|Polar HRMs S520 vs S510||witcomb|
Jan 3, 2004 8:30 PM
|I see that Performance Bikes has the S510 at a very decent price, at the moment I'm not willing to fork out a fortune for a HRM. However, it looks like the S520 is what is in production and the S510 is an old model. Does anyone know the differences? Is there any reason to stay away from the S510?
Also, you can connect this HRM to a computer via an IR port. Do you actually require using the Polar SonicLink or can you use a standard IR port on a laptop or other computer?
|Polar S510 requires Soniclink||cdhbrad|
Jan 4, 2004 7:49 AM
|I have a 510, so I can only reply to part of your post. I have used if for a year now and really like all the features. I only use the HRM portions as I have a separate cyclecomputer. The 510 uses the "Soniclink" via microphone to transfer data to your computer. I don't know if the 520 is the same or not.
The version of the PC Coach software that I purchased when I got mine isn't the greatest, but its worthwhile and I am purchasing the newer version soon.
|re: Polar HRMs S520 vs S510||avitar|
Jan 4, 2004 10:32 AM
|I too use the S510, and I use it for cycling functions. To download you just need a microphone into your soundcard. The only thing I know of regarding their differences is that the 520 has a metal face instead of the plastic used on the 510. I do like downloading my ride info, it logs many things like heartrate - max, average etc, it grafs it relavitve to time and speed, so you can see what happened when you were going up the big hill etc.|
|re: Polar HRMs S520 vs S510||witcomb|
Jan 4, 2004 10:50 AM
|Thanks, it looks like the only difference is th S520 has a stainless steel facing as you mentioned, whereas the S510 is plastic. This doesn't seem to warrent the extra $100 or so. By the sounds of things, there are no complaints about the S510 and for the price it seems hard to pass up.