How are you finding the RS200SD after a couple more days? I'd be interested to read anybody else's experiences with it.
I'm currently swithering about whether to get a RS200SD or a S625X. I definitely want a HRM with speed and distance functionality. I like the smaller size and sleeker design of the RS200SD but am tempted by the bigger memory and additional functions of the S625X. Maybe, if I'm honest, I just want the top of the range model!
Also, are Polar offering software compatible with Mac OSX yet? It seems oddly stubborn (particularly for a Scandinavian company) only to support Windows.
Road Ginger, I'm in the same position as you whether to buy the 200 or the 625. Currently the best prices on the web for the 200/625 is about £155 and £180 respectively.
I have decided against the Garmin 201/301 <very good by the way> as I took a neigbour who owns one for a 10mile run through some fairly thick wood land but it was up and down on the sattelite link like I don't know. Not sure how much terrain/mileage it missed <note to self, must ask neigbour>.
I hope we're not guilty of hijacking your thread, Marcus! There's a lot of discussion on this forum about the S625X, but I'd still like to read what others think of the RS200SD.
I wanted to start some dialogue on the RS200SD - so no problems Road Grinder.
Comments so far on my RS200SD:
- Good size on wrist so I can wear it all the time as a watch. - High level of accuracy 3.2 miles on treadmill was recorded as 3.22 miles (as per S625X) with no calibration. - If you're looking to download data from then the S625X is a better choice - in fact if anyone has managed to do this please can post the details on how you did it? Not sure about Mac compatibility. - Easy to use and intutive.
I think the altimeter function is one of the best bits of the S625X. Provided you calibrate it (because it works barometrically), it's acurate and gives you spot height and total ascent. The PPP software extracts other info too, such as gradient and makes nice route profiles! That would sway me to this model over the RS200D.
"High level of accuracy 3.2 miles on treadmill was recorded as 3.22 miles (as per S625X) with no calibration."
Sorry if I appear pedantic, but surely this means only that the Polar coincided with the treadmill in its estimate of distance. How do you know the treadie is perfectly accurate?
Yes indeed treadmills do fluctuate in their accuracy but unless you're running reps at significant pace I don't think it's going to degrade your training effect. I've heard of treadmills being as much as 5% off but then what's 200-300 meters to worry about when running 4 miles in total. Solution is to calibrate with a given flat straight line distance or 1200 meters run on a track as suggested directly to me by Polar.
Muttley - last night at my local club I went running with a colleague who had a Garmin Forerunner 201. He recorded 4.2 miles and I recorded 4.3 miles on my RS200SD (without calibration) - not bad correlation.
What is the accuracy Garmin state for the Forerunners? I know mine is suppose to be %.
I don't know, Marcus. Whatever the margin of error is, it's good enough for me.
My hunch is that a calibrated footpod is more accurate than the GF, especially if there's tree cover. But I don't think the discrepancies really matter. People do seem to get hung up about miniscule percentages and expect atomic accuracy. Both technologies are a boon, both have their pluses and minuses, and I think it really comes down to personal preference.
Just received my RS200sd. Polar should clean up with this (if they can sort their customer service out). Unless you are particularly techie - this has to be the best watch of its kind on the market. Does most things you need for HRM plus pacing and is still a sensible size. I had been looking to upgrade to 625x as I had been used to traingin with old HRM but wanted speed and distance plus interval training option. I was talking to a guy at Polar recently (about service!!!!) and he told me about this watch. For 95% of runners no need to pay extra for 625x - do your really use all those features. Money/features/ease of use - this has it all. Go and buy one. I have found it very easy to calibrate, and accurate although this is based on 10 days use!!Just had one slight problem with HRM on bike ride on Sat morning, but that could be me. Well done Polar...this is a winner!
After 10 seconds of running you cannot notice it at all! provinding you allow for the extra tightness in the laces because of plastic clip. If you stand still and shake one foot and then the other you might feel a slight difference then.
I'm in the early days of the s625x and although I've read lots of +ve and -ve about he watch I think it's great and does exactly what I need so far. To be honest I think the 220sd would have done the job as well but since prices have come down I thought the extra £40 was worth it.
The trick I use is to set up both shoe laces with the same tension that feels comfortable with the just the plastic bracket in. I actually only ever loosen/tighten the top three holes for the laces anyway. Then when the pod is attached it is only slightly tighter than the other shoe, then I simply pull both tops of the laces till it feels roughly right. I must admit it never quite feels the same on both feet but I don't notice it after a few mins of running.
I am still waiting for mine to arrive. Getting bit annoyed with a certain company so have now ordered it from treadbear instead. Hoping to receive it before I go off on holiday on Thursday morning.
Please let us know how treadbear are with delivery. I was thinking of ordering one for the good lady (i have a 625 but she thinks its too big!) & saw it on treadbear but the price almost looks too good to be true...... you can be the guinea pig!
Well, I have had an e-mail today from treadbear saying it will arrive by 2pm Wednesday. And they are excellent at replying to my e-mails too. So far so good and yes the price is right.
Unless there has been a recent update there is no Mac compatibility as of yet for Polar products. Using PC emulator is a solution but not nevessarily everyone's cup of tea.
Just found this thread. I was thinking of investing in one of these - I'm currently training with a Cardiosport HRM but I think it's on it's last legs.
How big is the watch? I have quite small wrists so don't want to get one and it ends up being really chunky.
Comments
I'm currently swithering about whether to get a RS200SD or a S625X. I definitely want a HRM with speed and distance functionality. I like the smaller size and sleeker design of the RS200SD but am tempted by the bigger memory and additional functions of the S625X. Maybe, if I'm honest, I just want the top of the range model!
Also, are Polar offering software compatible with Mac OSX yet? It seems oddly stubborn (particularly for a Scandinavian company) only to support Windows.
Now, if someone were to marry the footpod technology with the GF interface, it'd be the perfect gadget.
I have decided against the Garmin 201/301 <very good by the way> as I took a neigbour who owns one for a 10mile run through some fairly thick wood land but it was up and down on the sattelite link like I don't know. Not sure how much terrain/mileage it missed <note to self, must ask neigbour>.
http://www.pccoach.com/newsletters/June05/polar-RS200sd.htm
I hope we're not guilty of hijacking your thread, Marcus! There's a lot of discussion on this forum about the S625X, but I'd still like to read what others think of the RS200SD.
Comments so far on my RS200SD:
- Good size on wrist so I can wear it all the time as a watch.
- High level of accuracy 3.2 miles on treadmill was recorded as 3.22 miles (as per S625X) with no calibration.
- If you're looking to download data from then the S625X is a better choice - in fact if anyone has managed to do this please can post the details on how you did it? Not sure about Mac compatibility.
- Easy to use and intutive.
Any questions let me know.
Sorry if I appear pedantic, but surely this means only that the Polar coincided with the treadmill in its estimate of distance. How do you know the treadie is perfectly accurate?
What is the accuracy Garmin state for the Forerunners? I know mine is suppose to be %.
My hunch is that a calibrated footpod is more accurate than the GF, especially if there's tree cover. But I don't think the discrepancies really matter. People do seem to get hung up about miniscule percentages and expect atomic accuracy. Both technologies are a boon, both have their pluses and minuses, and I think it really comes down to personal preference.
Just found this thread. I was thinking of investing in one of these - I'm currently training with a Cardiosport HRM but I think it's on it's last legs.
How big is the watch? I have quite small wrists so don't want to get one and it ends up being really chunky.
Check out the link left by Road Grinder which shows a picture of the watch on a wrist:
http://www.pccoach.com/newsletters/June05/polar-RS200sd.htm
Marcus Lee 3:
Are you still impressed with it?