Strictly for running intention, which would be a better device to measure distance and pace? Polar RS300 or Garmin 310? i realize both use different theory but i thought i can pull some ST insights on the pros and cons of both devices.
thanx in advance
I have had the RS800 for a couple of years and it has been a disappointment - really only the HR and altitude is of use as the foot pod data is inaccurate and unreliable. I have just got the garmin 310xt. Only one run so far, and really dont know how to use it yet.But the speed is accurate, distance is good, but looks like the altitude is a bit dodgy (did an out and back course and the altitude profile by distance was quite different when it should have been a mirror image). Did have the same issue with HR on both - namely incorrect HR for around the first 10min - giving incorrectly high values (averaging around 170HR when I know it is more like 115-130).
Garmin. No ridiculous footpods(unless you want) or gps arm bands. Everyone in one ‘compact’ watch.
Very happy with garmin Edge (305 then 705) for Cycling and Forerunner (305 then 310) for Running / multisport
Garmin as a company has it’s ups and downs, they’re getting better. Very happy with customer service.
blanco
I have had the RS800 for a couple of years and it has been a disappointment - really only the HR and altitude is of use as the foot pod data is inaccurate and unreliable. I have just got the garmin 310xt. Only one run so far, and really dont know how to use it yet.But the speed is accurate, distance is good, but looks like the altitude is a bit dodgy (did an out and back course and the altitude profile by distance was quite different when it should have been a mirror image). Did have the same issue with HR on both - namely incorrect HR for around the first 10min - giving incorrectly high values (averaging around 170HR when I know it is more like 115-130).
are you wetting the HR strap before starting? I’ve had this issue a couple of times when I forgot to wet the strap. Once I start sweating it returns to normal operation.
yes, tried wetting it, and also wearing for 10-15min before I start a training session. It is worse in colder weather.
T
yes, tried wetting it, and also wearing for 10-15min before I start a training session. It is worse in colder weather.
T
Some shirts generate static which can impact on the HR detection of the sensor. Don’t ask me why, but this seems not be an issue once sweat gets beneath the sensor band. I’m getting a handle on which of my shirts are the worst offenders. In the meant time, I just fiddle around with moisture levels on the sensor until it settles. I ahve heard of people using honey and there is always electrode gel
That is interesting. I will keep a note of that.
I am pretty sure it is mostly a temperature issue - it is far worse in winter than summer (I am southern hemi-sphere). It also clears up and settles down quicker if I put it on well before I start a training session. The older harder straps were also far better in getting going correctly than the newer fabric straps. I was a little surprised with the garmin, as I did have the strap on for a while (and had wet it), playing around and setting it up first…
I like the Polar (RS800). No issues HR pickup unless battery is getting weak.
Neither are good for quality training!
If you want to get faster, by god, throw away your heart rate/garmin and run by feel and a timed watch/no hear rate only pace.
All the best runners do this and please do not get fooled by the Pro’s who say they do when
they are only getting paid by the sponsors.
My best races/training runs is when I ran by feel. Get to a track, find your pace and go for it.
Garmin, hands down. I’ve tried the Polar S1 footpod, and for the life of me, I cannot get consistent results. Same shoe, same course, laces seem just as tight, and…different result. God forbid you don’t batten that footpod down tight enough…now you’ll get really weird results, like going faster uphill than downhill. The Garmin…a mile comes in exactly the same place, every single time, period. I will note that some people absolutely love the Polar as it gives excellent immediate pace feedback, while the Garmin jumps around alot with the real-time pace info. But that pace is very suspect if your distance is way off.
If you want consistency with minimal dicking around, go Garmin. Plus you can map your courses.
Spot
Been a polar user for years, on run and bike. Gave up on the foot pod because it is inaccurate and unreliable, plus you have to calibrate it often. If you rotate shoes, like most of us do, you are supposed to recalibrate every time - that’s just impractical.
Did my first race today with a Garmin 305 - and I gotta tell you, I am impressed!
I thought the HR strap would be uncomfortable because it looked like the old polars - very comfortable!Thought the watch might be heavy, not an issue at all. Rides on the wrist well, and the displays are very easy to see.Setting up the data fields was easy, and having that kind of feedback while on the run is excellent.I used to run entirely by PE and HR. Being able to reference that with pace is indispensible.I am training with the FIRST marathon program, so knowing pace is essential.
Having used both, I am now a huge fan of the Garmin for accuracy of pace and distance.
The Garmin is way better. Had some bad luck with Polar Customer service. Garmin on the other hand was aces. The GPS on the Garmin is great for training. Stick with the 305/405/310xt. I had the 301 which can be had for a great price now but it does not pick up the satellites very well.
I’ve used a Garmin FR 305 for the past 2 years and it’s a very nice training tool. The info you get from it can be as simple or as in depth as you want. No issues at all in 2 years, I like it.