Not your usual Garmin v Polar thread

I have been a polar user (both bike and running - S725X with Footpod, Cadence and Speed sensors) for years.  I like the protrainer software and data display.


 Over Xmas I have used a Garmin Forerunner 410 on my right arm. 


 That garmin data for speed seems unusable for interpretation and very erratic.  I also, through inexperience, used the virtual pacer but as Garmin measured short vice the race I thought I was on pace but actually was running 2 sec per mile slow.  I started my polar 20 sec after start and because of the cycling on the garmin I rarely saw how long i'd been running so found running towards a time tricky.  I manually lapped my splits on the polar and would do that on the garmin if I were to get one.  Is this standard of data normal? Has anyone else used both? Is it just personal preference or is there more that I can get out of the Garmin.  The HR functions appear very scant with the Polar Fit test, own optimizer etc beating anything the Garmin has.  I have the S725X and am thinking of getting an old P1 GPS unit which works with it or going to Garmin as I like the ability to upload data to Strava and view routes.  I cycle and dabble in tri so would be looking at the 310/910 although I am unsure as to how much i'd use the swimming functions and consider them to be gimmicky.   



  • Hi,

    I have a Forerunner 410 and your heart figures look very erratic. Are you sure you are not picking up interference from your Polar unit? I very rarely get any spikes at all in my reports.

    Have a look at the dcrainmaker website for some excellent in depth reviews on GPS HRMs for Triathlon

  • That is the GPS trace not HR. I didn't use HR on garmin just looked at my mums stats. I have read some of dcrainmaker's reviews before so will revisit
  • Hi again,

    Sorry I looked at it wrong. My figures are quite steady and certainly not like the ones you show. The dips are caused by slowing down for gates and cattle grids


Sign In or Register to comment.