Originally Posted by
noglider
I understand that a heart rate meter is a good approximation of power. If I had a power meter, I wouldn't use it as a gauge of putting in too much work. I would use it to gauge too little work. I'm a bit lazy on the bike. Since heart rate monitors are cheap, I might end up buying one. Or an Apple Watch.
I often use a heart rate monitor on my bike when out for an exercise ride. And in winter often use one on an exercise bike at the health club.
There have been a few times where my heart rate monitor told me that I was working too hard to climb a hill, BPM was over my max so I stopped to take a break or instead walked the bike up the hill slower than I had been pedaling.
Although the health club exercise bike also gave me wattage, I never really cared what the wattage was because I was more interested in the heart rate. The way I look at a heart rate monitor is that it is like the tachometer in my truck. My truck has an automatic transmission, so a tach really is not needed, but I like to be able to see how fast the engine is turning over.
If I was a pro athlete, I could see where a wattage meter would be important. But if I used that data as part of a training tracking system, I would want something more accurate and more precise than an air pressure sensor on my bike to estimate head wind, I would want something connected to my drive train to tell me how much torque I was applying to the wheel.
Originally Posted by
rmueller
Not hijack the thread, but it's all in the same direction...The arm band HR monitors are way more comfortable than the chest straps. ...
I have never had any discomfort from the chest strap.