Polar or Garmin? Which Heart Rate Monitor?
Scubdup
Posts: 104 Member
Hi there. I'm considering getting a wrist-monitored HRM and I was wondering if I could hear from people who've owned both Polar and Garmin about which they preferred.
I need to stick to Polar, Garmin, or Fitbit as they work well with my health insurance incentive scheme.
I'm interested to know if one manufacturer's wrist monitors perform better and/or if one has better software than the other.
Thanks a lot for any help.
I need to stick to Polar, Garmin, or Fitbit as they work well with my health insurance incentive scheme.
I'm interested to know if one manufacturer's wrist monitors perform better and/or if one has better software than the other.
Thanks a lot for any help.
0
Replies
-
What are you wanting to gain from having one and what activities are you intending on tracking?0
-
Primarily it's to track steps and exercise to improve my status within my health insurer's incentive scheme, but I'd quite like to introduce some degree of heart-rate-based training to my running, indoor rowing, and possibly cycling too.
Really though, I'm after comparative reviews of Garmin vs Polar from users who've had both and can comment on the relative ergonomics of the software etc.0 -
I've had both, but back in the old days so it might not be that relevant anymore. I had one of the earlier Garmin forerunner watches that didn't track daily activity but was great for workouts and gps monitoring. I switched to a polar m400 to get the dayly activity monitoring back in 2015/2016 I think. I think I preferred the polar app to the garmin one, but that might have improved. When it came to the workouts I preferred Garmin, but overall I liked polar better because of the activity monitoring. Was I to buy one of them now I would go for Garmin though.
Now I have the Apple watch, which I would not reccomend for workouts, but I like it for getting my notifications and daily activity stuff.0 -
Primarily it's to track steps and exercise to improve my status within my health insurer's incentive scheme, but I'd quite like to introduce some degree of heart-rate-based training to my running, indoor rowing, and possibly cycling too.
Really though, I'm after comparative reviews of Garmin vs Polar from users who've had both and can comment on the relative ergonomics of the software etc.
Ok, that's helpful.
I've used both, but would generally recommend Garmin now. As far as step tracking is concerned, there isn't much in it, so if generally go for whichever one your social group uses of you want to compare our use challenges. If social stuff isn't a determinant, then whichever you like the look of.
If you want to use HR training then for running, again no big benefit of either. Garmin have a better pedigree around GPS and other instrumentation.
For cycling and rowing I'd suggest either upper arm optical or chest strap measurement. The main reason is that with the wrist flexed it's not a good place to measure HR. Whilst I don't see the value in zone training for recreational exercise, of you are going to use it then a consistency of measurement is quite important.
Essentially you're looking for two different tools.
Personally, at the moment I use a Forerunner 735XT, with Garmin straps. Either the HRM Tri for running, HRM Swim for swimming or a classic strap for cycling and rowing. The wrist optical is solid for running, but the Run Dynamics from the HRM Tri are useful data for me.0 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »Primarily it's to track steps and exercise to improve my status within my health insurer's incentive scheme, but I'd quite like to introduce some degree of heart-rate-based training to my running, indoor rowing, and possibly cycling too.
Really though, I'm after comparative reviews of Garmin vs Polar from users who've had both and can comment on the relative ergonomics of the software etc.
Ok, that's helpful.
I've used both, but would generally recommend Garmin now. As far as step tracking is concerned, there isn't much in it, so if generally go for whichever one your social group uses of you want to compare our use challenges. If social stuff isn't a determinant, then whichever you like the look of.
If you want to use HR training then for running, again no big benefit of either. Garmin have a better pedigree around GPS and other instrumentation.
For cycling and rowing I'd suggest either upper arm optical or chest strap measurement. The main reason is that with the wrist flexed it's not a good place to measure HR. Whilst I don't see the value in zone training for recreational exercise, of you are going to use it then a consistency of measurement is quite important.
Essentially you're looking for two different tools.
Personally, at the moment I use a Forerunner 735XT, with Garmin straps. Either the HRM Tri for running, HRM Swim for swimming or a classic strap for cycling and rowing. The wrist optical is solid for running, but the Run Dynamics from the HRM Tri are useful data for me.
To the OP, if you want accurate metrics, get a arm or chest strap. the wrist one's just aren't as accurate, for all the reasons MM has mentioned. Personally, I use a Wahoo Tickr.
@MeanderingMammal How do you find the durability of the HRM Tri/HRM Swim straps. I know for me with the Wahoo, I'm very hard on straps. The Garmin brand straps are certainly better than the Wahoo or generic, but I see that the puck on the Tri/Swim is integral and there are quite a few complaints about durability/replacement on the Amazon forums.
0 -
I haven't had any issues, but I hand wash them in the shower. My classic is starting to perish a little, but that's about 4 years old.
The only issue is the clasp can cause some irritation, but that's more likely due to wearing it for 3-4 hours at a time and wearing a race vest over the top.1 -
I have a Garmin Fenix 5S that I love--it has modes for all of the sports that I enjoy (running/alpine skiing/XC skiing/hiking/swimming/cycling/triathlon). I do not wear a chest strap when I am doing my swim training--it's not that important for me to have HRM info for those workouts.
I don't wear my Garmin all day--even though it has the smallest face of the 5 series, it's still large on my wrist, and I tend to get a rash underneath from trapped moisture. During my health insurance incentive challenges I actually resort to wearing my basic fitbit all day to record steps and then just add my Garmin when I workout.0 -
stanmann571 wrote: »
To the OP, if you want accurate metrics, get a arm or chest strap. the wrist one's just aren't as accurate, for all the reasons MM has mentioned. Personally, I use a Wahoo Tickr.
It's not a question of inaccurate, but inconsistent. Whilst wrist optical will give an accurate read, what you can't be certain of is whether that's an accurate read of the same thing every time.
For most people wrist optical is good enough, most of the time. Other sources of error are far more significant, in most circumstances.
In the two specific examples, the wrist is placed under stress, which makes it an inappropriate place to take a reading. Upper arm is still optical, not electrical, so while it's got similar accuracy, it's more predicable. Stresses in the upper arm don't generate the same level of inconsistency.1 -
Wrist based HRM is not useful on a bike. For example standing on the pedals changes your wrist angle because of the way you hold the bars. Looking back at the data after a ride you have no idea whether the part of the HR record you're looking at is reliable or not.0
-
I have a Fenix 5 and it keeps up with anything I want to do and then some. No issue with rash or any of that. I take it through plenty of mud runs and I still haven't even managed to scratch the face of it, really impressed so far. GPS is really good, step counter is pretty good, HRM is fine for a wrist watch and is a good generic daily average.1
-
I have a Polar HT7 with chest strap. I don’t need anything fancy, I just want to track my calories burned when I exercise, because I don’t wear a watch during the day. It’s syncs well with most of my gym equipment (Spinning bikes) but I use it to swim and when I do classes, mostly. It shows your heart rate and you can look back at your data and see if you are in Fat burn mode or Fitness mode. I simply wipe down my chest strap and store it. I’ve had mine for 4 years now and I believe I paid around $79.99 for it.0
-
MeanderingMammal wrote: »Primarily it's to track steps and exercise to improve my status within my health insurer's incentive scheme, but I'd quite like to introduce some degree of heart-rate-based training to my running, indoor rowing, and possibly cycling too.
Really though, I'm after comparative reviews of Garmin vs Polar from users who've had both and can comment on the relative ergonomics of the software etc.
Ok, that's helpful.
I've used both, but would generally recommend Garmin now. As far as step tracking is concerned, there isn't much in it, so if generally go for whichever one your social group uses of you want to compare our use challenges. If social stuff isn't a determinant, then whichever you like the look of.
If you want to use HR training then for running, again no big benefit of either. Garmin have a better pedigree around GPS and other instrumentation.
For cycling and rowing I'd suggest either upper arm optical or chest strap measurement. The main reason is that with the wrist flexed it's not a good place to measure HR. Whilst I don't see the value in zone training for recreational exercise, of you are going to use it then a consistency of measurement is quite important.
Essentially you're looking for two different tools.
Personally, at the moment I use a Forerunner 735XT, with Garmin straps. Either the HRM Tri for running, HRM Swim for swimming or a classic strap for cycling and rowing. The wrist optical is solid for running, but the Run Dynamics from the HRM Tri are useful data for me.
Yeah, it's an off-topic quibble, but I can't stop myself: Wrist should not be flexed when rowing, boat or machine, at any point in the stroke (with possible exception of inside hand in sweep, when feathering, and it's not under force - even there, feathering with finger movement would be preferred). Flat/relaxed wrist is better for force transfer, less joint stress.2 -
Going off of AnnPT77's useful quibble, wrist based HR monitors are generally fine when cycling inside if you are actually wearing it correctly. I just hopped on my bike, which is currently on a trainer, and the only time my wrist is particularly flexed is when I'm in the drops. It's barely flexed when I'm on the tops and not at all when I'm on the hoods.
The issue with correctly worn wrist based HR monitors and cycling outside is an issue of road surfaces and the inevitable vibration. DCRainmaker has plenty (tens if not hundreds) of examples of Garmin, Suunto, and Polar watches with HR monitors in them that bears this out (with each of those having him wearing a chest based and/or upper arm based HR monitor during those rides as well).1 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »Primarily it's to track steps and exercise to improve my status within my health insurer's incentive scheme, but I'd quite like to introduce some degree of heart-rate-based training to my running, indoor rowing, and possibly cycling too.
Really though, I'm after comparative reviews of Garmin vs Polar from users who've had both and can comment on the relative ergonomics of the software etc.
Ok, that's helpful.
I've used both, but would generally recommend Garmin now. As far as step tracking is concerned, there isn't much in it, so if generally go for whichever one your social group uses of you want to compare our use challenges. If social stuff isn't a determinant, then whichever you like the look of.
If you want to use HR training then for running, again no big benefit of either. Garmin have a better pedigree around GPS and other instrumentation.
For cycling and rowing I'd suggest either upper arm optical or chest strap measurement. The main reason is that with the wrist flexed it's not a good place to measure HR. Whilst I don't see the value in zone training for recreational exercise, of you are going to use it then a consistency of measurement is quite important.
Essentially you're looking for two different tools.
Personally, at the moment I use a Forerunner 735XT, with Garmin straps. Either the HRM Tri for running, HRM Swim for swimming or a classic strap for cycling and rowing. The wrist optical is solid for running, but the Run Dynamics from the HRM Tri are useful data for me.
Yeah, it's an off-topic quibble, but I can't stop myself: Wrist should not be flexed when rowing, boat or machine, at any point in the stroke (with possible exception of inside hand in sweep, when feathering, and it's not under force - even there, feathering with finger movement would be preferred). Flat/relaxed wrist is better for force transfer, less joint stress.
That's a fair clarification. Under stress might have been a better way to put it. The reliance on the correct position, on a wider part of the forearm, make it very vulnerable to movement.1 -
I did a lot of research before purchasing a HRM, and my take away was that wrist-based monitors are not as accurate as a chest strap. You may have heard that Fitbit is getting sued because of this inaccuracy. Even though I can still see the benefits of a Fitbit (reminder to keep moving, having Fitbit "friends," tracking steps, etc.), this inaccuracy part bugged me.
I bought a Polar H10 chest strap last year, and I love it. I was hesitant to buy one at first, after reading some comments on various boards about it being awkward for women to wear a chest strap, but I don't find it awkward at all.
While I typically work out 7 days a week (Barre, Lagree, HIIT, stairs), I am not a runner. So I'm not doing any formal heart rate training. I use a HRM mainly because I like data, and I like routine and consistency.
The app that comes with it, Polar Flow, is pretty good too. If I'm on a desktop I can pull up my entire month of workouts and view them at one time, and it's very motivating to see.
My coworker is a triathlete/marathoner and he loves Garmin. Garmin might have the edge over Polar if you're a runner.
0 -
Thanks a lot for all the input. Bizarrely, I found a Fitbit in some mud in a local park yesterday, and it seems Fitbit's advice is to send it for recycling rather than them offering any help reuniting it with its owner (staggering, to be honest. I had no idea they valued their customers so little).
On that basis I will probably keep it and use that for step-counting, which means my hrm requirements are purely exercise and performance assessment.
The Garmin 735XT is definitely one of the options, but the Polar M430 is currently much cheaper and seems to offer what I need.0 -
Thanks a lot for all the input. Bizarrely, I found a Fitbit in some mud in a local park yesterday, and it seems Fitbit's advice is to send it for recycling rather than them offering any help reuniting it with its owner (staggering, to be honest. I had no idea they valued their customers so little).
On that basis I will probably keep it and use that for step-counting, which means my hrm requirements are purely exercise and performance assessment.
The Garmin 735XT is definitely one of the options, but the Polar M430 is currently much cheaper and seems to offer what I need.
I wouldn't describe the 735XT and the M430 as equivalents, hence a justifiable price difference. If the M430 does what you need then I'd compare against the Gamin VivoActiveHR, or at a stretch the 235. Both of those have cycling functionality that the M430 doesn't have. The Suunto Spartan is also broadly equivalent. Looking at Wiggle the Polar is still cheapest, but the price difference isn't as significant.
One observation I'd make about the 735XT, which means I'd probably not go for it myself now, is that it doesn't have barometric altitude. That's probably not an issue for you.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 429 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions