best replacement for polar s625x

milmo

I have a polar s625x and love it but it is being to show its mileage.

When I looked on the polar website it appears that they are no longer making/selling it.

What would you recommend as a suitable replacement for it?

thanks

tunney

milmo wrote: »

I have a polar s625x and love it but it is being to show its mileage.

When I looked on the polar website it appears that they are no longer making/selling it.

What would you recommend as a suitable replacement for it?

thanks

A second hand S625x.

Whatever you do - DO NOT BUY A GARMIN 310xt.
Going from the heart rate functionality of the s625x to something that doesn't work as a HRM is terrible, I know I tried.

Post the s625x back to polar and ask them to repair it. They're good like that and completely replaced the outside of mine when i sent my back for a button fix.

milmo

Thanks Tunney,

I am definately considering that option, but would also like the peace of mind from a brand new HRM.

Outside of the second hand option are there any Garmin or Polar HRMs that would match or surpass the s625x?

Thanks

tunney

milmo wrote: »

Thanks Tunney,

I am definately considering that option, but would also like the peace of mind from a brand new HRM.

Outside of the second hand option are there any Garmin or Polar HRMs that would match or surpass the s625x?

Thanks

As an owner of a S625x and a Garmin 310xt I can whole heartedly say "Under no circumstances buy a Garmin, they do NOT work as a heart rate monitor".

robinph

tunney wrote: »

As an owner of a S625x and a Garmin 310xt I can whole heartedly say "Under no circumstances buy a Garmin, they do NOT work as a heart rate monitor".

Huh?!?

When I got bored of my S625x and wanted a new toy I went for the Garmin 405. It certainly seems to work as a HRM for me and I've actually found the strap to be more reliable for me than the fabric Polar one.

tunney

robinph wrote: »

Huh?!?

When I got bored of my S625x and wanted a new toy I went for the Garmin 405. It certainly seems to work as a HRM for me and I've actually found the strap to be more reliable for me than the fabric Polar one.

Comparing a Garmin to a toy is about right. Fisher price training tools.

robinph

The Polar software is probably a bit more detailed for analysing the HR through your workouts, but I'm sure the same could be achieved with SportsTracks if I really knew, or cared, what to do with such information in that much detail. But other than the Garmin Training Center software being useless, what else is it exactly that you find so bad with the Garmin hardware?

The mapping and measuring of routes is more accurate with the Garmin, unless you run underground all the time in which case the S625x and footpod will be more accurate, but you can add a footpod to the Gamin setup if you want. The HR data collected by the Polar and Garmin is the same.

tunney

robinph wrote: »

The Polar software is probably a bit more detailed for analysing the HR through your workouts, but I'm sure the same could be achieved with SportsTracks if I really knew, or cared, what to do with such information in that much detail. But other than the Garmin Training Center software being useless, what else is it exactly that you find so bad with the Garmin hardware?

The mapping and measuring of routes is more accurate with the Garmin, unless you run underground all the time in which case the S625x and footpod will be more accurate, but you can add a footpod to the Gamin setup if you want. The HR data collected by the Polar and Garmin is the same.

Okay - Garmin hardware.

Firstly - their soft HR straps, I have a two page email from Garmin support of the steps required to get them to consistently work. The setup for using it would be longer than most runs I would do. In short they don't work. (See other threads on boards and all over the net for this.)

Secondly - battery life. It ridiculously short. "But the new garming 310xt has 20 hours battery life". no it doesn't, use HR and GPS and its closer to 13.

Thirdly - recording rate and this is a biggie. They are moving to a smart recording rate in their products (saves memory costs),its a "smart" (read dumb) recording rate and samples can be from 2s to 40s apart. Garmin got absolutely shredded by the cyclists (not boards.ie ones, proper ones ) over this as wattage readings 40s apart are next to useless, actually any data 40s apart is. Garmin eventually capitulated and power is now the only metric that is not "smart" recorded.

Another one is their shocking QA process. When my orginial garmin was more useless than my present one I was onto Garmin support to get it changed. They insisted that they product did not operate in the fashion I described and as such they wouldn't do anything about it. Thankfully the retailer (cheers Rob) didn't agree with them and gave me a new one. Now 6 months on they freely admit the "bad batches".

So hardware wise - when you get a unit that actually works, it could well record one sample a minute of data, including HR data that is randomly (seemingly) selected from a range of 50-230.

Software wise - the "smart" recording means any proper analysis software cannot deal with the data and cannot use it meaningfully.

Now I'm sure your garmin is perfect and you've never had any problems and perhaps older garmins do not have the design flaws that their newer products do.

But in all good faith I could not recommend one and would even go so far as to say i could not sell my garmin second hand as i would feel I was ripping the buyer off by selling them crap.