'Dunno, but I was playing around with one at the Boston expo and it was REALLY nice looking/feeling. I use the RS200SD and have had mixed results. If it were cheaper, I'd jump on it - but cheap that model is not.

---

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

Hi Francois,

How are you. Are you still in El Paso? I have been using the Polar RS800SD since November. It's been very helpful in measuring everything it's supposed to. Everything is within 97% accuracy straight out of the box. Once calibrated it gets very accurate. The cadence function is very good to, but I tend to watch pace and heart rate, then distance in that order. I used the Garmin last year and then my good friend Peter Russo suggested I use it. He won the 40-44 AG at IMFL and used the Polar to manage his pace the entire marathon. I will do the same at Placid in July and have really enjoyed using it during training. I also like the added feature of seeing how long you spent in certain pre set zones.

-Vinu

---

vinu@fuelbelt.com

What really interests me is the stride efficiency or whatever polar calls it.
I'd like to know what they are really measuring and how accurate and reliable it is.
(yes, still in EP)

Once calibrated, it appears to measure your run gait and calculates how many times your foot goes through that forward motion within a certain amount of time. Two of us had the cadence feature on at the track last week and my friend was running 96 strides per minute and I was running at about 90. Not very scientific, but I have a more relaxed run form and foot strike than my friend. The numbers were consistent. It's pricey, but it's nearly the equivalent of using a power meter on the bike.

---

vinu@fuelbelt.com