In this article, we use so-called affiliate links. With every purchase through these links, we receive a commission from the merchant. All relevant referral links are marked with . Learn more.
Cycling comes from cycling - that's one of the many winged words from the history of cycling. However, the fact that racing cycling is not just about pedalling, but must have something to do with complex processes in the human body, became apparent to the general cycling public during the 2003 Tour de France at the latest. At that time, the television stations used a lot of technology to show viewers the current pulse data of selected professionals live on the screen. The racers wore heart rate measuring belts around their chests and the data was transmitted via receivers on the camera bikes. Training methodology and control have developed rapidly since then, and power meters have long since become the gold standard of performance measurement. But even almost twenty years after the TV innovation of the time, professional teams still use consistent heart rate monitoring for their riders in competitions and training.
Heart rate monitor cheaper than power meter
Even for amateur cyclists, heart rate can still be an important indicator for training control. A heart rate monitor is significantly cheaper than any power meter, requires almost no installation effort and now collects a wealth of data in addition to the heart rate. The HRM-Pro from Garmin, which at 129 euros is also the most expensive of the six straps in our test, also records movement data and derives other interesting indicators such as heart rate variability from the heart rate. Running and swimming functions make the belt interesting for triathletes; athletes who are already travelling with watches or GPS devices of this brand benefit from the good internal Garmin networking. Its storage capacity of up to 18 hours also sets new standards.
Heart rate measurement with all chest straps via two electrodes
However, the high-priced model does not differ from other chest straps in terms of handling. All models measure the pulse via two electrodes incorporated into the belt, which should be positioned on the right and left of the chest. Depending on the brand and model, the belt is slightly wider and the electrodes vary in size and arrangement by a few centimetres. This has no effect on the wearing comfort, nor does the weight, which varies only slightly. Almost all manufacturers use the same method of attachment: the straps are hooked in with a loop and the strap length is adjusted manually. The only exception is the Wahoo Tickr X, where the measuring unit holds the strap together with a clip. This is a practical design, as the lights that flash when clipped in signalise that the battery is working.
Important: The chest strap can only provide reliable data if it fits so tightly that it does not slip even during movement and deep exhalation. For precise measurement, the electrodes inside the strap below the nipples must be in permanent contact with the skin. The sensor, which sends the data to the watch on the wrist or the on-board computer on the handlebars, is centred on the sternum. Many manufacturers recommend briefly moistening the electrodes before putting them on to ensure good contact with the skin.
Chest strap or smartwatch - which is better?
When the first smartwatches with wrist measurement came onto the market a few years ago, chest straps seemed to become obsolete. The fact that the small computers on the wrist have not yet overtaken the classic heart rate monitors is undoubtedly due to the accuracy of the measurement - in addition to the price difference. And this is how smartwatches work: LEDs on the back of the watch send light through the skin, the reflection of which hits an optical sensor. This determines the pulse rate, taking into account the blood volume flow. This only leads to accurate readings if the watch is tight enough and the sensor is not soiled or covered by hair or tattoos. As the measuring unit on the wrist is further away from the heart, the pulse values are also slightly delayed.
Overall, the chest strap is the better choice, especially for high-intensity workouts, while the smartwatch scores with its functional diversity.
You will find these 6 heart rate monitor chest straps in the test
- Garmin HRM-Pro >> to the test
- Hammerhead HRM >> to the test
- Lezyne Heart Rate Flow Sensor >> to the test
- Sigma R1 Duo Comfortex+ >> to the test
- Suunto Smart Sensor >> to the test
- Wahoo Tickr X >> to the test
How TOUR tests
We have worn all chest straps on bike rides with GPS computers from Garmin, Hammerhead and Wahoo and training software. We also checked the recording via the respective company's own app during running and cycling laps. All chest straps proved to be very accurate when compared with each other and with an external reference, which is why we did not use the accuracy criterion in the test letters - especially as hardly anyone is likely to use different chest straps to measure their heart rate.
