MFP calories burned vs. heart rate monitors

katesoats

I have found that MFP is always significantly off (over) when it comes to calories burned and cardio exercises. I guess it's just an estimate on their end but I am trying to be as exact as possible. My question is.. What has everyone found to be the best method when tracking? Do you use MFP's calories burned or your own heart rate monitors? I have a Nike+ watch that I have a Polar band for that I can use for running/spinning.. What are some of your favorite heart rate monitors?

queenliz99

I have a polar HRM with the Digfit app. I'm not sure how accurate it is but I think it is pretty close.

cwolfman13

Your HRM is likely to be the most accurate for an AEROBIC event. Databases are wildly inaccurate for anything because there are about a gazillion variables involved. You'd still want to knock of 20% or so form your HRM though to be conservative...at least I would.

The further away you get from a true aerobic activity, the less accurate a HRM will be.

NotJustADieter

I use my fitbit for daily activity and estimating the number of calories I should eat. On days when I do strength training, I just eat at maintenance.

katesoats

queenliz99 wrote: »

I have a polar HRM with the Digfit app. I'm not sure how accurate it is but I think it is pretty close.

Good to know, which Polar model do you have??

oORosadaOo

I found the opposite to be true for walking! I walk a lot and have compared several websites, apps and also used a HRM app.

The HRM gave me the highest amount of calories burned and MFP the lowest, together with Sparkpeople. Mapmywalk, Runtastic, Nike+, Endomondo and Runkeeper are in between.

Mr_Knight

HRMs will always overestimate calories burned while walking. Usually significantly.