Product Reviews

On this page we will review or update information about some running gear and gadgets we work with. Opinions will always be our own but the links to products will be affiliate links. This means you get to support your favorite app development startup while treating yourself to a brand new pair of shoes, a heart rate monitor, or - why not - doing the holiday shopping. And it means we get to spend the money on making Track Runner even better. Deal? Alright, let's dive right in!


Shop the Microsoft Store via Amazon

Looking to spread some Lumia Love this Christmas? Shop the Microsoft Store via Amazon and support Track Runner v. 5.0 in one go. #NoBrainer. :)




Side-by-side: Jarv Run BT v. MIO Link

Note: This is not a review of these heart rate monitors as such but rather a look at how they perform side-by-side. You can find a thorough review of the MIO Link here and of the Jarv here.

Last night, I had the pleasure of joining Katie, the force behind Run.com's Greater Boston Running Company - Newton, on her Tuesday evening group run. Needless to say it was freezing (-2 C/28 F) so we decided on a hilly 4-miler to get our hearts pumping. Perfect for a heart rate monitor side-by-side and so I set off with the MIO Link on my wrist and the Jarv Run BT strapped to my chest (and 2 Nokia Lumia 630 in my pocket for those interested).

Let me give you a little more information on both monitors before we dive into the side-by-side. Both MIO Global and Jarv were kind enough to provide us with samples of their monitors for testing and to verify compatibility with Track Runner v. 4.0. Jarv recently released the first chest strap heart rate monitor geared directly at us Windows Phone users: Jarv Run BT Windows Phone Edition. The Jarv Run BT has an attractive price point at around $36 USD but for those of you who do not like the feeling of chest straps, the MIO Link or MIO Alpha (though more pricey starting at $92 USD and $ 174 USD respectively) are real alternatives. Kudos have to go to the MIO Global team for being the first monitor to pretty much nail measuring heart rate almost continuously on the wrist during running. It's no easy feat and impressive for a Kickstarter project.

Yesterday, I used the MIO Link rather than the Alpha (I've noticed I am using the Link much more than the Alpha as it's lighter and thinner and because I don't personally consult the Alpha during a run all that much) but both are verified to function with Track Runner v. 4.0 (WP 8.1 + Cyan required).

Setting up both heart rate monitors with Track Runner was a breeze. Since I am switching monitors a lot when running/testing I just had to make sure to have the monitor marked as default heart rate monitor so the app wouldn’t search for a different device.

So, let’s look at some screen shots to highlight how the monitors behaved (small caveat: I accidentally started the phone connected to the Jarv about half a minute into my run, hence the slight differences in data).

Jarv Run BT	MIO Link
As you can see, the MIO Link shows most of my first definitely at odds with what it felt like as I sped up enough on the wrist. After adjusting the wrist band matched right up with the Jarv. Both CardioMaps the Link has a slight lag in picking up/transferring Jarv picked up a couple of very small changes in hr Beacon St) but nothing major.	kilometer as recovery/light heart rate zone. This was the hill. It turned out I wasn’t wearing the Link snuggly you can see how it jumped right to speed hr zone. This look surprisingly similar. In testing, we had a feeling data and if you have a very close look you see how the zone that the Link didn’t map out (see f.i. after k2 on
Looking at the data summary (and keeping in mind registered the heart rate peak at roughly the same course, the faulty beginning for the Link massively detailed comparison split-by-split further down.	the false start of the Jarv phone) both monitors time. Accuracy is within 1 bpm so not too bad. Of influenced the average heart rate. You can see a more
As for the hr graph (in gray): it does seem as if the Jarv measured lower dips in heart rate likely due (for more information on how MIO actually does it	Jarv picked up changes in hr more immediately. The to the small latency of measuring heart rate on the wrist have a look here).
Finally, the split-by-split comparison of my average phone (Jarv) and monitor strapping issue (Link) the	heart rate. Ignoring the botched start both in terms of data seems not too far off.

In the end of the day it really does come down to personal preference whether you choose to go with the Jarv or Link. I would recommend either and trust their accuracy. I would say the Jarv’s price makes it attractive to pick up even when you’re just starting out. The Jarv tested accurate as compared to other chest straps and its strap is very soft and comfortable. You barely notice it’s there. It is also much lighter than for example the Polar H7.

I tend to use the Link a lot because I bundle up for a cold November run and then realize I forgot to put on the chest strap. Wearing the heart rate monitor on the wrist is very convenient and it feels much like a watch. The Link is quite light, has a secure strap that has never opened for me during a run and is very easy to adjust. You do have to wear it quite tightly, almost to the point of slight discomfort though if you don’t want a glitch like my start to happen. After the run, it looks something like this although it wears off soon enough:
I hope you found this product review informative and am crossing my fingers that Santa will fill your stocking with at least one of those great heart rate monitors. Below, you can find direct links to Amazon for all versions of the Jarv and both Mio products.

• Jarv Run BT Windows Phone Edition
• Jarv Run BT iOS Edition
• Jarv Run BT Android Edition
• MIO Link 
• MIO Alpha

Any questions? Go for it in the comments below! Want me to review a certain product? Let me know!