Experience with Polar Wearlink transmitter?

01-06-2007, 07:14 PM

I have to get a replacement for my Polar transmitter. I am trying to
decide between an (improved) "exact" replacement -- the T31 -- or the
new Wearlink transmitter. I am not interested in the encoding feature,
since I have an old receiver. But conceptually, I like the idea of a
fabric strap. On the other hand....

>From the picture, it seems like the WL "main body" (the part other than
the strap) is thicker than the T31. Is that true?

Is the WL "fabric" strap elastisized? Or do we have to adjust it for a
perfect fit?

The WL battery has only a 6-month warranty. Sounds like the battery
might last only that long with daily use. Is that true?

What do we replace the battery with? Is it a standard battery that is
available "everywhere" (drugs stores, etc)? Or must we purchase the
battery from Polar or a Polar retailer? And what is the cost of the
replacement?

The only thing I see listed on the accessories web page is a WL
replacement strap that "will work on all WL transmitter batteries".
Not sure what that means. Is the "main body" the transmitter or the
battery or both?

Or are they implying that to replace the "battery", we actually replace
the strap -- at a cost of $16?

That would really increase the cost of ownership of the WL compared to
the T31.

01-07-2007, 06:19 AM

i have successfully used a sports instruments transmitter [replaceable
battery]
with a polar s150 HRM receiver

works fine

no code, apparently

wle.

01-08-2007, 08:25 AM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote:
:: I have to get a replacement for my Polar transmitter. I am trying to
:: decide between an (improved) "exact" replacement -- the T31 -- or the
:: new Wearlink transmitter. I am not interested in the encoding
:: feature, since I have an old receiver. But conceptually, I like the
:: idea of a fabric strap. On the other hand....
::
::: From the picture, it seems like the WL "main body" (the part other
::: than
:: the strap) is thicker than the T31. Is that true?

Not enough to notice or stand out, IMO.

::
:: Is the WL "fabric" strap elastisized? Or do we have to adjust it
:: for a perfect fit?

I think the answer is both. It's elastic and you can adjust it. I think
the polar site even says so.

::
:: The WL battery has only a 6-month warranty. Sounds like the battery
:: might last only that long with daily use. Is that true?

Who knows. You want a warranty on an inexpensive battery? Just swap it for
a new one.

::
:: What do we replace the battery with? Is it a standard battery that
:: is available "everywhere" (drugs stores, etc)?

Yes, it's a standard cr2032, as I recall. I can check later and post back.

Or must we purchase
:: the battery from Polar or a Polar retailer? And what is the cost of
:: the replacement?
::
:: The only thing I see listed on the accessories web page is a WL
:: replacement strap that "will work on all WL transmitter batteries".
:: Not sure what that means. Is the "main body" the transmitter or the
:: battery or both?
::

I don't know what this means. The WL transmitter detaches from the strap.
You can put your own battery in the WL transmitter, which is a big
improvement. Again, I'll verify and get back later. I posted about this
back before december 2006.

:: Or are they implying that to replace the "battery", we actually
:: replace the strap -- at a cost of $16?

You can get a new strap or not. Battery replacement in the old unit is like
$10.

::
:: That would really increase the cost of ownership of the WL compared
:: to the T31.

??

Just buy the WL....it's better. Only a small part of it is not a strap, so
it's more comfortable.

01-08-2007, 02:58 PM

Roger Zoul wrote:
> [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote:
> :: I have to get a replacement for my Polar transmitter. I am trying to
> :: decide between an (improved) "exact" replacement -- the T31 -- or the
> :: new Wearlink transmitter. I am not interested in the encoding
> :: feature, since I have an old receiver. But conceptually, I like the
> :: idea of a fabric strap. On the other hand....
> ::
> ::: From the picture, it seems like the WL "main body" (the part other
> ::: than
> :: the strap) is thicker than the T31. Is that true?
>
> Not enough to notice or stand out, IMO.

The WL is probably a wee bit thicker.

>
> ::
> :: Is the WL "fabric" strap elastisized? Or do we have to adjust it
> :: for a perfect fit?
>
> I think the answer is both. It's elastic and you can adjust it. I think
> the polar site even says so.

Both.

>
> ::
> :: The WL battery has only a 6-month warranty. Sounds like the battery
> :: might last only that long with daily use. Is that true?
>
> Who knows. You want a warranty on an inexpensive battery? Just swap it for
> a new one.

The battery is user swapable.

>
> ::
> :: What do we replace the battery with? Is it a standard battery that
> :: is available "everywhere" (drugs stores, etc)?
>
> Yes, it's a standard cr2032, as I recall. I can check later and post back.

Check.

>
> Or must we purchase
> :: the battery from Polar or a Polar retailer? And what is the cost of
> :: the replacement?
> ::
> :: The only thing I see listed on the accessories web page is a WL
> :: replacement strap that "will work on all WL transmitter batteries".
> :: Not sure what that means. Is the "main body" the transmitter or the
> :: battery or both?
> ::
>
> I don't know what this means. The WL transmitter detaches from the strap.
> You can put your own battery in the WL transmitter, which is a big
> improvement. Again, I'll verify and get back later. I posted about this
> back before december 2006.
>

Check.

>
> :: Or are they implying that to replace the "battery", we actually
> :: replace the strap -- at a cost of $16?
>
> You can get a new strap or not. Battery replacement in the old unit is like
> $10.
>
> ::
> :: That would really increase the cost of ownership of the WL compared
> :: to the T31.
>
> ??
>
> Just buy the WL....it's better. Only a small part of it is not a strap, so
> it's more comfortable.
>

Check.
>

01-08-2007, 03:26 PM

Roger Zoul wrote:
> Just buy the WL....it's better. Only a small part of it is not a strap, so
> it's more comfortable.

Thanks for the information and the follow-up. It was very helpful.

01-08-2007, 08:30 PM

<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message
news:1168143269.921639.225470@v33g2000cwv.googlegr oups.com...
> I have to get a replacement for my Polar transmitter. I am trying to
> decide between an (improved) "exact" replacement -- the T31 -- or the
> new Wearlink transmitter. I am not interested in the encoding feature,
> since I have an old receiver. But conceptually, I like the idea of a
> fabric strap. On the other hand....
>
> >From the picture, it seems like the WL "main body" (the part other than
> the strap) is thicker than the T31. Is that true?
>
> Is the WL "fabric" strap elastisized? Or do we have to adjust it for a
> perfect fit?
>
> The WL battery has only a 6-month warranty. Sounds like the battery
> might last only that long with daily use. Is that true?
>
> What do we replace the battery with? Is it a standard battery that is
> available "everywhere" (drugs stores, etc)? Or must we purchase the
> battery from Polar or a Polar retailer? And what is the cost of the
> replacement?
>
> The only thing I see listed on the accessories web page is a WL
> replacement strap that "will work on all WL transmitter batteries".
> Not sure what that means. Is the "main body" the transmitter or the
> battery or both?
>
> Or are they implying that to replace the "battery", we actually replace
> the strap -- at a cost of $16?
>
> That would really increase the cost of ownership of the WL compared to
> the T31.
>

For me personally the T31 was more comfortable than the WearLink. I can't
explain why, I just did.

01-11-2007, 09:08 AM

Kurd wrote:
> For me personally the T31 was more comfortable than the WearLink. I can't
> explain why, I just did.

Thanks for your comments.

I can believe it, just looking at the design. But arguably, it might
simply be a matter of getting used to change. I can imagine that the
WL causes slight pressure in the center of the chest. With T31, the
pressure is distributed across its length -- mostly where the
electrodes are, not so much in the center.

I decided to stick with the T31 for now. I was tempted to get a T31C,
just in case I upgrade the receiver within the next 2-4 years. But I
was not sure if the T31C is compatible with the A1 receiver. I'm
"sure" it is. But whereas the WL specs say the WL is, the T31C specs
say nothing about backward compatibility (sigh). I have never had a
problem with HRM crosstalk anyway. Then again, I have not tried to use
it in a field of 1000 marathon runners (yet).

01-11-2007, 09:41 AM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote:
:: Kurd wrote:
::: For me personally the T31 was more comfortable than the WearLink. I
::: can't explain why, I just did.
::
:: Thanks for your comments.
::
:: I can believe it, just looking at the design. But arguably, it might
:: simply be a matter of getting used to change. I can imagine that the
:: WL causes slight pressure in the center of the chest. With T31, the
:: pressure is distributed across its length -- mostly where the
:: electrodes are, not so much in the center.

Why would it cause pressure in the center of the chest when the straps are
around your entire chest? I never notice any pressure other than that due
to the strap if the gets twisted along it's length. That's possible because
with the WL you have to get the end of the strap right up again the
transmitter to close attach it and it might have twisted while you're
reaching around. There is more strap so more possibility of a twist. I do
think that is a bit of a disadvantage.

::
:: I decided to stick with the T31 for now. I was tempted to get a
:: T31C, just in case I upgrade the receiver within the next 2-4 years.
:: But I was not sure if the T31C is compatible with the A1 receiver.
:: I'm "sure" it is. But whereas the WL specs say the WL is, the T31C
:: specs say nothing about backward compatibility (sigh). I have never
:: had a problem with HRM crosstalk anyway. Then again, I have not
:: tried to use it in a field of 1000 marathon runners (yet).