Polar monitor vs. Nike+ vs. others

SparkPoints: (158,833)
Fitness Minutes: (112,042)
Posts: 46,222
1/11/13 9:22 P

Hi,

I would think that of the two, the Polar would be a more accurate means of measuring one's caloric expenditure as it has the added HRM feature. But remember all these devices--Nike+ sportband, Garmin, Polar, Fitbit, even apps, use an algorithm using your personal data to base your calories expended.

That being said, as a runner, when it comes to speed work (tempos, intervals) and long, slow distance runs, my Garmin is the be-all, end-all when it come to my running improvement as I am able to track my pace. But you can use the Nike+ app and get similar data.

Just my take...

Coach Nancy

Edited by: SP_COACH_NANCY at: 1/11/2013 (21:23)

0 Days until:  The Historic MC 1/2 Marathon

50 37 25 12

0

SparkPoints: (3,986)
Fitness Minutes: (4,031)
Posts: 18
1/11/13 7:47 P

For years I have used a Polar Heart Monitor durring my work outs to monitor heart rate and track calories for each workout. These days there are many similar products out there so wondering what people use and is there truly a point to uploading results to thecomputer/ internet?

So I got a new pair of Nike+ Airmax 2012 running shoes. Debating if the Nike+ sportsband is something anyone has experience with and uses. Seems for calories you need a Polar Wearlink+transmitter Nike+ and that allows to communicate heart rate/ calories to the Nike+ sportband. Then with the nike+ sensor in the shoe will track distance. A nice feature. However is it accurate? When running outside I use my phone with MapMyRun app and been happy. But wonder for purpose of the gym if the Sportband is worth it.

Im not one that is big and finds it necessary to upload/ track every workout. I guess I feel I can notice improvement on my own with distance & times running. But then again mightbe nice to see everything uploaded and get a better gage on how my workouts are coming along.

So anyone use Nike+ sportband? Polar Heart Monitor? Thoughts/ opinions?