“Perceived exertion” is one of the most frequently used methods to monitor training levels across athletic disciplines. Though a low-cost (free) and accessible option, using a perceived exertion scale (which ranks athletes on their ability to string together sentences) is also subjective and inconsistent. Active Junky’s experimented with three readily available (and accurate) heart-rate monitoring methods to evaluate the pros and cons of each.
Chest Strap Monitors:
Chest Strap Monitors are among the most reliable from an accuracy and repeatability standpoint. Professional cyclists rely upon them to relay critical data to their cycling computers and coaches. The elastic structure holds the proper position – though not always comfortably so. Once in position, impact and abrasion are minimized. Unlike wrist monitors, this technology requires a main brain to capture the wireless data for display. Maintenance is minimal and pre-workout prep takes less than 30 seconds.
Pros: Inexpensive, reliable, useful for multiple activities, battery life good, keeps hearing available
Cons: Bothersome constriction, skin abrasion, requires separate fitness computer
Best For: Multi-sport athletes in high-output environments
In-Ear Monitors have become more accessible to amateur and aspiring athletes. Capable of relaying data back to the athlete with audio cues, these systems double as music systems and smartphone headsets in many cases. Active Junky’s experience with in-ear monitors over the past six months remains largely positive, recognizing the challenges of a) fitting and b) in-motion security. Vibration and head movement can compromise the connection unless the earpiece is custom fit for the athlete. Recharging (speed and battery life) is improving to strike a balance between light weight and long-distance functionality.
Pros: Multiple functions with one device, light weight, reasonable appearance
Cons: Quirky fitting, wires can snag, one-user device, power levels need watching
Best For: Indoor training, cycling and smooth-striding road runners
On-wrist monitors are more than watches; they incorporate data processing and display as integrated training tools. Ranging from systems focused simply on training zones (established by each athlete) to heart-rate tracking and GPS devices, on-wrist systems continue to evolve; more functions in a small footprint are the result. Testers found the number and variety of options overwhelming until they decided what functions and features mattered (sound advice for shoppers). Newer options tailor the displays for cyclists, recognizing that the position of the display and the ability to fight glare are critical.
Pros: Affordable, consistent, durable, functions variable by sport and discipline, battery life strong in basic models, no separate components needed
Cons: Accuracy questionable on cheaper models and with GPS functions, subject to impact and abrasion, multiple features can be distracting
Best For: Cycling, running, inconspicuous everyday use