Polar heart rate monitor battery life of transmitter

I consider that Polar (or at least their UK agent Leisure Systems
International) are not very open about the battery life of the sealed
transmitter unit. After just 2.5 years they recommended that I spent
34 pounds on replacing the battery in the watch part AND obtaining a
new sealed transmitter (battery cannot be replaced by them). When
new, the watch and transmitter cost about 45 pounds, so I think
battery replacement is poor value for money. They did not seem
surprised or interested that the transmitter had a weak battery after
2.5 years. This is something that the sales literature does not tell
you! I will not be buying another monitor from Polar.

I think they should be more open about the battery life of the
transmitter and/or offer a cheaper deal if it fails within say 5 years
of purchase. I have no objection to paying the 12 pounds to replace
the battery in the watch part - but the high and hidden cost of
dealing with the transmitter is ridiculous and must generate a lot of
cash for them.

My HRM heart rate monitor is a Polar fi****ch with a transmitter known
as a T31.

(Joe)

After just 2.5 years they recommended that I spent
34 pounds on replacing the battery

I had mine many years longer before the battery became an issue.


Sling Skate

My recommended reading for body fat control:
http://www.geocities.com/~slopitch/drsquat/fredzig.htm

1. How did you know that you needed a new transmitter battery, if your watch
battery also needed replacing? Was it just a co-incidence they failed at the
same time?

2. As you know, the transmitter cannot be explicitly turned off. What causes
it to consume power is a circuit between its sensor pads. This will exist if
it is stored with (say) a damp towel, or if it is wet for other reasons.
Keep it dry and it should last about 10 times as long as the watch battery
.....


"Joe" wrote in message
m...
I consider that Polar (or at least their UK agent Leisure Systems
International) are not very open about the battery life of the sealed
transmitter unit. After just 2.5 years they recommended that I spent
34 pounds on replacing the battery in the watch part AND obtaining a
new sealed transmitter (battery cannot be replaced by them). When
new, the watch and transmitter cost about 45 pounds, so I think
battery replacement is poor value for money. They did not seem
surprised or interested that the transmitter had a weak battery after
2.5 years. This is something that the sales literature does not tell
you! I will not be buying another monitor from Polar.

I think they should be more open about the battery life of the
transmitter and/or offer a cheaper deal if it fails within say 5 years
of purchase. I have no objection to paying the 12 pounds to replace
the battery in the watch part - but the high and hidden cost of
dealing with the transmitter is ridiculous and must generate a lot of
cash for them.

My HRM heart rate monitor is a Polar fi****ch with a transmitter known
as a T31.

In response to queries raised by Peter Webb:
1. How did you know that you needed a new transmitter battery, if your watch
battery also needed replacing?
The repair engineer at Leisure Systems International reported a low
transmitter battery, based on their diagnostic tests.

2. As you know, the transmitter cannot be explicitly turned off. What causes
it to consume power is a circuit between its sensor pads. This will exist if
it is stored with (say) a damp towel, or if it is wet for other reasons.
Keep it dry and it should last about 10 times as long as the watch battery
I did keep the transmitter separate from damp items - and stored it in
its bag. I was expecting it to last much longer than the watch
battery - hence my disappointment at being advised to replace the
transmitter after 2.5 years.

I really liked this*information.