Budget Heart-Rate Monitors

Heart rate monitors for less than $100

Lower-cost heart rate monitors typically track heart rate only, and can be a good choice for casual exercisers or those who don't want to mess with a fancy -- and expensive -- monitor.

The Polar FT1 (*Est. $60) gets the best reviews in this category, which is why we bestow the Best Reviewed Budget Heart Rate Monitor upon it. It receives high marks in a group test of budget-friendly units conducted by Triathlon Plus magazine, where testers say the unit is simple and easy to use. They also like that it is lighter and sleeker than many heart rate monitors. "Simplicity is its middle name, and from its sleek one-button design to its feather-light feel, it's a training watch without all the unnecessary fluff and guff," they say. A waterproof chest strap is another plus.

ThatsFit.com also recommends the Polar FT1, saying the monitor is easy to use and has a good display. Users report good accuracy, as well. "It's not fancy and doesn't have a lot of bells and whistles, but it does do what it's supposed to do and that is be an accurate heart rate monitor," says one reviewer at Amazon.com. However, the Polar FT1 has only one button for navigation, and it requires a lot of repeated pushing to navigate the menu. Reviewers also say initial setup can be complicated.

Advanced features on the Polar FT7 (*Est. $90) include calories burned and storage for 99 training files versus just one for the FT1. An optional computer hookup can wirelessly upload workout data and links to a website where users can analyze training data and download workout programs. The monitor's accuracy is highly rated in a recent independent test, and it earns a recommendation from Running Times magazine. "A heart rate monitor built with easy-to-use simplicity, the sleek FT7 calculates pacing according to heart rate zones and time spent in each zone," says Brian Metzler of the running publication. Owners at Amazon.com, where the Polar FT7 gets 4.2 stars out of 5 in about 180 reviews, are also largely pleased. Value is a high point, and users say the watch and chest strap are comfortable. However, there's no stopwatch, initial setup can be confusing and the faint alarm can be hard to hear.

While other brands' low-cost heart rate monitors earn fewer recommendations, the unisex Timex Personal Trainer Heart Rate Monitor T5G971 (*Est. $55) is the highest-rated unit in a recent independent test, where it gets excellent marks for accuracy and ease of use. It has a large display and numerous useful features. More than 600 owners posting reviews at Amazon.com give it an average 3.7-star rating out of 5. Many say the display is easy to read and the watch quickly picks up readings from the chest strap, but others complain that it's hard to set up or it broke soon after purchase. 

For those who want a barebones heart rate monitor, the Omron HR-100C (*Est. $40) gets good user reviews at Amazon.com. It scores slightly lower than the Timex Personal Trainer in a recent independent test, but still receives excellent ratings for accuracy and ease of use. It gets a whopping 900-plus owner reviews and rates 3.9 out of 5 stars at Amazon.com. There are some complaints of erratic readings, and several users say the user-replaceable battery dies quickly, but most agree that the HR-100C is good value. "It's easy to set up, and I like the option of clipping it onto my bike instead of having to wear it on my wrist during a workout," says one owner. The Omron does not track or calculate calories burned, and a few owners say their unit did not work properly out of the box.

Another Timex product, the Easy Trainer (*Est. $40)Mio Stride Petite , proves to be a favorite at Amazon.com, as well. With fewer features than the Personal Trainer, it doesn't incorporate training zones or track calorie expenditure but does provide a continuous reading with the included chest strap and has a user-replaceable battery. Users give it 4 stars out of 5 in more than 200 individual reviews, with many saying this basic heart rate monitor suits their needs just fine. "This heart rate monitor does exactly what I needed and has big easy-to-read numbers on the display," says one owner. They also like that the chest strap will transmit to cardio machines in the gym but some question its accuracy, saying their heart-rate reading jumps around while exercising. Others report no problems as long as they moisten the back of the chest strap before exercise, as instructed in the user manual.

Those who hate chest straps may prefer a strapless heart rate monitor like the Mio Stride Petite (*Est. $60). To obtain a reading, you place your middle and index fingers on two buttons on the watch face, which displays your heart rate after a few seconds. The downside is you won't get a continuous reading; whenever you want to know your heart rate, you must stop exercising and repeat the process. Overall, reviewers say heart rate monitors with a chest strap are a better bet.

Even so, the Mio Stride Petite gets relatively high marks in a test conducted by The New York Times. Testers don't like having to stop their activity to check their heart rate, but the writer calls it a good  monitor for beginners or those who will use it for walking or other low-intensity activities. At Amazon.com, a few users complain that the built-in pedometer doesn't work properly. The Mio Stride Petite also tracks calories, and includes a backlight, target heart-rate zones and exercise timer.