Sunday Runday
On this weekly column, Android Central Wearables Editor Michael Hicks talks in regards to the world of wearables, apps, and health tech associated to working and well being, in his quest to get sooner and more healthy.
Final 12 months, I wrote about how I used to be carried out with coronary heart fee monitor chest straps. Reduce to 2025, and I nonetheless don’t love all of them that a lot. However after testing the brand new Garmin HRM 200 in opposition to the Polar H10 and COROS HRM throughout a number of runs, I am pleased to confess that I used to be overly harsh on chest straps.
Garmin despatched me the HRM 200 with my Intuition 3, which I have been testing for months. Against this, I shoved Garmin’s chest strap right into a drawer and subconsciously suppressed its existence, ahem, forgot about it till this week.
The Garmin HRM 200, like all chest strap, cuts out the wrist-based optical intermediary and straight reads your coronary heart’s electrical indicators for higher accuracy. It is waterproof, extremely reasonably priced at $79, and lasts a couple of 12 months earlier than you might want to swap out the batteries.
Unsurprisingly, I discovered it uncomfortable. But it surely did outperform my Garmin Fenix 8‘s Elevate v5 optical sensor for accuracy, for the sticklers who want near-perfect knowledge. It is not standalone just like the Garmin HRM-Professional, however in any other case, chest strap followers ought to adore it.
I made a decision to check the Garmin HRM 200 and Polar H10 in opposition to one another — and in opposition to my COROS HRM armband that I a lot choose — and provides chest straps one other likelihood to impress me.
My easy beef with chest straps
Chest straps aren’t type to individuals with dadbods. The strap naturally digs into my pores and skin on the match essential to maintain a constant, non-slip connection.
I’ve misplaced sufficient weight previously 12 months that that is much less of a problem than earlier than, however my actual criticism is how a chest strap retains me out of the “zone.” It hugs my chest with each breath, reminding me that my efficiency is being monitored and judged always, and making me self-conscious if my respiratory fee will get excessive.
However I acknowledge that my dislikes could not apply to you. I feel I am extra hypersensitive to tight clothes — like ties or skinny denims — than different individuals. Simply because I don’t love chest straps doesn’t suggest I can ignore them; it is my job to present them a good shake.
My extra basic Polar H10 concern was the way it produced bizarrely erratic outcomes throughout a number of runs in 2024, irrespective of how nicely I adjusted the match or moist the contact sensors.
Finally, I found that my Polar H10 solely labored as meant when related to a smartwatch. I used to be utilizing the choice to trace exercises straight within the Polar Beat app, and for no matter motive, the wonky phone-strap Bluetooth connection would sub in deflated readings at odd moments that badly skewed the outcomes.
As soon as I began syncing my Polar H10 to a watch, it grew to become a dependable management group for my accuracy assessments. However I remained a bit suspicious that chest straps had been overhyped.
Now that I had two chest straps, I made a decision it was time to see simply how constant these gadgets are, and if the accuracy hole is well worth the trade-offs.
My Garmin HRM 200 vs. Polar H10 vs. COROS HRM accuracy check
My solely method to examine all three straps’ knowledge was to put on three smartwatches — Garmin Fenix 8, COROS PACE Professional, and Polar Vantage M3 — related to every, with the Garmin HRM 200 and Polar H10 stacked atop each other on my chest and the COROS optical sensor on my arm.
Apart from being a goofy-looking setup, I might solely hope this shut chest strap proximity would not intrude with the outcomes.
My hour-long, high-aerobic run began off shaky, with COROS’ knowledge elevated by about 30 bpm, Garmin taking a minute to catch up, and Polar having one early, random dip. However all the things stabilized shortly, and there have been no different points for the remaining 58 minutes.
The chart above exhibits how all three gadgets examine, whereas the chart beneath focuses on the 2 chest straps. All three straps measured a 168 bpm common.
Sometimes, wrist-based optical sensors fall 1–3 bpm brief in my assessments, with a noticeable delay once I change my tempo or climb hills. The COROS HRM nonetheless exhibits a little bit of that lag, however it’s minimal sufficient that solely probably the most fussy of runners would discover.
As for the 2 chest straps, they’re in near-lockstep for almost all of the run, which galvanized me!
The larger accuracy check, as at all times, was the monitor exercise. I foolishly ran it the subsequent morning once I was nonetheless drained, so I struggled to hit my normal max-HR ranges. However I nonetheless acquired nearly three miles of sprints, exhausting working, jogging, and strolling, difficult my coronary heart fee screens to observe the fast adjustments.
This time, there have been noticeable gaps between the three gadgets. Each COROS and Polar lagged barely behind Garmin’s HR peaks and valleys as a substitute of the 2 chest straps leaving the armband behind.
That does not imply Garmin’s HRM 200 is extra correct, essentially. The Polar H10 could have been barely deprived, positioned beneath the HRM 200 so it wasn’t as near my coronary heart. And I do not know if Garmin’s spikier graph than Polar’s regular one means it was sooner at catching tiny HR fluctuations or was simply barely extra inconsistent.
(Be aware: Ignore the Polar H10’s one awkward flat-line close to the top; it is a recognized concern the place Polar’s knowledge freezes on the final HR end result while you pause a exercise. I attempted to keep away from pausing, however like I mentioned, I used to be exhausted.)
Picture 1 of 2
In the end, the Garmin HRM 200 and COROS HRM each confirmed a 174 bpm common and 188 bpm most, whereas the Polar H10 fell 1 bpm brief at 173 and 187, respectively. I am pleased to chalk that as much as awkward chest placement, and it is a lot higher than how my H10 carried out previously.
If I distinction that with each monitor exercise check I’ve carried out with health smartwatches, some wrist-based optical sensors are higher than others, however even the most effective will fall a couple of beats per minute in need of the mark. I perceive why individuals depend on specialised HRM straps for the most effective knowledge.
I am sticking with my armband, however you do not have to
I am at all times pleased to alter my opinion when confronted with new info. After per week of twin chest straps and sporting a number of watches directly, I can state what most individuals would contemplate apparent: chest straps’ knowledge is extra constant than I gave them credit score for.
However I am not budging on the opposite a part of my argument. Sure, the COROS HRM optical readings aren’t as instantly responsive and correct because the Garmin HRM 200 or Polar H10. However the hole is so minimal, and an armband vanishes from my consciousness after 5 minutes whereas a chest strap takes up psychological actual property your complete time.
Mainly, until you really want the best-possible accuracy, I might level you in direction of a COROS HRM or Polar Verity Sense to enhance in your watch’s unreliable readings — and I hope Garmin considers an arm-based sensor of its personal.
If you happen to’re not as hypersensitive to tight gadgets as I’m, the Garmin HRM 200 is a wonderful deal for Garmin watch homeowners.
