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 operating 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 price monitor chest straps. Minimize to 2025, and I nonetheless don’t love all of them that a lot. However after testing the brand new Garmin HRM 200 towards the Polar H10 and COROS HRM throughout a number of runs, I am blissful 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. In contrast, 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 every chest strap, cuts out the wrist-based optical intermediary and straight reads your coronary heart’s electrical indicators for higher accuracy. It is water-proof, extremely inexpensive at $79, and lasts a couple of 12 months earlier than it’s essential to swap out the batteries.
Unsurprisingly, I discovered it uncomfortable. However it did outperform my Garmin Fenix 8‘s Elevate v5 optical sensor for accuracy, for the sticklers who want near-perfect information. It is not standalone just like the Garmin HRM-Professional, however in any other case, chest strap followers ought to find it irresistible.
I made a decision to check the Garmin HRM 200 and Polar H10 towards one another — and towards my COROS HRM armband that I a lot choose — and provides chest straps one other probability to impress me.
My easy beef with chest straps
Chest straps aren’t sort to folks 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 difficulty than earlier than, however my actual grievance 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 price will get excessive.
However I acknowledge that my dislikes might not apply to you. I believe I am extra hypersensitive to tight clothes — like ties or skinny denims — than different folks. Simply because I don’t love chest straps doesn’t suggest I can ignore them; it is my job to offer them a good shake.
My extra elementary Polar H10 challenge was the way it produced bizarrely erratic outcomes throughout a number of runs in 2024, regardless of how properly I adjusted the match or moist the contact sensors.
Ultimately, I found that my Polar H10 solely labored as supposed 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 turned a dependable management group for my accuracy assessments. However I remained a bit suspicious that chest straps have 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 definitely worth the trade-offs.
My Garmin HRM 200 vs. Polar H10 vs. COROS HRM accuracy check
My solely approach to evaluate all three straps’ information 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.
Other than being a goofy-looking setup, I may solely hope this shut chest strap proximity would not intrude with the outcomes.
My hour-long, high-aerobic run began off shaky, with COROS’ information elevated by about 30 bpm, Garmin taking a minute to catch up, and Polar having one early, random dip. However every part stabilized rapidly, and there have been no different points for the remaining 58 minutes.
The chart above reveals how all three gadgets evaluate, whereas the chart beneath focuses on the 2 chest straps. All three straps measured a 168 bpm common.
Usually, wrist-based optical sensors fall 1–3 bpm quick in my assessments, with a noticeable delay after I change my tempo or climb hills. The COROS HRM nonetheless reveals a little bit of that lag, however it’s minimal sufficient that solely essentially 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 after I was nonetheless drained, so I struggled to hit my typical max-HR ranges. However I nonetheless obtained nearly three miles of sprints, onerous operating, jogging, and strolling, difficult my coronary heart price displays to observe the speedy 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 an alternative of the 2 chest straps leaving the armband behind.
That does not imply Garmin’s HRM 200 is extra correct, essentially. The Polar H10 might 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.
(Observe: Ignore the Polar H10’s one awkward flat-line close to the tip; it is a identified challenge the place Polar’s information freezes on the final HR end result whenever you pause a exercise. I attempted to keep away from pausing, however like I stated, 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 quick at 173 and 187, respectively. I am blissful 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 just a few beats per minute wanting the mark. I perceive why folks depend on specialised HRM straps for the most effective information.
I am sticking with my armband, however you do not have to
I am at all times blissful to vary my opinion when confronted with new data. After every week of twin chest straps and carrying a number of watches directly, I can state what most individuals would contemplate apparent: chest straps’ information 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 actually want the best-possible accuracy, I would 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.
In the event you’re not as hypersensitive to tight gadgets as I’m, the Garmin HRM 200 is a wonderful deal for Garmin watch homeowners.