I need a simple heart rate monitor
February 5, 2010 9:49 AM Subscribe
I have a Garmin Forerunner 305, but I'm looking for a second, fairly simple heart rate monitor with a few specific features.
First, I want a monitor that tracks calories based on heart rate. (The Garmin uses distance; I know about the footpod and that's not what I want.)
Second, I want the "On" or power function to be separate from "Start." For example, I want to be able to turn the monitor on and have it pick up my heart rate so I'm ready to go. Then, at the exact second I want to start tracking my workout, I hit start and it starts timing.
I know that sounds basic (it's how the Garmin works) but I had a CRAP Timex (95% sure it was the T5G971) prior to the Garmin, and it would start tracking at the exact second it picked up my heart rate, which was whenever it felt like it or sometimes never.
Finally, there must be a way to silence or turn off any type of beeps or alarms and keep them off for the duration of the workout, without me having to press a button to turn off the alarm (think yoga class).
Cheaper/smaller is better!
First, I want a monitor that tracks calories based on heart rate. (The Garmin uses distance; I know about the footpod and that's not what I want.)
Second, I want the "On" or power function to be separate from "Start." For example, I want to be able to turn the monitor on and have it pick up my heart rate so I'm ready to go. Then, at the exact second I want to start tracking my workout, I hit start and it starts timing.
I know that sounds basic (it's how the Garmin works) but I had a CRAP Timex (95% sure it was the T5G971) prior to the Garmin, and it would start tracking at the exact second it picked up my heart rate, which was whenever it felt like it or sometimes never.
Finally, there must be a way to silence or turn off any type of beeps or alarms and keep them off for the duration of the workout, without me having to press a button to turn off the alarm (think yoga class).
Cheaper/smaller is better!
Just so you know, calorie tracking based on heart rate wouldn't be very accurate. Not everything that makes your heart race burns the same amount of calories. Also, when you're running, the more in-shape you are, the lower your heart rate will be. But that doesn't mean that people in bad shape are burning a lot more calories for doing the exact same exercise.
posted by Vorteks at 11:26 AM on February 5, 2010
posted by Vorteks at 11:26 AM on February 5, 2010
Response by poster: But that doesn't mean that people in bad shape are burning a lot more calories for doing the exact same exercise.
To a certain degree, that's what fitness is. I can run one mile more quickly and efficiently than an out-of-shape person. I can do it with a lower heart rate, thus burning fewer calories. But with respect, that's not my concern here. I want what I want - if you have a heart rate monitor suggestion, I'd be glad to hear it.
posted by peep at 11:50 AM on February 5, 2010
To a certain degree, that's what fitness is. I can run one mile more quickly and efficiently than an out-of-shape person. I can do it with a lower heart rate, thus burning fewer calories. But with respect, that's not my concern here. I want what I want - if you have a heart rate monitor suggestion, I'd be glad to hear it.
posted by peep at 11:50 AM on February 5, 2010
I have a polar RS100 which has an independent stopwatch, the F4 I had previously did not and it drove me mad. You can turn off alarms on the RS100 too. It's (relatively) cheap and I like it a lot.
posted by poissonrouge at 2:57 PM on February 5, 2010
posted by poissonrouge at 2:57 PM on February 5, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by zsazsa at 10:50 AM on February 5, 2010