Miles: 1.91 Time: 24:39 Pace: 12:56 HR: Avg: 155, 83% of max, HR Range: 148-163, In Zone:??.??, peak HR: 173, min HR: ??, cal: 288 based on 240 lbs. . Shoes: Brooks Addiction(126.4). Time: 11:40 PM. Right calf a bit tight during run, right knee twinged a bit near the end. Didn't do very good stretching today.
1st .5 Miles 6:04.73 min - 12:09 pace - 149 bpm - 84 calories - best pace 9:46
2nd .5 Miles 6:33.10 min - 13:06 pace - 155 bpm - 74 calories - best pace 9:15
3rd .5 Miles 6:40.59 min - 13:21 pace - 156 bpm - 71 calories - best pace 9:07
Last .41 Miles 5:22.70 - 13:14 pace - 161 bpm - 59 calories - best pace 9:52
Got the Garmin 305 in the mail today. Really easy to use. It's ugly, but I think more functional than the 405. My wife said "it is kind of hideous." The mileage from the garmin matched exactly to mapmyrun.com for my typical run. The HR seemed to track very closely to what my timex said it was on my previous runs, so I think HR monitors are fairly accurate. I've never had any issues with the HR monitor spiking like some claim happens. The only time I had an issue was one run a long time ago where the monitor wasn't tight enough. Will have to install the software tomorrow and see if I can get some of the other data I am used to like time in zone. The calories used is much more accurate than timex's shot in the dark which didn't know the distance. 288 still seems a bit high for less than a two mile run. I wonder if it subtracts base calorie usage had I been sitting in front of the tv. Seeing my pace made me tend to walk a lot faster which I think is why this run was a smidge slower in that I kept my HR in the zone just by walking fast. | 