If you have either of these heart rate monitors, can you please tell me any pros and cons. And even any major difference between the two (besides the whopping price difference).
Also, do both come 'complete' for keeping track of your data? I read that the polar FT 60 requires another part (a cable or computer attachment??) to upload the data on the hrm to your computer to keep track.
I am mainly looking for the following: easy to use and get around the menu system, easy to press buttons, calories burned, HR zones, programmable to my stats (age, wt, etc). A plus would be to track percentages of calories burned from fat and track HR and calories in one workout with different phases (warm up, workout, cool down) . I do not need GPS.
Thanks for any input.
Also, do both come 'complete' for keeping track of your data? I read that the polar FT 60 requires another part (a cable or computer attachment??) to upload the data on the hrm to your computer to keep track.
I am mainly looking for the following: easy to use and get around the menu system, easy to press buttons, calories burned, HR zones, programmable to my stats (age, wt, etc). A plus would be to track percentages of calories burned from fat and track HR and calories in one workout with different phases (warm up, workout, cool down) . I do not need GPS.
Thanks for any input.
). The only difference seems to be that the FT80 is useful if you're strength training - it tells you how long to wait between sets, according to your heart rate. I didn't feel I particularly needed that feature (I follow Cathe or just wait until my heart rate has settled). I think the FT80 also comes with the polar flow - I had to buy mine separately (UK£30).