The experience led me to start looking at a replacement device, or perhaps a GPS watch upgrade that would allow me to combine several functions. To be honest, I have not kept up with the latest fitness/running gadget releases. And in the process of looking for something new, I came to the conclusion that I didn’t really want to spend a lot of money when the devices I own have worked just fine for several years.

Most of my blog posts in the past have focused on reviewing the latest and greatest running gear, but in this one I want to highlight a few devices that have stood the test of time for me, and that I continue to use almost every day.

1. Garmin Forerunner 620 – My daily GPS watch (when I use GPS) is a Garmin Forerunner 620. It’s now several years old, and though it has the occasional tracking hiccup (less frequent these days it seems, maybe updates have helped), it records speed and distance more than adequately for my purposes, syncs with a heart rate monitor flawlessly (see below), and transfers workouts to Garmin Connect with ease (and from there instantly to Strava). I was having rapid battery drain issues for quite a long while with the 620, and this made me contemplate a new watch, but I resolved this problem a few months ago by turning off the WIFI auto-upload function (I just press the upload/connect button when I get home instead).

Why haven’t I upgraded? Well, I don’t need a watch to display my text messages or emails (don’t really want that level of intrusion while I run), I can manage with an off-watch heart rate monitor, and I can’t imagine that GPS tracking has improved so dramatically as to warrant the price of an upgrade (heck, my old Garmin 205 brick recorded just fine). About the only thing I’d like would be on-board music that trasmits via bluetooth, but probably not enough to make the jump on an upgrade at this point. To be honest, I think a Garmin FR15 would be sufficient for most of my needs these days as I don’t much use most of the advanced functions on the 620.

2. Garmin Vivofit (original) – Like the Forerunner 620, I’ve had an original model Garmin Vivofit for several years (read my original Vivreview review here). All I really want from the device is a rough estimate of my activity each day (i.e., step count), and it handles this very well. I love the fact that it has incredible battery life (went almost a year before I had to replace the batteries it came with), and heart rate sync is a plus. As with the GPS watch, I can do without text/phone notifications, don’t need a fancier screen, and I actually kind of like having it as a device separate from my watch (stays on my wrist while the watch is charging…). The only issue I’ve had is that the original band would occasionally unclasp and fall off, and the band started to disintegrate a few weeks ago. A quick search on Amazon and I found this band from Cumilo that fits perfectly and has more of a traditional watch-band closure. The original Vivofit is still avaialable on Amazon, and at $49.99 it’s a bargain. I highly recommend this old piece of no-frills tech!

3. Scosche Rhythm+ – I haven’t used a chest strap heart rate monitor in over a year. I reviewed the Scosche Rhythm+ optical HRM in early 2015, and it’s pretty much the only HRM I use these days. Tracking is more than adequate for my purposes, it syncs with both the Garmin 620 and Vivofit, and it’s adaptable enough to be worn in a variety of places to ensure a good fit (and seal against the skin for tracking accuracy, a potential problem for some with wrist-only optical HRMs). Battery life has been great, and though there is the occasional dropout (particularly if it’s on the opposite arm from the GPS watch), momentary dropouts really don’t matter that much to me since my primary purpose with HR tracking is an estimate of current effort (particularly in the heat of summer). At $79.99 (Amazon), I would still recommend the Rhythm+, particularly if you have had issues with wrist-only optical HRMs.

4. Jaybird Freedom Bluetooth Headphones – I’d lost my Jaybirds for several months, but after finding them and using them again for the past several weeks, I’m reminded of why I like them so much. They stay put in my ears far better than any other wireless headphone set that I’ve tried, sound is very good (though I’m no audiophile), the battery life remains strong even after several years of use, and the connection with my phone is solid (few sound drop-outs). At about $35 on Amazon, the price is tough to beat in this product segment (they were much more expensive back when they were new).

How about you – do you still use older model devices, and which do you recommend? And if anyone wants to try to sell me on one of the newer gadgets on the market, I’m all ears! I really haven’t kept up with the latest stuff, so I’d love to hear what’s working well.

Just prior to Christmas I received a package from Jabra containing a pair of their Sport Pulse headphones (Disclosure: these were a media sample provided free of charge by the manufacturer). This device combines a wireless bluetooth headset with an optical heart rate monitor (HRM). I love gadgets that combine functions of things that I use regularly (and I use HRMs and bluetooth headphones regularly), so I was excited to give the Jabra Pulse a try. I’ve now been using them regularly for a few months, and overall my experience has been mixed.

Fit, Sound, Battery, Connectivity

With a bluetooth headset my main areas of concern are fit, sound quality, battery life, ease of connection, and connection stability. For the most part, the Jabra Pulse does quite well in all of these areas. Fit is highly customizable with a variety of earbud attachment sizes/options (see photo below). I have not had them fall out of my ear during a run, but I don’t feel like the fit is as secure as it could be as I often have to push them back into my ear canal (I’ve tried several of the earbud attachments). In contrast, my Jaybird Freedom earbuds stay put really well.

Sound quality is good for a wireless headset – I’m no audiophile, but no complaints here. I’d say it’s comparable to the Jaybirds. I like that I can control volume and advance/reverse songs using the controls built into the headset wire.

Battery life has also been solid. Jabra estimates about 5 hours of listening time for the Sport Pulse, and I have no major complaints here either. I have not done a battery rundown test, but I can generally go a week or so between charges and I have not had the battery die on me mid-run. This is encouraging given my poor experience with the battery life of the Jabra Sport Wireless+ headset.

Syncing with my iPhone works flawlessly – simply turn bluetooth on in the phone settings and the Jabra Pulse will be identified. After the initial sync, the headset gets picked up the moment you turn them on, no need to go back into your phone settings (bluetooth must be on though). You can use the headset with the Jabra app, but I prefer to use them with iSmoothRun (my preferred running app). iSmoothRun recognizes them as a heart rate sensor and they pair without issue. On the run I have not had major issues with connection dropouts for audio – occasionally music will cut out for a moment if I turn my head, but this is not a common occurrence (my iPhone has typically been in a jacket chest pocket this winter while using the headset).

Heart Rate Function

So the Jabra Pulse has lots of fit options, decent sound and battery, and syncs easily with my phone. Sounds great, right? Unfortunately, things start to fall apart with the heart rate monitor. Crumble into dust might be a better way of saying it….

First off, the Jabra Pulse only connects via Bluetooth Smart. This is fine for music, but I never look at my iPhone while running, so seeing a real-time readout of heart rate would require the ability to sync it with my Garmin 620 or my Vivofit. Unfortunately the Jabra does not support ANT+ (the Mio Link and Scosche Rhythm+ both support ANT+), so I cannot display HR info on either device. You’d know this before making a purchase, so this isn’t really my big knock on the HR function. It’s worth emphasizing however: don’t buy the Jabra Pulse thinking you can pair it with your Garmin watch – it won’t work.

The bigger issue I have with the heart rate functions of the Jabra Pulse is that it simply does not work that well. The device measures heart rate via an optical sensor built into the earbud (see photo at left). Presumably this analyzes blood pulsing through the skin of the ear and uses this info to calculate heart rate. Unfortunately, the signal is unreliable with tons of dropouts, and at times the reading is way off what I would expect for a given pace. In fact, I’ve had almost entire runs where the heart rate is not even close to where it should be.

Let’s look at some comparison plots comparing HR data from the Scosche Rhythm+ and the Jabra Pulse. The Scosche data comes from my Garmin 620 via SportTracks, and the Jabra data comes from iSmoothRun .tcx file export into SportTracks.

First is a plot from a recent 10K run in which I pushed the pace a bit in the final mile. The first plot below shows data on pace via my Garmin 620 and HR via the Scosche Rhythm+. What you’ll notice is that the HR plot is fairly smooth with no dropouts, and HR moves up a bit toward the end of the run when I picked up the pace.

Next we have the same run with pace data from my iPhone and HR from the Jabra (I couldn’t get the scale to be quite the same). What you’ll notice on the HR plot is over 20 dropouts. Even worse, after mile 2 or so the HR line hovers around 185 bpm. This is approximately my maximum heart rate, and I can assure you I was never even close to that high on this run. Something is very wrong here!

To further illustrate the discrepancy, here are my average heart rate values for each mile split obtained from the Scosche Rhythm+ – note that all are under 180, and only the final split (from the final 0.2) comes close to 175. These values seem consistent with my normal range for the effort expended in each split.

Now the Jabra – mile one was reasonably close to what the Scosche reported, but then things fall apart. By mile 4 I was apparently almost maxing out my heart rate, and mile 6 plus the final 0.2 were similarly high. These numbers are way off reality, and I have no idea why.

So was this an isolated incident? Sadly, no. Here’s another run from last week, first plot is data from Garmin+Scosche:

Again, smooth HR line, no dropouts except maybe a little downward spike near the end of the run. Average heart rate for the run was 158, which sounds about right for the effort level.

Now the Jabra disaster:

I’m not even going to try and count the dropouts, and the heart rate line in this case never goes above 115. Average heart rate reported by the Jabra was 92. If I could run 7+ miles at 8:00/mile pace with an average heart rate of 92 I’d be pretty impressed with my current fitness. Again, something is wrong here, and this time the readings are way too low.

One more example – first Garmin+Scosche:

Next, iPhone+Jabra:

I think you get the picture.

One thing I’d also like to add is that though the plots for the Jabra were exported from iSmoothRun, I have also noticed weird heart rates that were way off what I expected when using the Jabra app.

Conclusion

So what am I left to conclude? Either I got a real lemon of a headset, or the Jabra Pulse is simply not up to the task of recording heart rate in a stable or accurate way on the run. As a result, I am unable to recommend this device if you are interested in its function as a heart rate monitor. My suspicion is that it’s rather difficult to keep a sensor seated firmly enough in the ear to produce a stable recording, and that for optical HR a wrist or arm band that can be cinched tightly to the skin is the way to go.

The Jabra Pulse is fine for music, but there are options out there that are much cheaper than the $199 price tag for the pulse. For example, you can pick up a Jaybird Freedom bluetooth headset (under $60 at Amazon) and a Scosche Rhythm+ optical HRM (just under $80 at Amazon) and still have $50+ dollars left to spend vs. buying the Jabra Pulse. And with that combo you’ll be able to listen to music without wires and get a stable HR recording that will also sync with a phone or a Garmin watch if you have one. To me it’s a no brainer.

The Mio Link and Scosche Rhythm+ share a lot of similarities. Both offer an alternative to the traditional chest strap heart rate monitor, both measure heart rate via sensors and LED lights that measure blood flow through the skin, both lack a screen, and both pair with other devices via Bluetooth Smart or ANT+. Pricing is also similar, with both devices selling for between $70-$80.

For me, the main thing that sets the Rhythm+ apart from the Link is the band used to attach it to your arm. The Mio Link is a wrist-based device – it has a watch-like plastic band that I found somewhat uncomfortable, particularly when cinched tightly. There is really no alternative with the Link other than attaching it to your wrist, and this has caused problems for some people as HR measurement requires a good, tight fit (those with bony wrists have reported dropouts and other problems).

In contrast, the Scosche Rhythm+ comes with two neoprene-like bands that allow for placement in a variety of places on the arm. On the product packaging Scosche shows the band on the forearm, but it can also be placed around the upper arm or on the wrist. I’ve actually worn mine on my wrist most of the time, right next to my Garmin Vivofit. The band is much more comfortable than that of the Link – since it secures via Velcro it’s easy to cinch up for a snug fit, and it’s nice not having a plastic band digging into your arm.

The Rhythm+ is pretty simple to operate. It charges via a USB dock (see photo above). When you’re ready to use it you simply press the Scosche logo on the device and it activates (an alternating blue/red light on top starts to blink). On my Vivofit (see photo below) I simply press the button until it says “Heart” and the device picks up automatically (the blinking light changes to red only while synced). On my Forerunner 620 I activate the heart rate monitor in the watch settings (Settings—>Sensors) and then it syncs with the device. It should automatically recognize it every time you turn it on after the initial sync.

I’ve been using the Rhythm+ for running with my Garmin 620 (on the opposite wrist), and though I have experienced occasional dropouts (see downward spikes in images below), they are rare and could be since I use a wrist placement rather than the recommended placement higher up on the forearm (could also be due to the devices being on opposite wrists). To be honest, one brief dropout over five miles isn’t a big deal, and I didn’t even notice that it happened until I looked at the plots in Garmin Connect later on. I’ve never actually noticed a signal dropout while running.

One thing to note is that the Scosche Rhythm+ will not transmit accurate heart rate variability data (not sensitive enough I guess – I’ve tried it with the SweetBeat app and the numbers are not correct). As a result, it does not provide accurate information to calculate things like recovery time on my Garmin 620. Not a big deal for me, but worth mentioning.

I’ve also been doing a bit of cycling on a recumbent bike this winter when the weather is bad enough to keep me inside, and on these occasions I use the Rhythm+ paired with my Vivofit. This combo also works great, though dropouts seem more common with the Vivofit than with my Forerunner 620. Again, a few momentary dropouts over the course of 45 minutes of cycling are really not a big deal to me since I mainly use it to gauge my effort in real time and have never actually noticed a dropout until looking at plots afterward.

Conclusions

If you’re looking to ditch your chest strap heart rate monitor and already have a device that syncs with ANT+ or Bluetooth Smart sensors, the Scosche Rhythm+ would be my recommendation over the Mio Link. Both are great little devices, but the flexibility offered by the strap options for the Rhythm+ make it a better choice in my experience. It can be worn on the wrist like the Mio, but also on the forearm or around the bicep (unless you are Arnold). I’ve been very impressed with mine – no plans to return to a chest strap ever again if I don’t have to.

The Scosche Rhythm+ is available for purchase at Amazon.com and Clever Training (Runblogger readers get 10% off select products at Clever Training with code RunBlogXJT). Purchases made via these links provide a small commission to Runblogger and help to support the production of reviews like this one – thanks!

A few months ago a company named Mio contacted me to ask if I’d be interested in trying one of their wrist-mounted heart rate monitors (Disclosure: the product reviewed here was a media sample provided free of charge for review purposes – you can read about my approach to writing honest blog reviews here). I really like the concept of wrist-mounted HRMs. I can wear it as I would a watch, and leave it on my wrist indefinitely if I feel like it. No more strap to worry about taking on and off, no sweaty bands to rinse out, etc. I was game to give it a try, and they offered a choice between the Mio Link and the Mio Alpha.

The main differences between the Link and Alpha are as follows:

• Mio Alpha (below right) has a screen and looks like a regular wristwatch
• Mio Link can communicate via both ANT+ and Bluetooth Smart, whereas the Alpha lacks ANT+
• Mio Link costs $99, whereas the Alpha costs $199

Since I already have a GPS watch with a screen on one wrist (Garmin 620) and a Garmin Vivofit activity monitor on the other wrist (also with a screen), the Mio Alpha seemed like overkill. I’m used to wearing lots of electronic devices, but three screens is a bit much! So I agreed to try out the Link, and I’ve now been using it regularly for a bit over a month.

How It Works

The Mio works by shining two green LEDs through the skin, and there is a sensor between the lights that can monitor pulsing blood flow below the device. Pretty cool! On their website, Mio points out that similar technology is used in hospitals with those little heart-rate sensing clips they put on your finger, but the challenge was to create a device that can measure an athlete on the move, not a patient sitting or lying down in a hospital. This is dependent on a tight light seal between the device and the skin – more on this in a bit.

You can see the Mio Link with the LEDs turned off and on in the two photos below. The sensor is located between the two lights.

The Mio Link is simple to operate – you just press the button on the top of the device and a light flashes. It can then be paired either with a watch or phone via ANT+ or Bluetooth Smart (a device compatibility list can be found here). Connectivity has been a breeze for me with my iPhone 5s, the Garmin 620, a Garmin Forerunner 15, and the Garmin Vivofit. You can see the Vivofit reading data from the Mio Link in the photo below (the first number denotes HR zone, second number is current heart rate) – they both fit comfortably on the same wrist and the proximity makes for a solid and stable connection. I have also recorded concurrently with my Vivofit and Garmin 620 (on the opposite wrist) without issue.

While running, the Mio Link has a light that flashes different colors to indicate your current heart rate zone. You can set these zones up by connecting your Mio to a phone and adjusting settings in the Mio Go app – a red flashing light indicates zone 5, purple is zone 4, yellow is zone 3, and so on… The Mio App also has basic workout features, but my guess is most people will use the device in tandem with a GPS watch or with one of the more dedicated fitness apps (e.g., Strava, Wahoo Fitness, MapMyRun, Runkeeper, etc.).

Personally, I don’t pay much attention to the Mio itself while running since I have the HR readout displayed on my synced GPS watch. This gives better real-time feedback of heart rate, and is why I’d probably opt for a Mio Alpha if I didn’t already have a watch that could sync with the Link.

The Mio is powered by a rechargeable battery, and Mio claims about 8-10 hours of recording time per charge. This is pretty consistent with my experience. To charge, I simply pop the Mio unit out of the wristband and place it on its USB charging cradle. I’ve gotten in the habit of charging the Mio anytime I charge my Garmin 620 – keeps them both fresh and ready to go. Couple of complaints about the charging cradle – I wish the cable was a bit longer, and it’s tough to get a good cradle lock unless you take the Mio hardware out of the band (the band doesn’t lay flat very well and tends to pop it off the charger).

Performance

My experience with the Mio Link so far has been very positive. I’d seen mixed reviews (e.g., check out the comments section on DC Rainmaker’s excellent review or the reviews on Amazon.com), with some people reporting that it experiences lags or drops HR signal from time to time, whereas others seemed to love it and have had no such problems. I’d put myself in the latter camp.

For the most part the recording from the Mio Link has been solid and consistent for me when paired with either my Vivofit or Garmin 620. The only time I have seen drop-outs with any regularity is during walk breaks when the signal to the 620 on my opposite hand seems to get disrupted, perhaps because my body is between the devices (apparently the ANT+ signal has trouble passing through the body). I’ve never seen a dropped signal on my Vivofit located on the same wrist as the Mio Link.

On rare occasions I have noticed the Mio Link stutter a bit, and every time this has happened I have found that simply tightening up the band a bit solves the problem. The key with devices like this is to create a tight light seal between the device and the skin – not uncomfortably tight, but you don’t want the device shifting around to much relative to the skin surface. It may also help that I wear it a bit higher up on my wrist since it is next to the Vivofit. This part of the wrist is a bit less bony, and may make a tighter light seal.

I should note that I have somewhat meaty forearms, and this may also facilitate a good seal on me. I also have a compact, high arm carry while running, and my hands tend to stay in front of my body (as opposed to walking when they swing forward and backward in front of and behind my hips). Some runners have a lower, more exaggerated arm carry where it may be more likely that the hands become blocked by the body for some portion of the stride – it may be that this type of form will create more problems with stable signal transmission.

For people with connectivity issues, Mio recommends a few things to try:

1. Wear the Link on the same wrist as your watch.

2. Wear the Link higher up on your wrist away from the bony bits (a tight light seal is critical).

3. Wear the Link with the sensor reading from the underside of your wrist rather than the top.

I’d suggest that if your body/form is not a good match for the Mio (e.g., you have connectivity/signal drop issues), contact customer support and ask for a refund.

Sample Heart Rate Tracks

My experience so far is that heart rate data recorded by the Mio is quite consistent with my perceived effort, so I’m very happy with recording accuracy. For a few examples of recorded heart rate data, below are heart rate tracks produced via the Mio Link and captured by my Garmin 620. The graphs are screen captures from Garmin Connect.

First is from a hilly 6 mile run up in Vermont last week – the downward spike just before the 25 minute mark was a water stop, and the smaller downward spike around minute 42 was due to the arrival of a thunderstorm and downpour that necessitated a stop to put my phone and camera into a ziploc bag. Pretty solid!

Second is a graph from a hilly 15 mile run I did a few weeks ago. All but the first (bathroom stop at the bottom of a hill) of the downward spikes represent walk breaks on big uphills (practicing race strategy for a hilly ultra this Fall).

Dislikes

My only real complaint about the Mio Link so far is that the band can be a bit finicky. It seems like every other buckle hole leads to the little nubs at the end of the strap misaligning with their corresponding holes. Not a big problem, but you have to fiddle with the band a bit to get everything lined up right. I’ve also noticed that the holes on the band get a bit uncomfortable against the skin when the band gets wet and the Mio is cinched tight. Loosening it up when not in active use takes care of this (again, it has to be pretty tightly cinched against the skin when in use).

Conclusion

I was kind of skeptical about the accuracy of a wrist-mounted heart rate monitor like this, especially after reading some complaints about connectivity issues and signal dropouts. After using it regularly for awhile I can say that I’ve been extremely impressed by the device, with the caveat that my forearms are meaty (thus create a good light seal) and my running form may be a good match for stable signal connectivity (compact, high arm carry).

Tracking has overall been very solid, and I love the fact that the Mio allows me to ditch the chest strap. The fact that other companies are integrating Mio technology into their devices (e.g., adidas, TomTom) adds further support that it is being viewed as stable and accurate technology by 3rd parties.

If you like to monitor heart rate but hate messing with a chest strap, the Mio Link is definitely worth a look!

Update 1/8/2015: I have now reviewed the Scosche Rhythm+ and prefer it to the Mio Link. Check out the review here.

Purchasing Options (Affiliates)

The Mio Link is available for purchase at Amazon.com (it comes in two sizes depending on your wrist size – make sure you check which is right for you). Amazon also carries the Mio Alpha if you prefer having a screen.

The Mio Link is also available at Clever Training (Clever Training offers a 10% off discount to Runblogger readers on select products using code RunBlogXJT).

Outside of the US, the Mio Link is available at Amazon UK and Amazon Canada.

Purchases made from retail sites linked above provide Runblogger with a small commission and help me to produce detailed reviews like this one. Your support is very much appreciated!