pants Ants
Reviewed: 07 March 2006
IT AIN'T PRETTY, BUT IT WORKS
It isn't a GPS system, therefore:
- quick start up time (don't have to wait for satellite reception to lock);
- doesn't need a clear view of the sky so it works in the densest forests and the narrowest city streets with the tallest buildings I bet it would even work underground if you could find somewhere subterranean to run
- Accurate speed & distance monitoring (once calibrated)
- Most comfy heart rate monitor strap I have worn.
It isn't a GPS system, therefore:
- No pretty map output of your route
- Changes of pace really throw the distance calculation
- Needs calibration to measure distances accurately
- UGLY - Watch is very big and chunky. Foot-pod, though light and not uncomfortable to wear, is big, bulky and very obvious (The number of times some child has asked "Mummy/ Daddy, what is that big black thing on that man's shoe?")
- Advanced functions (e.g. intervals) difficult to use
- Have to buy a separate USB infrared port if your computer doesn't already have one
- Polar software not the prettiest interface/ most flexible.
- If you have more than one pair of shoes, the foot-pod has to be moved between them.
Anyone choosing a speed or distance monitor should carefully consider question of an accelerometer system (like the Polar) vs. a GPS system. The reason I made the choice of the Polar 625x rather than a GPS is that it better suited the type of running I wanted to do. Principally, the majority of my running is either in town (including some quite narrow streets with tall buildings) or on routes with a lot of tree cover. Both terrain where GPS systems really struggle with reception. It will be interesting to see whether the new Garmin GPS based systems (205 and 305) have really solved these issues.
As for the other aspects of the units performance - I have found the speed and distance to be very accurate once calibrated (+/- 0.1 miles over an 8 mile run), however the measurement takes a bit of time to catch up with quick changes of pace (great for steady training or races, less good for interval training).
My main bugbear (apart from the looks) is that the advanced functions are quite difficult to use - for example, I have completely given up on programming intervals, as the programming itself is difficult enough, but as I don't use them often, I forget how to progress from the warm up to start the interval session - I end up either changing the display options, setting a lap time or turning the timer off instead!
Overall, I'm pleased I bought the 625x. It has made a real difference to my training, whether helping me pace my runs, measure how far I have gone, but also remembering the key details of the workout for me to put in my training diary at a later date.
If you want to measure your speed and distance, don't want the disadvantages of a GPS system, and don't have unrealistic expectations that it will measure your interval efforts to the nearest metre, I would thoroughly recommend buying one.
In fact buy mine when I put it on Ebay after winning the competition to get one of those new good looking Garmin GPS systems!
