
    I love my Garmin 225 Forerunner. It has the HR on the wrist, so no strap but they are a bit pricey.
  • msf74
    msf74 Posts: 3,498 Member
    Options
    If you have a smartphone then you can hook up a Polar H7 unit to it (or any other bluetooth HRM really) and use an app like Endomondo. That's probably your cheapest option.

    If you want a watch then something like a Polar M400 (admittedly I am biased as I got this at a cracking price on Wiggle) or Garmin 220 would be good.
  • SimonT181
    SimonT181 Posts: 49 Member
    Options
    Also looking to get a HRM, OP any reason why you are moving from a chest to a wrist HRM are they as accurate ? What every you pick please post your review of what you get.
  • Spike_G
    Spike_G Posts: 149 Member
    Options
    SimonT181 wrote: »
    Also looking to get a HRM, OP any reason why you are moving from a chest to a wrist HRM are they as accurate ? What every you pick please post your review of what you get.

    They're generally not thought to be as accurate as the chest monitors. However if you're using them to monitor heart rate zones they're perfectly acceptable.

    Bear in mind the calorie burn feedback for any HRM is only accurate for steady cardio anyway.
  • mwyvr
    mwyvr Posts: 1,883 Member
    Options
    A HRM can be a good tool for someone bent on improving their running or road cycling. I'm not talking about elite level athletes, just people who are serious about what they are trying to do. Beyond that... they are probably not worth it. That said if one wants a GPS watch and it supports HR monitoring as most do, bonus.

    In the Garmin world a FR220 + chest strap or possibly the new FR225 with wrist monitor, or the older but still available FR610 or FR910XT triathalon watches are all good choices. The FR620 is good but is yet more expensive.
  • Upstate_Dunadan
    Upstate_Dunadan Posts: 435 Member
    Options
    Spike_G wrote: »
    SimonT181 wrote: »
    Also looking to get a HRM, OP any reason why you are moving from a chest to a wrist HRM are they as accurate ? What every you pick please post your review of what you get.

    They're generally not thought to be as accurate as the chest monitors. However if you're using them to monitor heart rate zones they're perfectly acceptable.

    Bear in mind the calorie burn feedback for any HRM is only accurate for steady cardio anyway.

    I was using a Microsoft Band for over a year and finally replaced it with my Polar M400 and H7 chest strap. The reason? The HR on the band was too far off to make HR zone training anywhere near accurate it enough. I would be on the treadmill trying to do a nice stead state Zone 2 HR workout (that's really barely working hard at all) and the Band would show my HR over 160bpm. I knew that was not accurate. After picking up my Polar, and did a comparison on the treadmill and while the band showed HR above 160 multiple times throughout a 60 minute run, my Polar helped me stay pegged right around 125 bpm. I knew the Band was off, but 45 bpm is not even in the ballpark of being an acceptable deviation.

Categories