Opinions on HR Monitors please!

Options
2»

Replies

  • Spliner1969
    Spliner1969 Posts: 3,233 Member
    Options
    CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »
    the only thing about the polar is it only measures heart rate. it doesnt measure distance and what not. the app might though.an HR monitor is only good for steady state cardio such as swimming,running,biking,etc cross fit I dont know if thats considered steady state cardio or not

    The Polar is indeed just a HR monitor. I carry my phone with me all the time, usually in my pocket, so it does a great job of counting steps, GPS, as well as using the Polar to monitor HR during workouts with my favorite apps. I have not worn a watch since grade school, and probably won't start now, especially when I have one of the latest smart phones in my pocket already. The only thing it lacked was a HR monitor so the Polar fit the bill. It was also $50ish on Amazon, where a smartwatch/fitness watch started around $150 for a good one and went up from there.

  • leggup
    leggup Posts: 2,942 Member
    Options
    I bought a $15-20 Jarv chest-strap heart rate monitor on Groupon. I have it paired to RunKeeper on my phone. My phone GPS tracks how far I've gone and receives my heart rate data to determine exercise intensity (and I believe it also factors in elevation changes).

    RunKeeper pairs with many fitness apps, including MyFitnessPal. I go on a walk, the app sends my calorie burn information directly to MyFitnesspal.
  • Spliner1969
    Spliner1969 Posts: 3,233 Member
    edited September 2016
    Options
    leggup wrote: »
    I bought a $15-20 Jarv chest-strap heart rate monitor on Groupon. I have it paired to RunKeeper on my phone. My phone GPS tracks how far I've gone and receives my heart rate data to determine exercise intensity (and I believe it also factors in elevation changes).

    RunKeeper pairs with many fitness apps, including MyFitnessPal. I go on a walk, the app sends my calorie burn information directly to MyFitnesspal.

    This was my point, there's no need to spend hundreds of dollars on a smart watch/tracker if you have a smartphone made in the last few years that has gps and step tracking capabilities (most do) unless of course you have money to burn and feel like having the latest and greatest doohickey on your wrist. A strap will always be more accurate than a wrist mounted device. But, if that's the way you decide to go, you can always adjust to it over time just like you can with different apps. Some over estimate, some under estimate, even with HR straps. So accuracy aside, it's just a matter of personal preference, and how much you want to spend.

    Some exceptions though.. my wife for instance. Has a phablet (iPhone 6s Plus). It's too damn large for her to keep in her pocket, so unless she wants to wear an arm strap with that huge thing then it's not suitable for her to use as a step tracker. For this reason she'd prefer a wearable. My phone is almost never not in my pocket so it's the best device for me paired with a strap.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    ^ Speaking of money to burn, this is what happened when I tried to run a 5k with my phone:

    26579079160_48021c2ae9_o_d.jpg
  • adelanghe
    adelanghe Posts: 27 Member
    Options
    You should use running shoes instead...
  • Spliner1969
    Spliner1969 Posts: 3,233 Member
    Options
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    ^ Speaking of money to burn, this is what happened when I tried to run a 5k with my phone:

    Mine stays in a military grade case at all times, hopefully that won't happen. But if it does I have insurance and have an excuse to get a new phone. ;)
  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    Options
    Spliner1969 wrote: »
    leggup wrote: »
    I bought a $15-20 Jarv chest-strap heart rate monitor on Groupon. I have it paired to RunKeeper on my phone. My phone GPS tracks how far I've gone and receives my heart rate data to determine exercise intensity (and I believe it also factors in elevation changes).

    RunKeeper pairs with many fitness apps, including MyFitnessPal. I go on a walk, the app sends my calorie burn information directly to MyFitnesspal.

    This was my point, there's no need to spend hundreds of dollars on a smart watch/tracker if you have a smartphone made in the last few years that has gps and step tracking capabilities (most do) unless of course you have money to burn and feel like having the latest and greatest doohickey on your wrist. A strap will always be more accurate than a wrist mounted device. But, if that's the way you decide to go, you can always adjust to it over time just like you can with different apps. Some over estimate, some under estimate, even with HR straps. So accuracy aside, it's just a matter of personal preference, and how much you want to spend.

    Some exceptions though.. my wife for instance. Has a phablet (iPhone 6s Plus). It's too damn large for her to keep in her pocket, so unless she wants to wear an arm strap with that huge thing then it's not suitable for her to use as a step tracker. For this reason she'd prefer a wearable. My phone is almost never not in my pocket so it's the best device for me paired with a strap.

    Yeah, here's the thing...

    1.) most of the fitness trackers recommended ALSO come with a heart rate strap
    2.) it's also convenient for some activities to have an optical heart rate sensor
    3.) Unlike a phone, if you're wearing something it's on you all the time
    4.) like your wife I cant keep my phone on me all the time, and it's huge so it goes in the bag
    5.) i can't bring my phone with me when i workout either for this reason
    6.) some of these watches also track other data and trends over time (like sleep tracking for example), or offer smart features (like text/call notifications, alarms, etc.) so if i'm in class or at the gym i can reply/call someone back, change my music, etc.


    I guess what i'm saying is... it's not totally useless especially if you're someone who likes to wear a watch. it's a much more convenient form factor that trying to use your phone for everything. Not to mention the fact that i already feel like my iPhone has the worst battery life ever, i can't imagine using it to track all that data and enabling gps on it!

    If you don't want or need an activity tracker that's totally fine, but for some people they are more than just the "latest, greatest, doohickeys". :wink:
  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    Options
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    ^ Speaking of money to burn, this is what happened when I tried to run a 5k with my phone:

    26579079160_48021c2ae9_o_d.jpg

    I am SO lucky, i was running on a treadmill with my brand new iPhone and it slipped and fell (sweat) down my pantleg, the headset cord released, and my phone hit the treadmill and then shot like a rocket some 15 feet behind me. it was 100% totally fine, but NEVER again will i even bring my phone with me in the gym. Nope.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    If you don't want or need an activity tracker that's totally fine, but for some people they are more than just the "latest, greatest, doohickeys". :wink:

    I use my watch when I swim. It tracks my heart rate, gives me a map of where I swam, and other useful stuff. I also use my watch to not get lost sometimes. I wouldn't do this with my phone because, well, my phone's not waterproof:

    27386482953_4e9f0bc0e6_o_d.jpg

    My girlfriend has a waterproof phone case, because she lost a phone to the lake once while she was taking pictures with it, but when it's in the case, you can't actually use the phone. So if you want to pan the map or take a picture or whatever, the phone has to come out of the case for that.

    A broken or lost phone + a replacement phone + a special case + bluetooth sensors + apps to make the phone do what you want = $$$. I decided I'd rather have a watch that does what I want without needing special care or draining my phone battery.
  • _Waffle_
    _Waffle_ Posts: 13,049 Member
    Options
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    i have the garmin forerunner 230 (i don't use optical heart rate, only straps). my boyfriend has the fenix 3 hr.

    I cannot possibly recommend these enough. if you want a review:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiFcQnEhBXY

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGUhsao9mPA

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7e26MK1Q8E

    I love my Fenix 3 HR and can't recommend it enough.


    *Not the boyfriend of @rainbowbow. Just another opinion.
  • Spliner1969
    Spliner1969 Posts: 3,233 Member
    Options
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    rainbowbow wrote: »
    If you don't want or need an activity tracker that's totally fine, but for some people they are more than just the "latest, greatest, doohickeys". :wink:

    I use my watch when I swim. It tracks my heart rate, gives me a map of where I swam, and other useful stuff. I also use my watch to not get lost sometimes. I wouldn't do this with my phone because, well, my phone's not waterproof:

    Agreed, everyone's needs are different. OP didn't mention swimming or I wouldn't have suggested a strap, they will not work for swimming to my knowledge. Swimming would be a good reason to spend a boatload of cash on a tracker, it just isn't an option for me for normal workouts (I wish it was) because of where I live. OP didn't really mention swimming, and I agree a phone + strap isn't really waterproof. Mine are water resistant enough that rain isn't going to bother them (hasn't yet), but swimming isn't an option with either, not that I could do that much where I live anyway.

  • Spliner1969
    Spliner1969 Posts: 3,233 Member
    Options
    Not downling the Fenix 3 at all, but before anyone would spend $500 on a tracker, I'd consider all options (no, I don't own an apple watch nor a wearable fitness tracker, so whichever one is ultimately chosen by someone makes no difference to me):

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7bFiYXuG0M
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    I don't get to swim nearly as often as I'd like, either. :disappointed:

    But swim mode = very waterproof. I live in Seattle so hiking and cycling in the rain is a fact of life here. I'm not going to pull my phone out to use it in a canoe, or a downpour, because that would ruin it.
  • Spliner1969
    Spliner1969 Posts: 3,233 Member
    Options
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    I live in Seattle so hiking and cycling in the rain is a fact of life here. I'm not going to pull my phone out to use it in a canoe, or a downpour, because that would ruin it.

    Gotchya.. I've been to Seattle, it does rain there a lot.. as in holy crap it rains there a lot. Last time I was there I think it was spring and it rained every day for two weeks straight. My newest iPhone might be water resistant to 1M but I still wouldn't pull it out in a downpour, I'm just too skittish about it.

  • rsclause
    rsclause Posts: 3,103 Member
    Options
    My setup is a smartphone with a running app (Runtastic) synced to MFP. Armband so I won't drop it (see above). Bluetooth headphones for music and distance /pace info. Fit bit Blaze synced to MFP and Fit Bit to track heart rate, sleep & steps, the steps are just for challenges and motivation. I let the phone handle the GPS part and it works well because I am always on call too.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    SoxyKitten wrote: »
    It's my birthday soon (40th) & my work mates want to club together & get me something decent. I've never had a HR monitor before. In fact I don't even know if I'm calling it the right thing. But, I want something to measure calories burnt, distance covered, time etc for when I'm out hillwalking, biking & running. I also strength train with weights in the gym but unsure if there's anything suitable for measuring calories burnt in that situation. Any help or recommendations would be much appreciated!

    Key question becomes around the budget, in the absence of knowing that the whole discussion is a bit speculative.

    Noting the conversation above, a phone is a perfectly reasonable cheap option. However generally I'd advise anyone thinking about a tracker of some sort to go beyond that. Difficulties with phones include battery life, low GPS precision and low data collection rates. They're also extremely fragile, as highlighted above.

    Personally I'd generally recommend Garmin devices in each of the three price ranges, but they compete with different suppliers in each range.

    Three aspects to think about; GPS precision, HR precision and ancillaries. Of those, GPS data is by far the most important as distance, elevation and your body mass are more significant to calorie expenditure than anything else. Ancillaries can help, particularly for cycling. HR data can help to refine forecasts, but on it's own is of limited value. With that in mind there is little difference between optical and electrical (chest strap) data collection. Optical has some sensitivity to skin tone, arm hair and positioning, but most recent comparative work I've seen suggests they current crop of collection devices is comparable to consumer grade chest straps.

    The main practical issue with optical collection built into the device is that you're stuck in ba weather with haing it against your skin, so not being able to read the screen, or being able to read the screen but not being able to have the sensor against the skin. The Schoche collection device upthread is a good option, but expensive. That's worn on the upper arm.

    Main suppliers at the moment are:
    • Garmin - They've come into the market from the navigation end. Good GPS, and solid HR monitoring. Early optical tech was bought in but they've recently developed their own proprietary tech that's getting good reports.
    • Suunto - Again having come in from the navigation and environmental instrumentation end of the market. They generally jostle with Garmin for top spot in the higher end devices.
    • Tom-Tom - Came into the market again from the navigation end of the spectrum, albeit consumer grade GPS rather than commercial grade as the previous two. They pioneered the optical collection with early iterations being poor but now much better.
    • Polar - Came into the market from the HR sensing end with an adequate GPS implementation, although that tech has stagnated somewhat.
    • Fitbit - Came in from the consumer activity tracking side of the market. Good social software, adequate activity tracking and poor GPS an HR tracking implementations.


  • pondee629
    pondee629 Posts: 2,469 Member
    Options
    I've been using a Garmin Forerunner 110 with heart rate strap for about two years with no problems. It tracks my heart rate, pace, half mile splits, running time and calories burned (for what that's worth). With Garmin connect, all my runs; training, fitness or races; are stored, mapped and available for evaluation. You can find them, still, refurbished, but the 220 looks to just as good and for the more budget conscious.

Categories