Which HRM should I buy??

BadassBride
BadassBride Posts: 28 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I don't need a sleep tracker, pedometer, etc.

I really just want a comfortable (I have sensitive skin) heart-rate monitor so I can more accurately track calories burned during weight training. But there are so many out there!! I'd like one that's under $100.

Does anyone have one like this that they love?

Thanks!
~Sarah

Replies

  • BadassBride
    BadassBride Posts: 28 Member
    I just saw a similar post to this one, sorry about that! I'm a n00b!
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    HRMs do not accurately track weight training, so the correct answer is "None".
  • BadassBride
    BadassBride Posts: 28 Member
    edited October 2014
    Yeah, I know they don't but a ballpark would be nice. I have nothing to go on currently.
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    They don't even ballpark well. They aren't designed for tracking weightlifting. You are asking it to do something that it isn't designed to do.
  • BadassBride
    BadassBride Posts: 28 Member
    Awesome, thanks.

    Let's just say for fun, that I wanted to buy a heart rate monitor, for any reason at all.

    Does anyone have one that they really like?
  • EDollah
    EDollah Posts: 464 Member
    If you're truly just looking for a ballpark estimate, just use the MFP result. That's what I do and it costs $0.
  • YvonneBerdkan
    YvonneBerdkan Posts: 58 Member
    Polar ft4, its like $85.00 on Amazon and it is good for tracking calories burned from cardio. I have one and it does me just well for a simple hrm. It's a pretty popular product for someone not wanting to spend their life savings on one!
  • scrapjen
    scrapjen Posts: 387 Member
    I went with the PolarFT4 too ... it has a lot of good reviews.
  • lmr0528
    lmr0528 Posts: 427 Member
    Any of the Polar monitors are great. I started out with the FT4, now I have the FT60 and they both have been great tools to have.
  • BadassBride
    BadassBride Posts: 28 Member
    Thank you :)
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    If you want any chance of decent accuracy for the calorie burn for what the formula's are designed for, then the Polar RS300X is the cheapest that has the required stats.

    The cheaper Polars like FT4/7 are missing that vital stat (VO2max) and estimate it with a not very accurate method.
    RS300X has self-test for it that in study was very good up to very athletic level.

    And the MFP entry for strength training comes from MET studies, where they did measure people doing the activity for actual calorie burn.
    But that strength training entry is for heavy for you lifting, the reps up to 15 and sets and rests of 1-3 min.

    If actually doing circuit training, that's it's own.

    And yes, those entries much better than HRM, which will normally be inflated by decent amount for everything it's not intended to measure calorie count for - which is steady-state aerobic, same HR for 2-4 min, and aerobic.
    Lifting, intervals, ect, are anaerobic. Most classes and videos are non-steady state, so inflated too.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    I would say higher end Garmin or Polar (FT40 or FT60) I would not go for anything that does not allow you to change the max HR, or V02Max calculation as it will not take into account your improved fitness unless you can change these numbers.
  • Alanakrahenbil
    Alanakrahenbil Posts: 811 Member
    I got the polar ft4 and love it.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    that said, still not even remotely close for strength training as HRMs assume oxygen uptake based on % max HR, and for strength training the oxygen uptake is not the same as cardio and therefore HR would not be a good indicator of this.
  • dsjohndrow
    dsjohndrow Posts: 1,820 Member
    I had a Polar that synched with the gym machines. I have a Garmin that syncs with my run watch and my favorite is the Wahoo that syncs with Endomondo and a number of other app on iPhone and Android.
  • BusyRaeNOTBusty
    BusyRaeNOTBusty Posts: 7,166 Member
    I have a polar FT4 that I use for steady state cardio. Before I knew it was no good for lifting I tried it. It'd tell me like 400 calories for a half hour, but based on things I've read I really burn closer to 100 calories for that half hour.

    Besides we don't really lift weight to burn calories. We lift weights to build strength, retain muscle and improve health (or gain muscle if eating at a surplus). If all you want is to burn calories, cardio is the way to go.
  • Mexicanbigfoot
    Mexicanbigfoot Posts: 520 Member
    Polar FT4. It was inexpensive and it syncs with my treadmill. The chest strap (machine washable) was included. I love it!
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    GottaBeABride wrote: »
    Awesome, thanks.

    Let's just say for fun, that I wanted to buy a heart rate monitor, for any reason at all.

    Does anyone have one that they really like?

    That's a whole new question :) I use a polar FT4 for training purposes and does what it's supposed to do.

  • sherambler
    sherambler Posts: 303 Member
    I have a MIO Petite heart rate monitor watch that I really love. I think I bought it for $35 and it has served my purposes really well for the last couple of years. I actually bought it as a trial to see if I liked HRMs and if I'd want to later invest in a more expensive one, but I love it so much that I never switched. It's a simple device, not a lot of bells and whistles, but I like that. It tracks current burn, calculates over all to goal burn, and a few other things. I know Polar watches are popular though and have some friends who like theirs.

    I also have VERY sensitive skin and have not had any problems with mine, but as I haven't had any other devices, I can't say whether this is something unique to mine. I would assume not.
  • BadassBride
    BadassBride Posts: 28 Member
    This is so great! Thanks everyone for all the info and suggestions. I am new to MFP and love it so much better than WW. And it's free...I mean, come ON.

    74813511.png
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    GottaBeABride wrote: »
    Awesome, thanks.

    Let's just say for fun, that I wanted to buy a heart rate monitor, for any reason at all.

    Does anyone have one that they really like?

    So you want a toy...

    Polar FT4, it's not all that expensive and it's as inaccurate for your purposes as anything else.

    If you have money to burn, Garmin FR920XT or FENIX2, which have all kinds of handy features :)

Categories