14 responses so far ↓

• 1 Kurt

  I already owned most of suunto and polar heart monitors. The RS800SD is the one of my favorites. It has nice options of screens and it is very light. It seems not so robust as the 625x or 725x (I owned both). As some colleagues wrotes seems to me also that the S3 pod is not so accurated as the S1 but is lighter. I also own the RS400, if you are not looking for the running index, it comes with the S1 and coded transmitter that is easier find find spare parts (also once is a little bit darker than RS800 I prefer the looking). The main issue with Polar is the Irda interface. I already bought one Irda connector (universal non polar) that is working very well with the S725X but it is not with RS800 or RS400. Now I ordered the original Polar connector but once I use the windons Vista I am expecting problems (based on users reviews). Polar should pick an easier system suc as wired connection or bluetooth. Last point, the RS products are not designed for multi sport (biking for example)

• 2 Newcomb

  This product is excellent i have been used Polar for more than 10 years, i have the GPS and the foot sensor, as i practice mountain bike, i had some doubts because i have read in Amazon the products is not very good, but i took the risk and no regret, the only issue is the Polar software is excellent but do not have manual, only the help files and this is the only reason they do not have 5 stars.

• 3 Devore

  What bothered me the most was the fact that Amazon didn’t inform that I must pay further taxes when I would withdraw the product at the Post Office.

• 4 Lerman

  I have had my RS800SD for almost a year now, and I love it. Measuring cadence has helped my running more than anything else I have done. This is the main reason that I chose it over GPS units. I took ten minutes off of my half marathon time using it for training.

  I have had GPS units in the past, but found that they were not as accurate as the footpod in terms of distance (when calibrated) or altitude. I was within a hundredth of a mile of my treadmill readout on a recent 5K.

  Heart rate is accurate as well. I found battery life to be adequate for my purposes. I changed them recently just because it seemed about time to do so, but had about 50 hours of running in on the batteries before doing so.

  I love the unit and it has been a great training help.

• 5 Luong

  I’ve been a Polar HR monitor owner since the mid 90’s starting with 710i, then 625x, followed by the 725x, and now the RS800SD. I consider myself a serious competitive runner and have been so for over 30 years. Polar introduced me to heart rate monitoring as key component to performance improvement with the book “Training, Lactate, Pulse rate” by Janssen, which is no longer offered by them and may not be published anymore. I have had my VO2, HR curve, and lactate threshold measured in a lab several times over the past few years. I have used this product now for almost a full year and my review will focus on what does all this functionality do to help me improve my running vs some of the other reviews here which seem enamored with purported functionality without connecting the dots for useful training feedback.

  The bottom line: This is their flagship product, top of the line and top dollar but Polar seems to have chosen marketing (a shiny sexy small form factor watch with apparently lots of new functions) over solid engineering, useful software functionality, and product reliability. If you already own a 625x or 725x model there is little reason to upgrade as this is an “unfinished product”

  The good:

  1. Small form factor for watch and footpod
  2. Improvement in ergonomics — buttons and watch face are easier to use
  3. More memory — you can record longer than earlier models at the 1 second rate
  4. Running stride length has been added.

  The bad:

  1. The footpod and HR strap via blue tooth does not seem any more accurate than previous non-blue tooth models and maybe less so regarding footpod functions. HR measurement seems as accurate as earlier models.
  2. Software (Polar Pro Trainer 5) has new functions which are questionable at best and misleading at worst — namely the running “index” function which on a scale of 30 to 76 purports to give you the sum of all calculations with a number which roughly correlates with expected future performance (running times) on various races such as a 5K through a marathon.
  3. Customer Service. I was told at first that the inability to record temperature on the watch was a bug in the software. Later was told that the watch could not record temperature (correct). Also was given an excuse as to why temperature was no longer recorded by the watch (users body temperature — hah! — it worked well enough on earlier models). And regarding the index calculation, I was never given the algorithm which could at least help me understand what type of math it was doing (it is a mystery to me and the algorithm seems biased to reward you with a higher index score for a lower heart rate and slow time vs a slightly higher heart rate and faster time). Instead I was given a platitude;

  “It is worth to remember that in addition to good Running Index, maximal running performance demands good preparation, optimal running conditions, speed endurance and guts. Training quantity and quality have an affect as well as natural talent. The RunningIndex gives a value measured in current circumstances.”

  I especially like the “guts” comment — really happy about that as I don’t know how I’ve gotten by over the past 30 years beating people without “guts”

  The ugly:

  1. Incomprehensible design decision to modify the altimeter sensor holes from recessed (previous polar models) to flush on the bottom of the watch resulting in erroneous readings as soon as you start to sweat (yes you read that right — sweat) and thus rendering the altimeter function of the watch largely useless unless the watch is worn in such a way (flopping on wrist or strapped to clothing) to preclude the sensor holes from clogging with sweat from your wrist.
  2. Software. Looks real nice until you try to modify data. Say you got erroneous distance reading on your last run and you want to easily fix it. You won’t be able to. No simple function to correct the total distance of a run and have that correction evenly applied to entire run. This undermines the whole point of exercise comparison within the software. If you go out on two identical runs but the distance recorded by the watch varies by a few tenths of a mile there will be no easy way to correct the data.
  3. Temperature. Previous models recorded temperature as a data point whenever you took a lap marker or finished the run. This model does neither requiring you to manually enter the temperature into the software.
  4. The running index calculation does not take into consideration temperature (AMAZING! since the book noted at the beginning of this review showed clearly that there is a positive correlation between high temperatures and higher heart rates — you work harder to cool youself). The lack of temperature calculation (an identical run can have HR vary by 10 BPM based upon temperature) seriously undermines the usefulness of the running index function.
  5. No way to tell software about different running conditions for a given distance and have that taken into consideration on the index calculation. Five miles run on a track are treated the same as five miles run on sandy roads or trails. So when you go into the comparison graphs which purportedly allow you to see at a glance trends in your running, you cannot account for different conditions on runs. Neither different temperatures or different running surfaces are considered on calculations. This seriously undermines the usefulness of comparing weeks worth of training runs in order to come up with a performance trajectory and let you know are you ready for that next race.

  Until this product I rarely even considered any other HR monitoring tool. Polar may not have made “pretty” watches, but they worked. They made tools for athletes interested in maximizing their performance. The marketing department has apparently taken over the company from the engineers. The company may have “jumped the shark” with this watch and software. I hope I’m wrong and Polar surprises with its next watch. It needs to actually delivers useful functions for serious athletes and not take away functions offered from previous models (temperature and an altimeter which works reliably). And if they are going to go to the trouble of providing a number which tells all — the index number — then they better explain how that number is calculated and provide the user with the ability to modify the formula (temperature and surface conditions to start with) in order to meet variable conditions if their engineers and exercise physiologist have not already thought of everything.

  And keep the marketing department out of product design until functions are firmly set and don’t represent a two steps forward, two steps back design as we see with this model.

• 6 Beller

  I’m an experienced runner (running for more than 5 years) and I just can’t train without a polar on my wrist… First I bought a simple polar F3… At first It was good because all I wanted was my heart rate measured… But after 6 months I realized it wasn’t enough… So I spent a good money on a Polar FT80 Heart but that was too much… You just don’t use all the features of the watch and the screen is too dim at night and when you are running at high level you get have an easy to see screen, one that just at a glance you get all the information you need and want… So, as I’m from Brazil and I moved to US I forgot to bring my Polar FT80 Heart so I purchase the Polar RS200sd (the sd means speed and distance because it comes with a footpod)… This heart rate monitor does all the work… It measures your speed and distance (that’s good for street runner but useless for treadmill runners only if you like the watch to keep registered your speed and distance for that day)… And gives you your heart rate, your percentage, and your ownindex (VO2)…
  I’ve learned that the polar ownindex is not accurate but it is useful for doing a training program at the polar weblink software…
  This polar comes with a feature called connectivity… You download the polar weblink software, register yourself on their website and transfer your training data from your polar just putting it near your computers microphone… It makes a modem connecting sound and it transfer all the data (it’s easy to do it)… Thus, after transferring the data you can create training programs up to marathon… Moreover, it’s really useful for you to keep your whole data as this polar only keep in file your last 20 sessions (more than enough)…
  In a nutshell, I would certainly recommend this polar for experienced runner and beginners… Keeping a track of your heart rate and your training evolution is extremely important and with this polar on your wrist you will be just fine…
  Best cost for the features, certainly do not recommend spending more money… This does it all…

• 7 Keene

  This is a good entry level watch for a runner that wants to follow their HR during runs. The watch is only moderately complex. The numbers are legible. The basic kit comes with a strap, the sd kit comes with the footpod.

  You really need to buy into the HR zones to get the full function of this watch. Otherwise, it may be a bit of overkill. The polar website has some additional instructions that help with this.

• 8 Sit

  Pros: Price, Weblink, accurate, not big, easy to navigate.
  Cons: none
  I have had no problems with my Polar RS200SD. It is extremely accurate. and easy to use although more advanced interval monitoring is a little cumbersome. For anyone looking to purchase a heart rate monitor for the first time the RS200SD is a great start and has the weblink feature that lets you use Polar’s software to breakdown and visualize your workout heart rate data. I have not used the foot pod so I can’t comment on it. I’ve had very good luck with mine so far.
  [...]

• 9 King

  I am currently training for the Marine Corp Marathon and recording all my runs using this watch. I am tracking against a training program i created on the polar training website. The watch included the optional footpod. I find this to be an invaluable tool as I use it to track pace (min/mile) as well as total distance. Overall i am extremely happy with this purchase. As a long distance runner i am able to keep track of my heart rate and better manage my fitness through training zones. This is not perfect as i find i am typically running at 90% of my maximum heart rate unless i make a concerted effort to slow down.

• 10 Page

  I LOVE this Heart Rate Monitor watch!! It is just what I was looking for in a HR Monitor for running. I would highly recommend it…It is easy to use and loaded with great features for runners/walkers.

• 11 Chavez

  I have no problems with the IR transfer others have mentioned, although this has been problematic on my two previous models (one i broke and one I gave to a friend as an excuse to buy this cool new one). My S610 worked well for the first couple of years but then struggled to connect via IR. One thing I will say is steer very clear of that Polar after marker IR device (see my other review on that specifically). It is an absolute overpriced piece of garbage (I usually don’t speak out that strongly against something but after spending $120 on two of them I want to help others not flush good money down the drain). For $20 you can get a Startech model that works flawlessly. I use this monitor 5 days a week and the Polar Precision Performance software that comes with it is solid. I do recommend upgrading to a model that includes this software as their weblink tool is pretty worthless (my wife uses it because her F55 is not supported by the Polar Precision Performance software). Overall though the Polar watches and chest bands are the best.

• 12 Pendley

  Why do they not clearly state that this product does not come with a IR Adapter. Why provide software for analyzing data when they do not provide a way to transfer the data to the computer.

  Have they not heard that IR is out and Bluetooth is in!!!!

• 13 Keyser

  I got the RS400 to replace the Polar 625X–which failed to connect to my computer just after the warranty expired. key thing about this device is being able to download data to the computer to use the analyzing software. Unfortunatly, I am RETURNING the RS 400 becuase it FAILS TO DOWNOAD to the computer–even using the very expensive POLAR brand IRD interface device. The old watch (625x) was always very touchy to download, took many tries. This fails to transfer at all. I’ve had the Garmin 305 for 2years and love it. It downloads thru a USB connector every time. the only reason I tried to get polar again is to for the OWN INDEX test. But I don’t need to spend $249 for only that functoin when the Garmin 305 does everything else and also has a robust analytical software program (but you cannot print it). really wanted to give Polar another chance and really disappointed. GET THE GARMIN 305 INSTEAD!
  -middled aged female athlete

• 14 Eggehorn

  I have been using a RS200 for a few months. The unit works fine capturing the data but the hassle that one needs to go through to get the data uploaded to the Polar site via Weblink is very very cumbersome. It is a hit and a miss and I have given up on transmitting my data because of this useless feature.

You must log in to post a comment.