As amateur runners in the third year prompted me two main aspects to search for a "pulse watch" respectively a running computer: I needed an objective mileage rating because I noticed that when people runs the mass starts regularly botched my run-in period; Moreover, my training should be designed and comparable power side balanced.
Spoilt for choice was between "heart rate monitors" under 50, Sigma RC1209 or RC14.11 75/95 and the upper class 140 upwards for Polar or Garmin products partially with GPS. After the reviews online research remained at the sigmoid colon hang (cheap Pulsuhren deterred by inaccuracies and lack of distance measurement / the upper class may indeed be super accurate but suffers from electricity consumption [GPS] and the entry discourages the price). The RC1209 got from St.Warentest a good podium place, surrounded by twice as expensive products.
To decide between RC1209 and RC14.11 is essentially on personal taste and price limit. The RC14.11 brings intermediate timing and USB transmission, which is missing the RC1209, otherwise they are essentially the same.
Enough drumrum ... for RC1209 itself:
> Packaged well, plastic case and band ~ valent processed, super to the idea about rotation of the battery cover off the clock completely (remain data received), chest strap is comfortable to wear and not the least bit slips
> Setting and operation essentially intuitive .. the manual but is extensively and who are not enough, you will find video tutorials on the Sigma website
> Test run uncalibrated (warm up for Kalibrierrunden): uncalibrated the clock can only be used as a stopwatch, the route deviations were with me around the 15%
> To calibrate the same known distance is twice gone, once slowly and once quickly (difference should be 30%) .. one, two more runs on the same route may be inspected via adjustment of the correction factor calibration be refined
> Based on age / sex / weight determines the clock the personal maximum heart rate (seems to be based on the calculation by Sally & Edwards), which is also manually adjustable, if you should have a personal data performance testing. On the basis of HRmax two RF ranges are offered for training: "fat burning" (55% .. 70% HR max) and "fitness" (70% .. 80% HRmax). In addition, an individual zone can be set that I use, for example for the races.
Two tips:
> Always about 20m start running before the start point or the starting point jog in place to keep the accelerometer already active, first press on the starting point, the start button
> Calibration distance lt. Sigma min. 800m - To help 2 rounds are named on the stadium track, but who has been running as defined rounds? I have therefore my 3km-City Cross Round taken with different surfaces and gradients.
> After careful adjustment and correction, I have the RC1209 fully satisfied now for 2 months in use. On my 22km training lap I achieved so variations of about +/- 2%.
> My individual purchase targets have been met, I run so constant and can my training data more comparable (Tip: Sigma provides an evaluation for little money to download .. the data of the RC1209 can be entered there in the same logic as in the clock, who automatic data transmission needs to RC14.11 must engage)
Notes other recent data on connection failures between clock and chest sensor:
> I myself have only ever experienced during a workout. No external influences recognizable (no cell phones, no power line, no other runner or biker miles around) .. But, never occurred on the same lap, again.
Tip: stop, training mode close (current run data will be retained), start training mode, wait Syncronisation, start running and clock start .. wait for the Neusyncronisation during running distorts the training values in my opinion too much.
Overall, I am therefore fully satisfied with the full range of functions for which RC1209 mid-price offers and hope they will give me a long time in good stead.
As I said, who held manual data transfer needs interims and USB to the PC, the RC14.11 should look.
Sports free running gentlemen
