Garmin - I love mine. Best part? Works on the swim, bike and run.

Hey spot:

I also live in Ohio - southern (Cincy, where else) so hills gallore. I had the Timex GPS and didn't like it much. Friends have the Garmin, but I couldn't get over the watch. I've had the new RS200SD and absolutely love it. VERY accurate after setting up. Don't notice the foot pod thingy at all (certainly less than I noticed the GPS on my arm or belt). It is basically a smaller watch version of the 625 which I didn't need since I have a bike computer and their is no need for redundancy.

---

____________________________________
Fatigue is biochemical, not biomechanical.
- Andrew Coggan, PhD

I'm using the Garmin 301 pretty consistently. It works great outside for runs as well as bike rides. I haven't used it yet in open water swims as it's not really water proof. My understanding is that you should put it in a zip-clock bag under your swim cap.

You can turn the GPS off to use indoors but I never can get my HR to work right. It seems to really pick up any interference inside from electrical equipment such as TV, Stereo, speakers and such. Takes this into consideration if you need it for trainer rides and/or treadmill runs.

It does have a multisport function now that you can use for races. You hit the lap button and it will go from swimming to cycling in T1, hit the lap button again in T2 and it will switch to the run.

Tracking your results via Motinbased.com is quite fun. ;-)

I also bought the accessory pack which has an adapter that goes from a watch band to a cycling mount or vice-versa.

The 301 really is water proof - well water proof enough for our needs. 5 meters I think. I have taken it in the water many, many times - never in a zip loc. Keep it under your cap and it will keep the signal.

Thanks John ;-).

Timex and Garmin are probably the most accurate if you live in a nice open area with good GPS reception.

Otherwise the new Polar RS200sd is super sweet. I work at a shop that sells Polar and this has got to be our best selling Polar watch ever! Well at least I sell a lot of them. The 625x is nice as well, I have one and love the bike features, downloading and especially the altitude. BUT it's damn big and although lighter than say a Garmin it's still a beast to me. You get used to it but if you don't need the bike features the SD200sd sure is nice. Beautiful LCD display, easy to set up, best damn chest strap in the world, small footpod that is much less noticeable than any other technology. Accuracy is pretty decent and it'll do hills as well. Battery life could be better but it's still better than Timex, you can recharge Garmins but don't use rechargeables in the Polar. Only bummer is no IR downloading to the computer, only sonic link (microphone) to the Polar website:( The Metallic RED color is COOOOOL!

I have the Garmin 301. It's been nothing but trouble.

a) unless you have blue skys with absolutely no treecover, the reception can vary widely. I live in chicago and there are as many dead spots as there are strong signals on the lake front. It's much better in the burbs, but i live in the city.

It completely lost signal at Steelhead during the run and the run is out in the open (this was unfortunate b/c I bought it to pace me on the run at steelhead).

b) the HRM sucks. It will jump all over the place and then decide to completely peter out. Completely unreliable.

c) real time pacing is terrible. It jumps all over the place. avg lap pace is better, but takes a few minutes to stabilize.

It's not bad when you bike, though. But that's mainly b/c the roads have less tree cover to deal with.

So, I would recommend it if you live in an area with little tree cover and no high buildings, and don't rely too much on it's HRM functions.

Crazy - I haven't had these problems at all. I spend a week running and riding off road in the mountains in So Cal, never had a problem. HRM does pick up interference, but only when I am inside.

We stock the Polar S625 and RS200, and the Garmin 201 and 301. We've got at least a dozen regular customers on the Polar setup and a dozen more on the Garmin setup. The Garmin 301 seems to have a decent heart rate monitor that has good transmission to the watch and that accurately counts all your heartbeats. The Garmin has some cool features that the Polar doesn't, and the Polar has some features that the Garmin can't touch. You should decide what features are really important to you.

The GPS based systems are great when you live in an area where you can get good, consistent GPS signal. They're about 99% accurate in terms of distance run, even on the hills, when you have good signal. If you lose signal, the GPS systems will do a straight line interpolation between where you lost signal and where you got it back. That means the accuracy decays rapidly if you live in an area where you don't get good signal. The Polar system is about 95-97% accurate. To me, that means the GPS is more accurate if you have good signal, and the Polar is more accurate no matter where you are. Here in New York, the GPS signal is terrible.

Garmin has a completely smooth transition from bike to run. With the S625 you need to press a bunch of buttons to change modes. (I don't remember if you can change modes in the same file, but the new Polar software lets you combine files so it's a moot point.) That's a design flaw that's a pain in the butt for triathletes.

Polar has the ability to measure cadence; Garmin does not. I personally monitor my cadence more than my speed, so that's a very important criteria for me.

Polar, in theory, has the ability to measure power, but according to everyone who I've spoken to, if you're serious about measuring power you're using a different technology to do it.

Polar needs a lot of work on its user interface and usability. As a former computer geek I've mostly been able to figure it out, but see my post today regarding how the darn tests work to illustrate that they still leave a lot to be desired. Garmin's systems are fairly easy to figure out and use.

Hope that helps!

Lee Silverman
JackRabbit Sports

This new Garmin unit sounds good. Supposedly better reception on tree covered trails/streets and urban canyons.

http://www.garmin.com/products/edge305/

greg

I have used the Nike, Timex and Garmin speed distance monitors plus Polar hrm's. The Nike (foot pod similar to Polar) was hard to calibrate. The Timex HRM does not receive the signal at times and it seems to be absorbing moisture after 2 years. Although I have only had the Garmin for a few months, so far it is a home run. The functions are intuitive and I have not had many instances where it could not pick up the signal (heavily forested trails). Plus the software is great for logging workouts.

As I have stated here several times before, Polar's customer service sucks! And why should anybody have to buy a new transmitter belt to replace the battery?

"You know you are getting old when you see your father in the mirror." anon.

---

Dean Wilson
http://www.anaerobiczone.com
Bicycle Protection Indoors & Out