Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
Polar s625x
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
It sounds like too perfect little thing, why it's not any worse. So I didn't want to buy it...
Let's make a competition; who can get the greatest speed on the display! When I've got mine I'll surely score over 23 mph.
Hmm.. good point:
"I think (correct me if I'm wrong) your speed is the average for the run (?) and pace is right now.
Did I make that up?"
Anybody?
One other thing, can any help me with setting up a training program. I want to configure a interval run based on heart rate and distance. e.g :1 mile at 65%, 1mile at 80%,1mile at 65. Can i program this into the s625x ?
I read a few posts about using the watch for interval workouts. It sounded like people weren't really happy with the watch because of the beeping during the recovery, etc.
Has anyone else tried the watch for interval or fartlek workouts? I have a S120 right now and it is a pain to have to manually switch between zones when the intervals change.
I have all sorts of new 'beep's' that i didn't have on the 610 - but I think i just need to sit down and switch off stuff on the exercises ... long run last night and it bleeped every 60 secs,
oooh i'm having so much fun ....
I am undecided on whether to wear the footpod for the Dublin marathon. The extra information is nice, but is it worth carrying the extra weight for 26 miles?
I normally use the interval timer but unfortunately the warm up and cool down bits which I would use for the 65% bit can only be set for time or manual. The only way to get round it is to set them to manual then start the interval when you hit a mile. I've had a look at the none interval bit but you can only specify HR or pace limits for set times.
Are you following the 'Heart monitor training for complete idiots' schedule because I have to do exactly the same thing :-)
I wear it in all races - even though I don't really look at anything but the split times on my watch (good to have 'real' split times though - measured at accurate intervals rather than on the sometimes oddly placed distance markers) - I just can't resist it - really I just like looking at the graphs afterwards
Has anyone had any real problems with the pod and strap, I've just had to send mine back to Polar, the pod stopped working (yes I changed the battery) and the right tab on the strap cracked. Customer services told me a number of the initial straps have been faulty, but I've had the first pod problem.
Regarding to this ..."If you don't want to use the SDM bit, you need to turn the running speed off - either via the options menu, or by holding down the bottom right hand button and cycling through from ru to b1, b2 and finally you should get a couple of straight lines showing that all speed functions are off"....I couldn't turn the Speed off while i'm running....do I have to stop the watch fist???
Bob kite and Kan Man, i've asked the Polar guys about "interval or fartlek workouts" and the answered me that the only way to program this kind of training whith different limits it was by using the warm up, interval and cool down phases.....it's a little bit disappointing... I would have preffer to set more limits than only three...
With reference to the question on a heart rate interval based on 1 mile at 85% followed by 1 mile at 65% etc. I have adopted a kind of "cheats" approach of this kind of interval based on what can be done with the device. Basically, from experience and checking out my graphs etc. I know roughly the pace/distance/heart rate relationships of my running style. If I want to do an interval along the lines you indicate I would set a distance based interval of 1 mile with pace limits of 8 min/mile (because I know that the pace which gives me a HR of between 82-87% is 8 min/mile) I would then set recovery at 1 mile and basically just jog slow (because I know that after a mile at 85% no matter how slow I go I aint gonna get to 65% anyway so I'll just jog slow as the recovery. Not very technical I'm afraid but it works for me. My favourite interval using the HRM is the YASSO 800's one from Runners World, this one incorporates a warmup followed by up to 10 800m intervals at a "minutes version" of marathon pace (ie. If you want to run a marathon in 3 hours 30 mins. then you should aim to do 10 800m intervals in 3mins 30 secs. each. with jogged recoveries of 3mins 30 secs between each interval. On the HRM you set up your interval as distance based, 800m. You then set pace limits of 4 min. 22sec per km(which equates to 3 min 30 for 8oom (obviously a bit of maths is required to do your conversions). You then set timed recoveries of 3mins 30 secs and finally a cooldown, Bingo, Yasso 800's without a running track, any park,footie pitch etc. will do.
Sorry for the long post, got a bit carried away.
The slightly encouraging news is that the error seemed to be consistent for each mile, but given the accuracy claims, an error of 17% was a surprise (I run neutrally). Time to head to the track for some serious testing....
I'm pleased to report that I am continuing to get very consistent results, with it always reporting the same distance for certain set runs that I do, irrespective of the pace or which direction I run the loop in. I reckon mine is pretty close, but hopefully I'll manage to get down to my local track this week and calibrate it to get the accuracy really nailed down.
More a case of expectations management - Polar claim that in general you can expect 97% accuracy out of the box.
Really? Yes, well, I think that is rather over-optimistic of them!
HEre's the interesting bit.......I calibrated it over 1600m and ran 4 exaxt laps of the track trying to remain uniformly 8inches or so from the inside rail of the inside lane (this is where the 400m is measured to on a bonafide track). Anyway this gave me a calibration factor of 999 and I did it twice for the same result. This shows me that the monitor is virtually spot on accurate. What it also shows me is that the half marathon distances I ran were not 13.1 miles. I would never have thought that I could convert the GNR into a 12.3 mile run, I must have a tendancy to taking the inside line on corners or something!
I've just acquired one and clearly need to calibrate it - it described a (measured by bike accurately) 5 mile run as 6.2 miles - over 20% out. The altimeter was spot on, however and gave a wonderful route profile when downloaded.
Most of my running is done on forest tracks with lots of ups and downs. I don't think that running 400m or multiples thereof round a track equates to the sort of running I do every day. A usual run can mean a very slow and steep 500 feet climb followed by a high speed descent, and I suspect that this is probably pushing the limits of what one could expect. Not only is my pace changing, but because of uneven ground my footfall and take-off are going to be variable too.
My proposed calibration method is to measure a 2 km loop with ups and downs on the bike (several times for accuracy) and use this as the basis for the calibration factor.
Even if I only get rough accuracy with the speed/distance thingy, I'm pleased with the altitude v HR optins.
Test-drove mine at Baxter’s Loch Ness Marathon yesterday. Will report back when Ive looked more closely at the results .... First impressions are that it performed admirably
Greyhound - Agree that it's best to have the watch calibrated to its performance in use rather than in a different environment. Given that my current targets involve road races, I guess I will look to calibrate off those measurements (accepting that you will almost always run slightly over distance). Will try 20 laps on the track at different paces tommorow though just to try and work out how consistent the error factor is relative to speed.
Am also going to look to try the sdm on my left foot soon. Has anybody noticed whether left/right foot makes much of a difference?
Can't wait!
Here's a thing - I thought Polar claimed the S625x was 97% accurate out of the box - but actually, on the product itself - it says 97% accurate "after callibration".
Interesting.
lotc - interestingly, I find that the foot pod is 'better' on my left foot. I know I do different things with my feet when they are off the floor on one side and the other, so maybe that's why.
Bought some rechargeable AAAs now. Don't care about battery life any more
http://www.polar.fi/polar/files/4Zjpy9Qds/LiftupAttachment/Polar_S625X_Running_Computer_FAQ.pdf
I noted a difference of 2% when I ran the same route twice. This is acceptable, but would like to do a bit more testing before my mind's completely at ease.
I've just looked back on some of the earlier posts and note your comments about using it for Ben Lomond & Ben Nevis.
How did the figures compare to what you would have expected? Was the summit half way on the results graph or was it confused by short strides / slower pace for first half and long strides / faster pace thereafter? What about immersion (as one who fell in the Red Burn trying to take a shortcut many years ago!)?
PS - Also found a way to impress with high total distance. Simply record your run in km and switch to miles when you get back. Lo! 10km becomes 10 miles and no extra effort involved! Bit disappointed with this finding as my Garmin eTrex GPS has no difficulty in converting units.
Polar replaced the footpod so I guess that should solve the problem.
This evening I'm going to give it another try and hope I will get within 3% accuracy.
Maarten
Monkey, I haven't read all of the forerunner thread. But I believe that 625 is miles ahead of Forerunner. One run doesn't tell the truth. You have read in this thread how well Polar has done with some users - less than 1% fault. How good Forerunner usually does in runs?
Btw. forerunner looks like a one from the scifi movies. Anyway, Polar will be my choice, when I have the money...