Garmin HRM 600 review: A powerhouse of a heart rate monitor, but perhaps lost on just cyclists

First and foremost, the pod has been completely redesigned. There is now a button on the front, which like the HRM 200, can be used to set up pairing to avoid unwanted connections to the device, and also to check battery status thanks to the LEDs on the front. It works exactly the same way as the HRM 200, so to refresh your memory; the button needs to be held to enter pairing mode to easily connect to a bike computer or smart watch, and then single pressed in the future to wake it up.

The front LED has different flash patterns for connecting (orange flash), and connected (green dual flash). The LED can also display battery level at the point of waking up; green flash is okay, orange flash is low, red flash is critical.

Using the M-XL strap, the sizing was spot on for me, and adjusting to size was very easy. Over the course of the testing period, the strap has not moved so the fit has remained consistent; something I have had issue with on other brands’ chest straps. I really like the small tab inside of the latch, as this can be an area that causes irritation, but this removes that issue.

There aren’t grippers as such on the straps, but the large electrode reading pad has a certain grippiness, so it stays in place very easily even in hot weather with lots of sweat.

In terms of the data, I have compared it to several other heart rate monitors. Wearing a Wahoo Trackr HRM along with a Coros arm HRM and Whoop MG. The Garmin HRM 600 and Wahoo Trackr have read very closely, to the point where there is no real shift from the trend lines and data. The Whoop has been less consistent, being a wrist based one, while the Coros is solid as long as you don’t get too sweaty. In conclusion, the Garmin HRM 600 is more than accurate enough for its intended use.

This is the first rechargeable chest strap from Garmin (Image credit: Future – Andy Turner)

I am a big fan of the rechargeability of the device. A lot of coin cell heart rate monitors previously have not had battery indicators, so you only know the battery is low once it conks out during a ride. With the HRM 600, as with the 200, the LED lights tell you roughly how much battery is left, and the claimed ‘one hour per day for two months’ seems to track correctly, as after 14 hours a week for a month, I needed to recharge the unit.

Removing the pod is easy, and the cable connects securely making charging a breeze. It’s a little easier with the Trackr HRM as it is magnetic and the pod does not need removing, but equally the charger is bespoke for the Trackr and can disconnect if shifted.

The ability to take heart rate variability (HRV) is useful as a metric to track, but ideally this needs to be taken overnight or first thing in the morning, and a chest strap is not the ideal solution for this as you also need a heat unit or watch to connect to. It’s more accurate than wrist based measurements, but more of a faff. This takes us on to the next issue for cyclists, which is that many of the smart features are more relevant to runners or swimmers.

Essentially, this is the ideal heart rate monitor for triathletes, but for those who just cycle, I think many of the features on offer are somewhat superfluous and will seldom get used.

That superfluousness of features is the issue with the Garmin HRM 600. It’s a great heart rate monitor, and for swimmers, runners, or triathletes I can see real value in the additional features that it offers, but for cyclists, many of those features will not be realised, and you are paying for technology that is not going to be used. At £149.99 it is one of the more expensive heart rate monitors around.

If you want rechargeable units, the Wahoo Trackr HRM is a little over half the price at £79.99, and although it lacks HRV readings, it works very well.

The Magene H613 (£49) is even cheaper and still features the rechargeable element, but at just a third of the price. It means that realistically, for cyclists, if you want a heart rate monitor that doesn’t rely on coin cell batteries, the Garmin 600 HRM is not a good value offering.

The Garmin 600 HRM is a great heart rate monitor that is accurate, has a good battery life, features recharging, and has a whole host of smart and additional features. However, many of those smart features are somewhat limited to swimming and running, so from a purely cycling perspective, many of them are superfluous.

At £149.99, this means that this is a very expensive heart rate monitor that might not really bring anything necessary to users looking to just use it for cycling. It’s a great device, but poor value for cyclists.

Swipe to scroll horizontally

Testing scorecard and notes

Attributes

Notes

Score

Design

The strap is comfortable, easily adjustable, and secure, while the new pod relays useful information.

10/10

Performance

I can’t fault the heart rate readings, and HRV tracks with other readings.

10/10

Features

This is difficult as there are a lot of smart features, but many of them are not really of value to cyclists. But rechargeability and smart LEDs are useful features.

8/10

Value

It’s almost double the price of most competitors, but for cyclists it doesn’t really bring anything special to the table. If I was reviewing from a running, swimming, or triathlon perspective it would score far higher, but for just cycling it’s not good value.

5/10

Overall

Row 4 – Cell 1

33/40 (82.5%)

Garmin HRM 600: Price Comparison