RunningAHEAD - Topic: Polar S625x

rkeddie

posted: 5/20/2008 at 9:21 PM

Anyone use one? Any input vs. the Garmin 305/405?

Chenille

posted: 5/21/2008 at 12:16 AM

I have one - I did/do enjoy it. I found the foot pod to be pretty accurate, and I think the HR monitor is better than the garmin. Plus - you don't have to worry about losing GPS, you can use it swimming, you can use it on the treadmill or bike. I did end up getting a garmin - 305, and I never use my Polar for running anymore - I really like that I can map routes and save them in google earth - especially nice when on vacation Smile

. I don't have to worry about calibrating the foot pod, and it's just the one piece of equipment. Even tho' the garmin is larger than the polar, I don't even notice it on my wrist when I am out. I have never had any problems with my Polar, and although it is 2 years old, I haven't had to have the battery changed - that's another negative - it has to be sent to an authorized service center to change the watch battery. HTH Smile

Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the number of moments that take our breath away...(unkown)

• Go With The Flow
• Thyroid Support Group

easytarget

posted: 5/25/2008 at 11:41 PM

i bought one the year they came out, so however long that's been, no issues whatsoever (which was the same thing I could say for the S610i I had before it and sold when I got the 625X) the battery is not a big deal, i got it changed locally at a jeweler, just like i would have with any other watch and something I can't point out enough, the software that comes with Polar devices with upload to PC capability, like the 625X, is actually useful for training, unlike the software that comes with garmin devices

andsmit

posted: 5/26/2008 at 10:11 AM

I have the polar s625x and found the footpod to be accurate enough. However, recalibrating the footpod evertime you get new shoes is irritating, and the watch can be a bit confusing when using it for the first time. The polar software however is pretty solid, but not mac compatible. I would purchase the garmin 305, simply because the of the deals that are available. You can pick one up for $180 at Costco, far cheaper than the $350 that the Polar costs. However, the garmin does have some drawbacks: 1. You can't swim with the 305. 2. The polar wearlink HR strap is arguably more comfortable 3. Battery life on the 305 is around 10 hours (some ppl get more) while the polar will run out of memory after about 60 hours. 4. Garmin Training Centre is seriously needing an upgrade. Having said that, if you don't plan to swim with your watch, then get the garmin, much better value.

Marathon runners suffer the agony of da feet

easytarget

posted: 6/1/2008 at 8:21 PM
modified: 6/1/2008 at 8:26 PM

and my only response to his last statement would be, and if you plan to actually train with the device get a polar the use of the software on the PC is the whole point here actual HRM training only results in changes that take place over time, if you don't upload the data, have graph capabilities to make sense of it, and then make use of it as feedback in modifying your training, you're just doing what 99% of all the people who have ever bought an HRM are doing, wearing an over priced watch Roll eyes

in which case you'd be just as well served by following the advice of the techno-luddites who love to jump into HRM threads and proclaim they run by feel and all you need is a pair of running shoes Wink

andsmit

posted: 6/2/2008 at 3:28 AM

Agree with you 100% easytarget. You have to admit though, with the specials running on the garmin at the moment, you have to be tempted...

Marathon runners suffer the agony of da feet

Marathonjunkie

Ice Cream Man

posted: 6/2/2008 at 12:10 PM

Quote from rkeddie on 5/20/2008 at 9:21 PM:

Anyone use one? Any input vs. the Garmin 305/405?

I have had the 625 by Polar and the Garmin 305. But I am currently using the Polar RS800 and love it above all the rest. Just be ready for the sticker shock for this granddaddy of watches. The foot pod on the RS800 is about the size of a quarter and weighs next to nothing. Right out of the box it was rather accurate. You can calibrate it to really fine tune it. The training software is great. I even upgraded to the G3 GPS unit to use on my bike. I was not a big fan of the 305 GPS for running due to accuracy issues during my long runs in the woods. The polar foot pod however has been spot on in the woods and trails. Plus the altimeter and graph will show you climbs and downhills with cadence, stride length, auto lap and of course the all valuable HR function. The new cloth HR strap is virtually undetectable. IMHO.

Some guys will do anything for Ice Cream.

OnceADCV

posted: 6/3/2008 at 10:13 AM

I had/have the Polar RS800sd and just got the Garmin 305. The Garmin blows the Polar out of the water. Haven't picked up the Polar since I got the Garmin. The footpod is so damn inaccurate on the Polar it is a waste. The calibration is usually only good for one pace/speed and if you pick up your pace or alter your stride the calibration goes bye-bye. I use to get HR spikes on the Polar because Polar has exposed contacts that corrode due to contact with sweat. The Garmin's HRM is contained.... Yes the Polar strap might be slightly more comfortable, but I haven't notice anything with the Garmin. Who even uses the software that comes with the Garmin anyway????? You can used MotionBased.com or even better is SportTracks. Which is a FREE software that is way better that what Polar provides you with. Yes you have to use the Garmin software to set up workouts, but you really sets up workouts?? Also, the GPS is pretty accurate also, way more accurate that a footpod will every be. My routes always come in +/- 0.01 or 0.02 miles every time. No problems. Get a Garmin its cheaper, and there is a reason why most people have Garmins.... Don't make the same mistake I made when I got a Polar

djdarrin

posted: 6/3/2008 at 3:07 PM

I believe the inaccuracies that people notice on their watches vary from quite a bit. I have been using a new RS800sd for a month now and absolutly love it. the accuracy is almost spot-on for the foot pod. I recently completed a very hilly half marathon race (Dexter Ann Arbor in Michigan), running up and down hills, going faster/slower, up and down, varying pace and stride length considerably and what was the difference between foot pod and course length?? 0.04. My watch/foot pod on the 800 came in at 13.06. I don't think you can get much more accurate than that over a 13 mile course such as the one this race covers. I also owned the 305 at one point and, unless they changed the design (which they did not), are there not 4 exposed gold contacts on the underside of the 305?? and didn't (and most likely still does, since garmin could never solve it during the time I had the watch) one of those contacts blacken up due to sweat? Multiple calls to garmin only resulted in them telling me to "take a pencil erasor and wipe it clean...."

Run long, run strong

easytarget

posted: 6/6/2008 at 11:54 PM
modified: 6/7/2008 at 12:03 AM

Quote from OnceADCV on 6/3/2008 at 10:13 AM:

I had/have the Polar RS800sd and just got the Garmin 305. The Garmin blows the Polar out of the water. Haven't picked up the Polar since I got the Garmin. The footpod is so damn inaccurate on the Polar it is a waste. The calibration is usually only good for one pace/speed and if you pick up your pace or alter your stride the calibration goes bye-bye. I use to get HR spikes on the Polar because Polar has exposed contacts that corrode due to contact with sweat. The Garmin's HRM is contained.... Yes the Polar strap might be slightly more comfortable, but I haven't notice anything with the Garmin. Who even uses the software that comes with the Garmin anyway????? You can used MotionBased.com or even better is SportTracks. Which is a FREE software that is way better that what Polar provides you with. Yes you have to use the Garmin software to set up workouts, but you really sets up workouts?? Also, the GPS is pretty accurate also, way more accurate that a footpod will every be. My routes always come in +/- 0.01 or 0.02 miles every time. No problems. Get a Garmin its cheaper, and there is a reason why most people have Garmins.... Don't make the same mistake I made when I got a Polar

Anyone who has actually owned both products knows where all the errors are in most if not all of the statements above. So I'm not even going to bother wasting time on it. But am I to assume you have no use for the 800SD then? In which case sell it to me cheap. I've been using a 625x for 4 years and I know it won't last forever.

mark.bogner

posted: 3/5/2009 at 1:09 PM

Quote from easytarget on 5/25/2008 at 11:41 PM:

the battery is not a big deal, i got it changed locally at a jeweler, just like i would have with any other watch

easytarget (if you are still out there), or if someone else has had their battery changed, I have had the S625x for 3 years now and my battery just died on the wrist watch. When you had the jeweler replace the battery did you have them replace the gasket as well? I just don't want to have to pay for shipping charges... for a simple battery change. Any suggestions and did anyone have a bad experience with having the battery changed outside of the polar service centers? Thanks!

cgerber

posted: 3/5/2009 at 1:24 PM
modified: 3/5/2009 at 1:25 PM

I've got the Polar RS800 CX Multi, the GPS version of the RS800. It's a great watch... zero complaints. You can change the GPS battery in the field (one AA battery) so you don't have the 10 hour limitation like you do with the Garmin. Pros: - Better battery life - Barometric altimeter - Bike functions - Same GPS chip as the Garmin so the accuracy is the same - Field replaceable GPS unit battery (I run 100s, so this was key) - Better software Cons: - Insanely expensive. It replaced a Garmin 205 (actually, three of them)... nothing but problems w/ them. Will never buy another Garmin product. I've also had a Polar 710i for 8 years. Great watch, never had a single problem with. Once it went out of warranty I just changed the battery myself. NFI in Polar or Garmin. - Chris

Suunta

posted: 3/5/2009 at 3:04 PM
modified: 3/5/2009 at 3:05 PM

I have both (RS800sd & 305) and I like both for different reasons! I've been using my 305 a lot since it works on my Mac, but the Polar RS800 is an AWESOME watch. Once calibrated, it's very accurate. I wore it at Boston last year and it was well within 1% and I was weaving a lot those first 10k which I'm sure added length to the course. 305: Pros: Nice and simple, accurate. Cons: Ugly, uncomfortable, I personally don't like where the lap button is. RS800: Small, pressure altimeter, huge lap button, works in the cities with tall buildings/sharp corners, cadence! Cons: The footpod needs to be calibrated at race pace, no Mac support. Check out www.runningcharts.com/. You can upload watch data from both and the charts are similar to Polar's, which I love, but it's online which is great.

Polar S625x (Read 2811 times)