heart rate monitors

jag con

Hi Guys i bought the heart rate monitor for 20 euro in Aldi recently and it is driving me nuts works when it feels like it So i am in the market for a decent heart rate monitor

I am looking at the Garmin edge 705 gps/heart rate monitor

Or a polar f4 unit wrist watch type

Any advice, i know they are two different monitors altogether but is is worth the extra for the Garmin unit as i will be getting more in 1 unit

Cheers Con

Lumen

Unless you need the mapping and navigation capabilities of thr Garmin 705, I'd hang on until the Edge 500 comes out.

blorg

I think the 705 is well worth it for the other functions but there are plenty of HR monitors that will do the basics specifically of heart rate monitoring reliably. Any entry level Polar product for example.

Dr_Colossus

I'd agree with Blorg on the 705, got one about 3 months ago and can't fault it. I think the mapping functions are fantastic, you can preprogram routes onto it from mapmyride.com or more precisely from mapsource and then cycle away to your hearts content and not think about turns and random sign posts etc. Can also insert locations when out on a spin if you don't have anything preprogrammed and it'll direct you to your desired location with turn by turn directions and distances and depending on your settings will keep you to the quieter back roads. The down side is that it's not cheap and slightly on the bulky side. Would be an amazing piece of kit if they had installed an mp3 player and radio into it to listen to while out on a lonesome spin.
If solely looking for a hrm then you can't really go wrong with a Polar wrist unit and some of them are quite cheap. I've a Polar S625x that I bought a couple of years ago specifically for running and gym work and find it a great piece of kit. I find the foot pod that measures your distance and speed very accurate and also the altitude meter. The Polar S725x is more specifically for the bike and given they're on the market for a couple of years you should be able to pick one up second hand fairly cheap. There's newer more modern Polar cycling HRMs out since but obviously more costly.
I guess only you can decide if the Garmin is worth the money depending on how often you expect to use the mapping functionality. Personally I don't particularly like taking the same route over and over and as a result often change them around with different loops etc and the Garmin 705 is ideal for this. The level of detail in the maps is quite astonishing with nearby attractions, shops, service stations and all the rest.
Any other questions just ask, when I was purchasing the Garmin Edge 705 I did quite a bit of research on it and asked the guys here alot of questions on it's functionality etc and got some great feedback from the likes of Blorg etc.

blorg

Worth noting that as valuable as the routing function (for me anyway) is the logging it does of your whole ride with heart rate, speed, altiude, etc. How fast did I climb that hill etc. I had a 305 before the 705.

Some of the higher end Polars do this logging as well, just without the map of where you went- although I like this as it makes it easier to figure out where you did whatever. I think there is also a high end Polar that has a GPS add on for also recording where you went for that matter although it may not be as well integrated as with the Garmin.

scottreynolds

blorg wrote: »

I think there is also a high end Polar that has a GPS add on for also recording where you went for that matter although it may not be as well integrated as with the Garmin.

There's a few CS600CX is the 'pro' level GPS but the GPS is contained in a seperate pod which isn't part of the overall device like a speed sensor. It has its advantages and disadvantages. The best advantage for me is that I don't need to charge my batteries on my unit ever (well not for the past year).

If you want the mapping buy the 705.

Blorg is correct in saying that the best feature is the recording of the workout great for future ference and or specific training. If this tickles you boat then make sure you get one that records every x secons and not just a summary of the workout -- I've made that mistake and its painful.

Lumen

Have we done a Garmin failure poll?

I'm recently had my second in 12 months. This time the rubber button ripped off the front.

When it rains water gets in and the display switches between the two modes about 5 times a second. It's excellent if you're pumped full of caffeine gel, but tends to grate after the first couple of hours.

I really ought to send it back again...

kerryscoob

Same as myself with regards the Aldi piece, now pricing the Polar CS200CAD.

blorg

I think I have had around 4 or 5 failures between the 305 and now the 705. +2 accessory failures, HR strap and cadene module. Generally the barometric altimeter but I also had issues with water ingress after a downpour affecting the display. Currently the barometric altimeter seems to be on the way out again so it will probably need to go back. I have also had many many issues with corrupted ride files, most recently Saturday in Sicily, for some reason it always seems to happen abroad whether the higher temperatures or the fact I am doing long cycles with routing... Also issues with the mount breaking, currently one of my cadence sensors is on the blink, I have also in the past had a HR strap die and indeed the wireless reception in the head unit die (cutting off both HR and cadence.)

It is a credit to how utterly indispensible I find the unit that I would still recommend it. Garmin's warranty system is at least very good.

@Lumen- by rubber button ripped off the front do you mean the joystick? All my 705s the rubber USB cover has come off the back and I think this ruins the waterproofing. Current one it ripped off some months ago but maybe just hasn't got wet enough yet (as I say the barometric altimeter seems on the way out.)

jif

Ask yourself what you want it for.

then go from there.

Do you want a new gadget to play with or a no nonsense training recording tool? both is ok too btw

you want avg/max hr
ability to download to SW analysis?
ability to use with spd/cad/pwr data?
ability to store numerous files (and view them tediously in the hr itself)
alility to do interval sets (automatically/non auto)?
ability to record altitude data? (fantanstic for analysisng rides afterwards)
the list goes on

know what you want then start asking for recommendations based on that
or you could just get the Polar 725x and have all the above and lots more :pac:

alfalad

blorg wrote: »

I think I have had around 4 or 5 failures between the 305 and now the 705. +2 accessory failures, HR strap and cadene module. Generally the barometric altimeter but I also had issues with water ingress after a downpour affecting the display. Currently the barometric altimeter seems to be on the way out again so it will probably need to go back. I have also had many many issues with corrupted ride files, most recently Saturday in Sicily, for some reason it always seems to happen abroad whether the higher temperatures or the fact I am doing long cycles with routing... Also issues with the mount breaking, currently one of my cadence sensors is on the blink, I have also in the past had a HR strap die and indeed the wireless reception in the head unit die (cutting off both HR and cadence.)

It is a credit to how utterly indispensible I find the unit that I would still recommend it. Garmin's warranty system is at least very good.

@Lumen- by rubber button ripped off the front do you mean the joystick? All my 705s the rubber USB cover has come off the back and I think this ruins the waterproofing. Current one it ripped off some months ago but maybe just hasn't got wet enough yet (as I say the barometric altimeter seems on the way out.)

So they still have a lot of work to do on it to get it right!

lafors

blorg, you say you've had problems with the altimeter, what problems exactly?
I was out for a shot 40km spin on friday (CRACKING DAY ) and by the time I got to the seafront in clontarf it was reading at -26m below sea level :rolleyes: then on the way back about 20mins later the same spot was 0m.
The week before the same spot was -18m on the way out and -7m on the way back.

Would you send it back for this problem alone?

blorg

@lafors- no, I would consider that reasonable, altimeters are not necessarily that exact and for it to occasionally be off by 25m is not a catastrophe. My house (at around 21m) alternates between being under the sea and at 100m or so when I turn it on. You need to leave it on for a while for it to calibrate the barometric altimeter from the GPS. It does this quickest and best if it is left completely stationary, could take 30 seconds, could take 15 minutes. It is annoying there isn't a manual calibration but other barometric units without GPS you basically have to calibrate with a known altitude before each ride. What you saw was it basically reducing the error gradually over the course of the ride. If it is right at the start of the ride (and is not playing up) I find the altitude pretty accurate for the entire ride. Really needs to be right at the start though.

The issues I had with the altimeter involved (1) the grade display disappearing altogether and just showing __% even when recording; (2) the altitude basically getting "stuck" - this would involve it sticking at whatever altitude I was at and showing completely flat for 10km, even though I might have been climbing up an extended mountain in the Pyrenees for that period. Sometimes with this latter failure it would suddenly recover and flip from one altitude to another within a few seconds, grade would then go basically vertical.

Note the altitude problems are a hardware failure, the corrupt data files I think are more in the line of software bugs. Most of the data file corruption to be honest I think came from situations where I turned the unit off and on again in the middle of a ride. If you stop and reset it before turning off I think this is less likely to happen, you would just have to live with your ride being split up into sections then I guess. I generally needed to turn it off either to conserve battery or to fix the disappearing grade problem I mentioned.

ROK ON

My Garmin shuts down on fast descents (anything greater than 50km/h, and it just dont work.)

Pretty fed up of it to be honest. I dont see the point of having all this wonderful date recording technology, if the device itself is prone to failure. Call me old fashioned, but it sorts of defeats the purpose f having it.

If I wanted to guess what speed/cadence/hr I was doing I would not have gotten the Garmin in the first place.

blorg

ROK ON wrote: »

My Garmin shuts down on fast descents (anything greater than 50km/h, and it just dont work.)

That is a fault, you need to return it. My own one has reliably indicated speeds up to 900km/h or so (on an aircraft, it got the altitude right there too.)

I can understand the frustration and the device is pretty flaky but most of it does work most of the time. If you are the sort of person who needs 100% reliability in your devices may not be for you... It is basically flaky in much the same way a modern computer can be flaky, older devices were more reliable but did less.

Lumen

blorg wrote: »

It is a credit to how utterly indispensible I find the unit that I would still recommend it.

Me too, and I use probably about 10% of it's functions (power, HR and data recording).

blorg wrote: »

@Lumen- by rubber button ripped off the front do you mean the joystick?

The joystick. I was probably being clumsy with it.

The 705 is a bearable ownership proposition as long as you know what you're getting into, and treat it like a small laptop attached to your handlebars rather than a bike component. But I think it's still a generation short of being a well engineered product.

I wonder to what degree Garmin's bike product line is kept afloat by power weenies who don't really have a lot of choice. Saris and others need to get their act together.

ROK ON

blorg wrote: »

That is a fault, you need to return it. My own one has reliably indicated speeds up to 900km/h or so (on an aircraft, it got the altitude right there too.)

I can understand the frustration and the device is pretty flaky but most of it does work most of the time. If you are the sort of person who needs 100% reliability in your devices may not be for you... It is basically flaky in much the same way a modern computer can be flaky, older devices were more reliable but did less.

I am aghast. After describing your own hassles with the device (4 or 5 failures), you then describe it as merely flaky.
As an aside, I have the same laptop for 3 years with nary a problem. I dont need exactidude, but I do require that the product delivers the service that it was purchased for in the first place. To expect anything else is plainly bizarre IMHO.

I have a similar issue with my blackberry (need it for work, and they pay for it).
I have all this fantastic software on it, but it has a side effect of causing the handset to fail repeatedly.
I am forming the opinion, that in the race to fit the most tech stuff on a device, that the device itself is overpowered and thus compromised. Because society is becoming obsessive with information, we are prepared to put up with mediocrity in order to get our fix. We are all nuts.

uberwolf

I've just seen the 305 on amazon (US) for €100.

How much is the edge expected to come in at?

blorg

@ROK_ON- point is, if there was another option that did everything the 705 does and was rock solid, I would use that instead. There is no such other option. When one part is down (say the altimeter is being flaky) the rest of it is still working... So I am still being guided around France, just without display of the grade of my climb.

@Lumen- I would imagine that the vast majority of Garmin users do not have power meters, it is a niche albeit an important one especially with the pro racers... I certainly know a lot more people with Garmins than I do with power meters.

@ROK_ON- meant to add, I can completely understand someone NOT being able to tolerate the flakiness and just wanting something that works, even if it doesn't have the same featureset, different users will have different priorities. I can tolerate the flakiness; I'd prefer something that worked 100% but I still prefer my flaky Garmin to a solid bike computer without its features.

Beasty

Lumen wrote: »

Have we done a Garmin failure poll?

I'm recently had my second in 12 months. This time the rubber button ripped off the front.

When it rains water gets in and the display switches between the two modes about 5 times a second. It's excellent if you're pumped full of caffeine gel, but tends to grate after the first couple of hours.

I really ought to send it back again...

Got one in July. It recorded a max speed of 90mph one day a couple of weeks ago! It died last Friday (4 times actually - it would run for 15-30 mins, then switch itself off. I would switch it back on, and it would run for another 15-30 mins).

Needless to say it is going back under warranty

redmenace1

Lumen wrote: »

Unless you need the mapping and navigation capabilities of thr Garmin 705, I'd hang on until the Edge 500 comes out.

I waiting with great anticipation to see the price. Think it will come in around €350-€400 which will make it more expensive than the 705. But it looks neat even without mapping software

girvtheswerve

Anyone ever use a garmin fr60 for cycling? I'm looking for something that will be suitable for running and cycling. Also on the running forum the 305 and 405 were recommended. Anyone have any experience with them? Cheers in advance for any help

blorg

redmenace1 wrote: »

I waiting with great anticipation to see the price. Think it will come in around €350-€400 which will make it more expensive than the 705. But it looks neat even without mapping software

US RRP on the 500 is half that of the 705 ($249 vs $499.) Whatever it comes in at over here there is no reason to expect it to more expensive. Actual street/internet price might be a little bit over 50% of the 705 price as it is new (there may be greater discounting on the 705 if you hunt) but I would expect it would settle down into something like 50% soon enough.

blorg

girvtheswerve wrote: »

Anyone ever use a garmin fr60 for cycling? I'm looking for something that will be suitable for running and cycling. Also on the running forum the 305 and 405 were recommended. Anyone have any experience with them? Cheers in advance for any help

Raam has used a Forerunner for both running and cycling, if he doesn't post up himself you could send him a PM. I think he kicked the former habit thank god.

jag con

Cheers guys sounds like the Garmin edge 705 has a few gremlins in it

Con

Chips Lovell

Lumen wrote: »

Me too, and I use probably about 10% of it's functions (power, HR and data recording).

...

I wonder to what degree Garmin's bike product line is kept afloat by power weenies who don't really have a lot of choice. Saris and others need to get their act together.

Doesn't the PowerTap have it's own head unit with HR?

scottreynolds

girvtheswerve wrote: »

Anyone ever use a garmin fr60 for cycling? I'm looking for something that will be suitable for running and cycling. Also on the running forum the 305 and 405 were recommended. Anyone have any experience with them? Cheers in advance for any help

310XT is your man. The 405 screen is a little small for the bike from all accounts. The 310XT is just the next 305. I would buy this without hesistation next time. Its also features rudimentary routing features.

Lumen

el tonto wrote: »

Doesn't the PowerTap have it's own head unit with HR?

Yes, but it's a bit crap. The data capacity is really small, so you have to download data pretty much after every ride, the display is very limited, and the interval functions are too cryptic for my simple brain.

But thanks for reminding me, maybe I'll start using it again. At least it was reliable.

Raam

blorg wrote: »

Raam has used a Forerunner for both running and cycling, if he doesn't post up himself you could send him a PM. I think he kicked the former habit thank god.

Yeah the 305 forerunner was pretty good. Looks like a laptop strapped to your arm, but it does the job. I used it for running and for cycling for a few years, then I saw Blorg's Edge 705 and wanted it.

One thing about the 305, the signal can get dropped a lot when going through wooded landscape. It always picked the signal up again straight away for me, but it gets a bit annoying.

redmenace1

blorg wrote: »

US RRP on the 500 is half that of the 705 ($249 vs $499.) Whatever it comes in at over here there is no reason to expect it to more expensive. Actual street/internet price might be a little bit over 50% of the 705 price as it is new (there may be greater discounting on the 705 if you hunt) but I would expect it would settle down into something like 50% soon enough.

handtec are selling the following excluding postage (£15)
Garmin 705 £290stg
Garmin 500 £333stg

As you say, pricing will settle down on Garmin 500 or else i won't be buying one;)

Dr_Colossus

redmenace1 wrote: »

handtec are selling the following excluding postage (£15)
Garmin 705 £290stg
Garmin 500 £333stg

As you say, pricing will settle down on Garmin 500 or else i won't be buying one;)

That's absolutely nuts, why would anyone buy a 500 over the 705 at those prices. Does the 500 have anything that the 705 doesn't? Does the above 705 for £290 include the hrm and cadence sensors as they're a good bit extra?

redmenace1

Dr_Colossus wrote: »

That's absolutely nuts, why would anyone buy a 500 over the 705 at those prices. Does the 500 have anything that the 705 doesn't? Does the above 705 for £290 include the hrm and cadence sensors as they're a good bit extra?

500 has thermometer!!! Rest of functionality is much the same
the 705 does have all the bits in it (HRM & cadence sensor) for that price but only the basic map.
If you have a look at garmin site you can do a comparsion.
Think the 500 is aimed at racing rather than touring or off-road etc.

The whole thing is nuts. Could buy a bike for the price, almost

blorg

705 actually has a thermometer as well (as did the 305, it is needed for the barometric altimeter), they just don't let you have it as a field in the interface which is annoying. You can get the current temperature if you go into diagnostic mode.

Lumen

Dr_Colossus wrote: »

That's absolutely nuts, why would anyone buy a 500 over the 705 at those prices

Smaller, lighter, more reliable (maybe).

blorg

Lumen wrote: »

Smaller, lighter, more reliable (maybe).

It's not really so much smaller/lighter as to make a major difference to anything, and loses functionality. As for more reliable, I would doubt it, generally with Garmin stuff they are least reliable when first released and improve with time as the firmware is updated (this is a regular iterative process with Garmin.)

No-one (well, very few) will buy it priced over the 705- but as RRP is half that of the 705 it should drop in price soon enough.

Lumen

blorg wrote: »

It's not really so much smaller/lighter as to make a major difference to anything, and loses functionality. As for more reliable, I would doubt it, generally with Garmin stuff they are least reliable when first released and improve with time as the firmware is updated (this is a regular iterative process with Garmin.)

Horses for courses. I never use the mapping or navigation capabilities of the 705, so those are entirely useless to me (other than perhaps for resale value).

The fact that it's significantly lighter will put less stress on the mount. Unless Garmin have truly surpassed themselves and produced a less reliable mount, it will be less likely to launch itself off the bike.

Agree with the 1.0 avoidance and pricing concerns. Handtec states "DUE: December 2009". Maybe the pricing will change before then.

blorg

I don't disagree that your viewpoint exists but I think you are in a small minority there. I agree the 305/705 mount is flaky (they have actually redesigned it, I got a new one that maybe looks a bit more solid) but it honestly for me it is one of the lesser issues, I have had a couple of mount failures but never damaged the device as a result.

The thing will certainly sell at half the price of the 705 though no question.

Raam

Lumen wrote: »

Horses for courses. I never use the mapping or navigation capabilities of the 705, so those are entirely useless to me (other than perhaps for resale value).

Yes, I noticed this when we took some wrong turns on some of our summer spins... after me taking the time to send you the course.

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

Yes, I noticed this when we took some wrong turns on some of our summer spins... after me taking the time to send you the course.

LOL. Perfect example. Whilst I much appreciated the planning, the pre-mapped route was offset from reality, so the instructions were ambiguous.

I have no problem with satnav in general, I rely on my Garmin Nuvi completely when I travel to the UK (in fact last week I was completely screwed by a hire car with a dead ciggie lighter socket). I just find the 705 incredibly frustrating to use. Compared to the Nuvi, it is utterly ****e.

blorg

Lumen wrote: »

LOL. Perfect example. Whilst I much appreciated the planning, the pre-mapped route was offset from reality, so the instructions were ambiguous.

This is an issue if you use one of the online services to generate your route- it is the Google maps that is offset from reality. If you use Mapsource or the built in routing it is spot on the the metre with very clear turn by turn directions. I've done very long cycles (over 800km) using this without having to look at a map once. I've used it extensively here but also in Spain, France and Italy and it has been invaluable and routed me down back road routes that simply would have been impossible without it.

The main downsides I find compared to a car satnav are (1) the tiny screen which makes it impossible to get a good overview of a route plotted on the fly, and (2) the lack of via points. The flip side is the much better battery life, relative weatherproofing and the fact it is small enough to sit on your handlebars.

Raam

The "Google offset" only becomes a problem when a few small roads are present at a junction, apart from that I find it no biggie.

Mapsource: perhaps there is a simple solution, but when I used this to program a route to Portumna, it insisted on sending me the wrong way around round-abouts, not all, but 90% of them. It either thought I was on the right hand side of the road, or it was looking for the shortest route around them.

Raam

blorg wrote: »

The main downsides I find compared to a car satnav are (1) the tiny screen which makes it impossible to get a good overview of a route plotted on the fly, and (2) the lack of via points. The flip side is the much better battery life, relative weatherproofing and the fact it is small enough to sit on your handlebars.

Yes, via points would be nice. I've bemoaned the lack of them when trying to devise routes when out and about.

blorg

Raam wrote: »

The "Google offset" only becomes a problem when a few small roads are present at a junction, apart from that I find it no biggie.

The turn directions it flashes up at a junction are a lot clearer though on a Mapsource/routed route.

Mapsource: perhaps there is a simple solution, but when I used this to program a route to Portumna, it insisted on sending me the wrong way around round-abouts, not all, but 90% of them. It either thought I was on the right hand side of the road, or it was looking for the shortest route around them.

I honestly don't know what it was doing there, with any route I have plotted it will just flash up a picture of the roundabout and say "take 1st/2nd/3rd exit" - it has always routed the right way around both here and on the continent. Maybe the roundabouts you got it didn't realise were roundabouts and just treated them as normal roads- you are using the same maps as me and they are a bit out of date in places.