The RS800sd adds in running speed and distance, and our newest feature, running cadence, with the new S3 Stride Sensor W.I.N.D. The RS800sd can be fully integrated into the adidas adistar running tops and shoes, to create the Worlds First Integrated Training System.
List Price:
$499.95
Our Price:
$375.00
You Save:
$124.95 (25%)
Product Details
Product Length:
0.0 inches
Product Width:
0.0 inches
Product Height:
0.0 inches
Product Weight:
0.5 pounds
Package Length:
6.7 inches
Package Width:
5.2 inches
Package Height:
3.0 inches
Package Weight:
0.75 pounds
Average Customer Rating:
based on 16 reviews
Features
Wrist-style heart rate monitor and stopwatch geared for elite level athletes and coaches
With included S3 Stride Sensor, receive highly consistent and accurate speed/pace, distance and cadence data
Polar WearLink W.I.N.D. transmitter with 2.4 GHz disturbance-free transmission
Includes Polar Protrainer 5 training, planning and analyzing software
Dual time zone, alarm with snooze, and water resistance to 50 meters
Average Customer Review: ( 16 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
55 of 58 found the following review helpful:
Great find...addictive Dec 05, 2006
By Christopher Coyne I suspect there are 2 kinds of people who'd buy a running watch of the rs-800sd caliber: the first are highly competitive or enthusiastic runners, and the second are gadget freaks who tolerate running and want to measure results.
I'm the latter, and I've been having a great time running with this watch. Just seeing the graphs of my performance change over time is motivation enough. Some quick thoughts:
1. Before buying, visit the Polar website and use their "compare" feature to see if you need the 800, 600, or 200 series. With the 800 you're paying a premium for a handful of features you might never notice.
2. The "sd" in the name is misleading. The watch included is the same as with the rs800, but it also includes a stride detection unit that attaches to your shoe. With the shoe sensor, you can glance at the watch and see your pace, stride length, etc. It's totally impressive once you calibrate it. You *can* buy it later if you like.
3. Still, I'm finding that despite calibrating the stide sensor, I'm getting 3-4% inaccuracy in my measured runs on a treadmill. If I run exactly a mile, it tells me I ran 0.96 to 1.04 miles. Not bad, but on a perfectly flat surface at a constant pace I'd expect a little better.
4. I think the stride sensor is a worthy addition, but if you're a fan of Adidas shoes, they make an "Adistar" model with a built in sensor. It's designed for this watch.
5. The heartrate sensor is perfectly accurate in all my tests and the included strap is comfortable and doesn't slip.
6. I haven't figured out if it's possible to change the volume of the heart-rate warning on the watch, for zone-controlled runs. If I exceed my goal zone during a Central Park jog, it beeps so loudly and continuously that it's embarassing to me and annoying to others. Which....makes my heart pound. I've figured out how to turn the beep off, but that's no good. I'd like it softer. Anyway, for those of you who run with iPods, the beep will penetrate your music.
7. The watch communicates with your computer via IR. MOST desktops and SOME laptops do not have infra-red ports. You can use any USB IrDA (search Amazon for it) dongle and you don't have to buy Polar's own branded one. However, if you use Windows XP 64-bit edition, good luck finding drivers that work. If you don't know if you use xp-64, you don't, so don't worry about it.
8. The Polar Pro Trainer software that comes with it is intuitive.
40 of 41 found the following review helpful:
The triumph of form over function Feb 21, 2008
By W. Banker I've been a Polar HR monitor owner since the mid 90's starting with 710i, then 625x, followed by the 725x, and now the RS800SD. I consider myself a serious competitive runner and have been so for over 30 years. Polar introduced me to heart rate monitoring as key component to performance improvement with the book "Training, Lactate, Pulse rate" by Janssen, which is no longer offered by them and may not be published anymore. I have had my VO2, HR curve, and lactate threshold measured in a lab several times over the past few years. I have used this product now for almost a full year and my review will focus on what does all this functionality do to help me improve my running vs some of the other reviews here which seem enamored with purported functionality without connecting the dots for useful training feedback.
The bottom line: This is their flagship product, top of the line and top dollar but Polar seems to have chosen marketing (a shiny sexy small form factor watch with apparently lots of new functions) over solid engineering, useful software functionality, and product reliability. If you already own a 625x or 725x model there is little reason to upgrade as this is an "unfinished product"
The good:
1. Small form factor for watch and footpod
2. Improvement in ergonomics --- buttons and watch face are easier to use
3. More memory --- you can record longer than earlier models at the 1 second rate
4. Running stride length has been added.
The bad:
1. The footpod and HR strap via blue tooth does not seem any more accurate than previous non-blue tooth models and maybe less so regarding footpod functions. HR measurement seems as accurate as earlier models.
2. Software (Polar Pro Trainer 5) has new functions which are questionable at best and misleading at worst -- namely the running "index" function which on a scale of 30 to 76 purports to give you the sum of all calculations with a number which roughly correlates with expected future performance (running times) on various races such as a 5K through a marathon.
3. Customer Service. I was told at first that the inability to record temperature on the watch was a bug in the software. Later was told that the watch could not record temperature (correct). Also was given an excuse as to why temperature was no longer recorded by the watch (users body temperature --- hah! --- it worked well enough on earlier models). And regarding the index calculation, I was never given the algorithm which could at least help me understand what type of math it was doing (it is a mystery to me and the algorithm seems biased to reward you with a higher index score for a lower heart rate and slow time vs a slightly higher heart rate and faster time). Instead I was given a platitude;
"It is worth to remember that in addition to good Running Index, maximal running performance demands good preparation, optimal running conditions, speed endurance and guts. Training quantity and quality have an affect as well as natural talent. The RunningIndex gives a value measured in current circumstances."
I especially like the "guts" comment --- really happy about that as I don't know how I've gotten by over the past 30 years beating people without "guts"
The ugly:
1. Incomprehensible design decision to modify the altimeter sensor holes from recessed (previous polar models) to flush on the bottom of the watch resulting in erroneous readings as soon as you start to sweat (yes you read that right -- sweat) and thus rendering the altimeter function of the watch largely useless unless the watch is worn in such a way (flopping on wrist or strapped to clothing) to preclude the sensor holes from clogging with sweat from your wrist.
2. Software. Looks real nice until you try to modify data. Say you got erroneous distance reading on your last run and you want to easily fix it. You won't be able to. No simple function to correct the total distance of a run and have that correction evenly applied to entire run. This undermines the whole point of exercise comparison within the software. If you go out on two identical runs but the distance recorded by the watch varies by a few tenths of a mile there will be no easy way to correct the data.
3. Temperature. Previous models recorded temperature as a data point whenever you took a lap marker or finished the run. This model does neither requiring you to manually enter the temperature into the software.
4. The running index calculation does not take into consideration temperature (AMAZING! since the book noted at the beginning of this review showed clearly that there is a positive correlation between high temperatures and higher heart rates --- you work harder to cool youself). The lack of temperature calculation (an identical run can have HR vary by 10 BPM based upon temperature) seriously undermines the usefulness of the running index function.
5. No way to tell software about different running conditions for a given distance and have that taken into consideration on the index calculation. Five miles run on a track are treated the same as five miles run on sandy roads or trails. So when you go into the comparison graphs which purportedly allow you to see at a glance trends in your running, you cannot account for different conditions on runs. Neither different temperatures or different running surfaces are considered on calculations. This seriously undermines the usefulness of comparing weeks worth of training runs in order to come up with a performance trajectory and let you know are you ready for that next race.
Until this product I rarely even considered any other HR monitoring tool. Polar may not have made "pretty" watches, but they worked. They made tools for athletes interested in maximizing their performance. The marketing department has apparently taken over the company from the engineers. The company may have "jumped the shark" with this watch and software. I hope I'm wrong and Polar surprises with its next watch. It needs to actually delivers useful functions for serious athletes and not take away functions offered from previous models (temperature and an altimeter which works reliably). And if they are going to go to the trouble of providing a number which tells all --- the index number --- then they better explain how that number is calculated and provide the user with the ability to modify the formula (temperature and surface conditions to start with) in order to meet variable conditions if their engineers and exercise physiologist have not already thought of everything.
And keep the marketing department out of product design until functions are firmly set and don't represent a two steps forward, two steps back design as we see with this model.
16 of 17 found the following review helpful:
RS800sd great watch that motivates me to run Apr 29, 2007
By Jan Musil This review was edited in December 2007 after the GPS sensor release:
I have an addition to the original review - I got the GPS sensor few weeks ago and I love it. The combination of GPS sensor for outdoors running and S3 sensor for treadmill and outdoor running is great. The S3 helps me with my cadence as I'm changing my running style to get a faster turnover and different foot strike. The GPS sensor is great when I do outdoors running or want to use the watch with my bike.
I have one complaint about the watch though - after about a year of use the watch band broke off and I needed to send the watch to the Polar repair shop. I recommend anyone buying the watch to keep the original receipt to get free repair from Polar. Polar insists on you providing the original sales receipt in order to receive free warranty service.
I still like the watch very much and look forward to using it in years to come. So not only is this watch great for runners, it is now great for multi-sport users as well (with the optional GPS sensor).
_____ This is the original review _______
I'm amazed at the number of problems other reviewers are claiming to have with this watch. I have it since last Christmas and got it as a present. This is probably the best watch for running training there currentky is on the market. Bear with me and read further to learn why I believe this.
When I got mine RS800sd I was ready to go out and run the same night (well I ran the next morning in sub-zero temperature and really enjoyed the run). Since then I have used this watch to plan, train adn successfully complete my first 10k race and today I'm just few hours away from running my first half marathon. I have been using this watch for over 3 and half months and I'm very happy with it. Before this watch I had Polar S625X with S1 foot pod (I still keep it for triathlon training) and Polar S120. I used one of the basic Nike HRMs, but I have returned it after a week as it was too basic for my needs.
Now back to the RS800sd and the things that I really like:
1. Ability to design your own training plan in the Polar software, upload it to the watch and trace my progress in both the watch and the software on my PC. The training run could be fairly complex and have various target HR zones and pace. I love this feature for combined interval runs or tempo/interval runs.
2. Great and very acurate HR reading. The HR strap is the most comfortable one I ever used - it is fabric not plastic and that is very nice especially for long runs.
3. Very acurate distance reading on both treadmill and outside. It took me a while to figure out how to set the calibration factor for individual exercises. Before I figured that out my readings were around 10% off - maybe explanation of some problems other reviewers claimed to have. And no this watch is not less acurate that Nike+ sensor. I use both most of the time and the watch is maximum of 0.2 mi off on a 10 mi run on a treadmill whereas the Nike+ sensor is easily 1.5 - 2 mi off (even after repeated calibration).
4. I like that I can lock the watch and still switch on the backlight when I need it. This prevents me from accidentally switching on the run mode which could happen quite easily with the big red button on the watch face. I practically do not take the watch off the whole day - it goes nicely with my office wardrobe, during running and even during the night I do not take it off. I have alarm in reach all the time and the lock prevents me from starting a run even when I sleep.
5. I love the ability to configure the information shown on individual displays for the run. I re-configured the default settings to see only the data I'm interested in. Great feature if you need different setup of the screen for your run.
6. Uploading to the PC is a breeze and the Polar software is fairly good (I still miss some features and better customization of graphs as you can see in the text later)
7. I use the watch together with trainingpeaks site and love the way it helps me keep track of my training.
I recommend everyone to look at the RS400 model as you may find it good enough for your need and save youself some money. RS200 could be an alternative as well.
I still own the S625X with S1 sensor and the watch is less acurate than RS800sd especially in interval training. But the acuracy is good enough for most long distance running. If you do not do much track or treadmill interval training you may be happy with the 625 model.
Few things Polar could improve on this watch:
1. Documentation - it is very short and not as good as documentation I got with other Polar products. I wonder why this great product with many functions comes with very basic manual. I can see that some people may have problems with the watch if the manual is short on discussing details.
2. Polar software - it could be improved in terms of what it helps you monitor. I would not mind additional features to monitor how many miles i logged on the pair of shoes I use, ability to see my planned heart rate in the recorded results of the exercise (it should be easy to produce - hey I have the training plan and the exercise result how difficult is it to overlay one over another). I think I can come up with few more improvements, but there is no major problem with the software. I just wish it would do some more things for me (something trainingpeaks site offers me).
Overall I'm very happy with this watch and recommend it to every serious runner (even non-professional like me).
11 of 11 found the following review helpful:
Poor initial quality, working well now Sep 06, 2007
By Mr. Inspector
"Javert"
First, a brief summary: As you will read below, I have had significant problems with the initial quality and reliability of this product. However, my experience with Polar customer service has been excellent. They have promptly fixed every problem I have run into (I have just ran into more than I expect for a product of this price). I now have a functioning watch (and hope it will stay that way). When the watch is working, this is a fantastic product that offers a level of performance that you won't find anywhere else. Yes, it's a bigger watch than your Timex Ironman, but it's quite a bit smaller than any comparable systems (I have also owned the Polar 625x, and have some experience with the Garmin 205).
Now the details of my review. First, the painful experience I have had just getting a working watch into my hands:
1. My first RS800SD I received had a slight rattle inside it when shaken. I verified that the rattle was not coming from any part of the watch band; the rattle appeared to be emanating from the red OK button (when I held the OK button down and shook the watch, the rattle was diminished or non-existent). I called a sales associate at the place of purchase to ask him about this, and he could not give me a definitive answer as to whether this was expected or not, but he suggested I return it for replacement, which I did.
2. The second watch I received (I verified that the watch was replaced; serial numbers were different) exhibited the same rattling. After calling many authorized Polar service centers, I received multiple answers as to the cause of the rattling. Some technicians told me that it was expected and was just the nature of the design of the OK button; others told me that this was probably indicative of a defect, but that they had never heard of it happening before; and others could not give an answer to my question. I finally spoke with service technician at the Polar service center in NY who informed me that he was aware of this problem. There apparently was a particular manufactured lot of RS800SD's which had a problem with a loose main button spring (hence my having received two of them with the same rattling problem) and that I needed to send in the watch to Polar for repair under warranty. I will mention that from the time I received my second watch from the original place of purchase to the time I sent the second watch back in to Polar for repair, I used the watch on one 1-hour run. I will also mention that, for a product this expensive with a known manufacturing defect, I wouldn't expect to have to pay shipping to send it back for repair, but I did (Polar paid for shipping back to me).
3. I received my third RS800SD promptly from Polar and the rattling problem was solved. I did notice that the paperwork said that the watch case was repaired/replaced, which I expected, and the battery was replaced since it had tested as weak or flat, which I did not expect, since I had only used the watch on one 1-hour run (and never used the heart rate monitor). But the repaired watch seemed to work and I used it for two runs, during which I used the altimeter and stride sensor, but still did not yet use the heart rate monitor. The watch worked fine for a couple of weeks, but then one morning the screen was blank. I tried pushing all four side buttons to reset the watch, which led to the full screen of various figures/digits. I then pushed the OK button (the final step in resetting the watch), which just caused the screen to go blank again. After talking to technical support, I was asked to send it in again for repair. Thankfully, I did not have to pay shipping this time.
4. I again received the watch promptly in return from Polar, this time with some documentation indicating that they had replaced the entire watch. The problem on the previous watch was described as "high power consuption" (I wish they had looked into this a little deeper the first time, instead of just replacing the battery). Since I now had my old heart rate/stride sensors and my new watch, I had to re-"teach" the sensors to talk to the new watch. This appeared to be easy enough, but once the watch indicated that I had successfully taught the sensors, the watch failed to find the stride sensor when I started an exercise (this was never a problem on any of the previously repaired/replaced watches I have had). After more discussion with a Polar service rep, I learned of a second technique (found nowhere in the documentation) of helping the watch to find the sensors. So I then had a work-around (though entirely undocumented), but it was many more steps than I had to go through previously, and it concerned me that the new watch with the old sensors does not behave the same as the old watch with the old sensors. However, I then saw other posts on this site (or comments to posts) which recemmended additional tips (some documented, some not):
a) ensure that the footpod battery fits sungly in the footpod by inserting a small strip of paper around the rim of the battery holder,
b) ensure that the small gold-colored batter contact in the footpod is bend sufficiently to guaranty a good connection to the battery,
c) take a little extra care in installing the battery to ensure that the footpod battery holder is snugly held in place by the grooves in the footpod,
d) attach the footpod to my shoe exactly as instructed in the documentation, by inserting the clip under the laces, THEN tightening the laces, THEN snapping the pod in place,
e) wear the footpod a little higher on the show (closer to the ankle as opposed to the toes)
Recommendations a) through c) resulted in the watch being able to find the footpod automatically (at least the last few times I have tried it). Recommendations d) and e) seemed to improve accuracy of distance/pace measurements and reduce noise, particularly on downhills or at faster paces.
So, when the watch IS working as it should, here are my observations.
1. The altimeter seems to be right on, as I compare watch data from a run in the mountains to topo maps.
2. The stride sensor is quite accurate, at least for my needs. I do almost all my running on uneven trails in the mountains, and in such a scenario I expect lower accuracy in speed/distance than on a uniform surface like a track. For the runs I do, total ascent is as important a number as miles run. I calibrated the stride sensor on the track and found that pre-calibration, the stride sensor was >96% accurate, as measured. Post-calibration, it was within 99% accuracy (my calibration and measurement route was 1200 on the track). It is pretty cool to be on a run and put forth an almost inperceptible additional effort, and see your measured pace go up by 5 seconds a mile. One thing I did notice is that when running down steep downhills, the speed/distance measurements get quite erratic. This is probably due in part to my poor downhill running style and the consequent pounding my feet make. Taking certain steps (see above) improves this significantly, though. I have not yet had the chance to calibrate the stride sensor on runs in the mountains. When I do, I will measure it against a distance wheel and update my review to include the results.
2.b. The physical design of the footpod is fantastic. One of the reasons I decided to upgrade from the 625X to the RS800SD is because of the smaller, lighter footpod. To me, the 625X footpod was just large and heavy enough to notice. Not so with the RS800 stride sensor. I have not used the foot pod with the Addidas shoes inside which you can place the foot pod, so I have only used the pod strapped to the top of my shoe. The other reason that I upgraded to the RS800 is that it will not get confused with other similar computers around, which was a problem with the 625x. However as indicated in #4 above, I have had some trouble with communication between the food pod and the watch (only when I tried using my new watch with my original stride sensor), so there may be a few bugs that need to be worked out, or at the very least the documenation is incomplete.
3. I don't have a good way of making a statement on the accuracy of the heart rate monitor, but I will say that I haven't had any trouble with getting it to communicate with the watch (old or new replaced watch). In agreement with other reviews I have read, it is certainly the most comfortable chest-strap-style heart rate monitor I have experienced. It reads very consistent heart rates...almost no noise at all.
4. The user interface on the watch itself is quite good and fairly intuitive (with the exception of the weeks I had the 625X, which I eventually sent in for an upgrade to the rs800, I am a new Polar user). I am admittedly somewhat technically savvy, but am not a complete gadgets geek. The documentation I would give 6 stars out of ten. What it did cover, it covered clearly with a few minor exceptions, but there are a number of things that were completely ommitted (such as steps, built in to the watch, to take if you are having difficulty establishing communication between the watch and sensors).
5. The software that came with the watch is decent. As of this writing, I haven't had the chance to really delve into it (since I have only had a working watch for about 2.5 weeks since I initially bought the watch 3 months ago) beyond its basic features. As is true of other portions of this review, I will update this as I learn and experience more. A word of advice, though: don't buy the Polar branded IR adapter. You can get the same thing without the Polar logo at many places for 1/3 the price.
6. The watch itself is an fairly decent industrial design. I would have preferred an option other than silver, since the watch's size makes it stand out enough as it is, but I'm not that particular on those kind of things. It took a little getting used to to use a watch this big as an "everyday" watch, but I do so occasionally now. I like the keylock feature and the sleep mode. Those were good additions. Like I mentioned before, if your watch rattles, particularly the red button, send it back to Polar. This is a known defect. If you just return it to the place you bought it, you may (as I did) receive another watch with the same defect.
7. When working properly, this watch gives you a LOT of data. So much, in fact, that it takes some discipline to remind yourself not to spend the whole run looking at pace, distance, HR, ascent, elevation, stride length, etc., and to instead just enjoy the run and peruse the data afterwards.
8. Yes, the thing is expensive. But you do have to pay for high performance. I would just expect better quality/reliability from such a price. Fortunately I have gotten good response from Polar customer service, and I now have a complete system that seems to be working. My fingers are crossed.
In summary, the jury is still out on this one. My better judgement says that I should have waited for the second edition of this watch so that they could get the bugs worked out. As I have noted, I have had a pretty rotten intial experience with quality and reliability of this product, but I've had a positive experience with Polar's response to my problems. I am still hopeful that I have finally gotten all the bugs worked out, as this product has shown great promise when it is working as it should. If it would have worked out of the box like it is now, I would give this product 5 stars, even considering the high price. If I were to rate Polar customer service independently of my poor experiences with the product it self, I would give them 4.5 stars. All things considered, I'm giving it 3 stars now. If I can get six months of uninterupted reliable performance (and after a chance to evaluate battery life), I'll bump the rating up, and chalk my experience up to a few consecutive spouts of bad luck.
10 of 10 found the following review helpful:
Polar or Garmin? Aug 01, 2007
By F. Tarabay I bought the RS800sd and a Garmin Forerunner 305. I thought that I wanted the RS800sd but I found the Forerunner for about half the cost so I decided to try them both out. I'll be keeping the Garmin and putting the Polar on ebay. I went on runs wearing both to have an accurate comparison.
Before trying them out, I thought Polar would have the edge because of its reputation with heart monitors. It turns out that both units show exactly the same results.
Both units let you somewhat configure the display. The Garmin still has the edge here since it has a larger display and is easier to read. You can view more information as well. The deal with that is the Polar is, basically, normal watch size. The Garmin is pretty big, and I thought I might have an issue with its bulk. I was wrong about that too as it actually fits really well.
You can actually tell time with the Polar (and not with the Garmin) so keep that in mind if you really need a clock. As far as timers go, that's pretty much a wash. I do like the lap timer on the Garmin a lot though.
The Garmin has the edge in computing distance. It is very accurate and doesn't require any calibration. However, the Polar is still impressive and was pretty close with no calibration and even closer after calibration. In contrast, I've also used the Nike+ footpod and that thing was waaaaay off, even after repeated calibration.
The Garmin also has the edge in ease of use. It's just more intuitive. I also like how it comes with a USB docking/charging station. It makes uploading the run data to your computer easy. I really don't like the IR interface that the Polar uses. If you do buy the Polar, keep in mind that they overcharge you for their IR adapter. They will charge you $60 for something that you can get for about $15. The only difference will be the price.
Each unit has some features that the other doesn't. The Polar has a cadence feature that can be useful to evaluate your runs. There are also a few index values it will calculate for you. The Garmin keeps track of your route and maps it out on your computer. Both are quality units, and I initially thought I would prefer the Polar, but after trying both out, I decided the Garmin is the better choice.
based on 16 reviews
Great find...addictive Dec 05, 2006
By Christopher Coyne
The triumph of form over function Feb 21, 2008
By W. Banker
Poor initial quality, working well now Sep 06, 2007
By Mr. Inspector
"Javert"
Polar or Garmin? Aug 01, 2007
By F. Tarabay
