What To Do

Social Bookmarks

Feeds

Running Gear: HRM suggestions

Bottom of Page

1 to 6 of 6

  1.  
  1.  
    rpetreccajr

    Thinking about getting an HRM to see how hard I am really working my heart. All the HRMs on the ellipticals at the gym seem flaky. One second they show a rate of 78 bpm and the next 156. Could also use one when out on the road eiter running or riding. I'm thinking about either a Polar RS200 or RS400. Any feedback on either model or suggestions on alternatives? I don't need GPS capabilities and don't want to go broke.

  2.  
    RunningKnows
    The HRM's on gym equipment are very flaky, but to be honest tracking heart rate at the fingertip or through the palm is a difficult business. The signal is noisy, and the signal processors have a hard time making sense of the signal. What happens a lot is aliasing, where the processor only counts every other (or some other whole number fraction, like every third) beat. The treadmill I have for some reason always aliases my HR (when I'm not wearing my monitor), which actually makes it easy.... just multiply by two. Polar is the brand we use for research, and the models mainly differ in the options they offer. All of the polar units (with a chest strap.... I don't know if they make a fingertip model) will give you an accurate heart rate, but if you want a continuous record of your heart rate you'll need to go for a more spendy unit.
    • CommentAuthorFree Memberbhbrtn
    • CommentTimeJan 7th 2009
     
    bhbrtn

    Tried a Polar RS200 and it did a good job but for just a little more ($150 on sale) you can get a Garmin 305 which is a good HRM + GPS. I survived with my Polar and mapmyrun but....being able to change my run on the fly and let the Gamin track it is really living!

    Ben

  4.  
    running.beast
    I've used both polar and garmin and both are great hrm.  Personally I would rather not run indoors at all and love the GPS function with the garmin but if you do a lot of indoor training most of the machines are polar compatible so they'll show your hr while you exercise.  I haven't found a machine compatible with garmin.  Polar makes good entry level models at a good price the more expensive you get the more bells and whistles some are compatible with foot pods and GPS Sensors and most of the mid-level range will give you calories burned that are probably more accurate than most machines at fitness centers since the monitor takes your max hr, theoretical VO2 Max, weight to determine calories burned based on exertion not just weight and time.
  5.  
    the_rainmaker

    Fo Christmas, my wife bought me (well  I picked it out and she paid for it) the Polar RS800 CX Run. It is pricey but I got a good deal on it. Complete overkill I know for my standard of running, but I enjoy downloading the data to my PC, and checking the data at the end of a run, to see how my performance varied throughout the run. I'm sure I haven't even scratched the surface of the features it has. The footpod is great, and it allows me to keep track of my pace and the distance I have covered. It's great having a speedometer on your wrist. Like my long run last Sunday should have been 15 miles, but I decided to take a longer route home to bring my mileage up to 16 miles.

    Supposedly with all the data (HR, Cadence, Running Index, Stride Length, etc) it gathers while you run, it should help you improve your performance, or at least target areas where you need to improve. Reduce stride length increased cadence. That is where I am a little disappointed with Polar Pro Trainer 5 software, I was expecting a little more feedback (artifical intelligence) regarding levels of performance, areas which require improvement etc. You get plenty of graphs, but not a whole lot of information on how to interpret them. I actually prefer the MMR training log, although I would love to be able to upload the data from my PC to MMR rather than having to do it manually.

     I started running 'seriously' in my thirties so there was no coaching and I really just put one foot in front of another, supplemented with an information I get from any  books/articles  I read. So as stated above I was hoping for some feedback/ coaching from the software.

     Other than a few runs with a (a very basic) second hand HRM a friend loaned me, I never used a HRM for training before this, and using one has been a bit of an eye opener regarding my heart rate during exercise. I am running to hard during my training runs, however its one thing identifying the problem its another thing telling your brain to slow down, as I feel I'm not really working if I stay within the predefined Heart Rate limits which are set for me.

    The CX Run comes with the footpod, as far as I know, the CX Multi comes with GPS. I like the idea that I can add the GPS at a later date (obviously at a price).

    I have it less than a month so it's early days  with my Polar RS800 CX Run, and I am sure as I use it more and more I will get more and more out of it. Does someone of my level need a such a fancy HRM, probably not, but I think I would find it hard to go running without it now. When I get a bit more familiar with, I post some more detailed feedback.

     

  6.  
    RunningKnows
    On a related note, you need to be careful about one point with measuring heart rate. As you do long runs, you'll notice that your heart rate will start to creep up for a given pace. What this tends to do for people using an HRM is make them think they are going too hard and slow their pace a bit. The funny thing is that this increase in heart rate isn't matched with an increase in your "Rating of Perceived Exertion", or RPE. This measure (which has many different scales... Borg is the most famous... which probably aren't important right now) is a scale of how hard you feel you are working. The way I use an HRM is to use it to set a pace at the beginning and then focus more on maintaining the same RPE as the run progresses.

1 to 6 of 6

  1.  

Report Offensive Content