fitbit or heart rate monitor

babypunkprincess

I'm wanting one of them. Not sure which. Basically I just want it for best/most accurate calorie burn.

Which one and if HRM which brand?

malibu927

They have two completely different functions for the most part. A HRM measures your heart rate and estimates calorie burn while doing steady state cardio (the most accurate activity, it becomes less reliable for interval or strength training). Fitbit monitors your movement and activity throughout the day to estimate your total calories burned (some do include heart rate monitoring, but not all).

babypunkprincess

malibu927 wrote: »

They have two completely different functions for the most part. A HRM measures your heart rate and estimates calorie burn while doing steady state cardio (the most accurate activity, it becomes less reliable for interval or strength training). Fitbit monitors your movement and activity throughout the day to estimate your total calories burned (some do include heart rate monitoring, but not all).

So a HRM would be better to estimate calories burned during a walk?

kam744

I bought a Charge HR and from my experience it is useful for calories burned even for a walk. The higher your heart rate is, the more calories it will show you burned. I believe it is more accurate than the other fitbit that doesn't measure heart rate. I think you would enjoy it more.

malibu927

babypunkprincess wrote: »

malibu927 wrote: »

They have two completely different functions for the most part. A HRM measures your heart rate and estimates calorie burn while doing steady state cardio (the most accurate activity, it becomes less reliable for interval or strength training). Fitbit monitors your movement and activity throughout the day to estimate your total calories burned (some do include heart rate monitoring, but not all).

So a HRM would be better to estimate calories burned during a walk?

If you're looking for something to only wear during walks, then yes. Fitbit would likely be a bit more accurate, but it is meant to be worn all day.

LannyaB

I have a Fitbit charge HR and love it, but HRM (chest strap) is going to give you a more accurate read on your heart rate therefore better at calculating calories. Polar is a good brand.

JDMac82

I use the FB Charge HR, does both for you and tracks stairs climbed too.

Sued0nim

babypunkprincess wrote: »

malibu927 wrote: »

They have two completely different functions for the most part. A HRM measures your heart rate and estimates calorie burn while doing steady state cardio (the most accurate activity, it becomes less reliable for interval or strength training). Fitbit monitors your movement and activity throughout the day to estimate your total calories burned (some do include heart rate monitoring, but not all).

So a HRM would be better to estimate calories burned during a walk?

Absolutely not

A HRM is for steady state cardio ..at some intensity ...this is a jog up, not a walk

For a walk you need a pedometer ..like a zip or one or alta (Fitbit) or other brands

The 24 hour HR wearable market is a marketers dream if you ask me ...function without rationale

Sued0nim

@adzak wrote this years back http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-21472

Much still holds true

mdrolle

Actually, either will work. An HRM measures your heart rate and calculates, using that manufacturers algorithm, calorie burn. A pedometer and a vast majority of the wearables (without HRM), measure steps taken, or more accurately, how often your wrist has moved, with the exception of a clip on type, and again, calculate based on the manufacturers algorithm.
Say you're digging in the backyard, or loading a truck, expending a good deal of energy, well, the HRM is going to give you, by far, a more accurate calorie burn statistic. For the wrist based, this is assuming it is either always on, or has a really good algorithm. Some of the wrist based actually track steps in addition to HR.
The fitness tracker is going to count how many times your wrist or your legs move because it has no idea how hard you are working.
That said, from the devices I've used, the chest strap is the most accurate of the HRM's. They are not fun to wear all day though. I just picked up a Samsung Gear 2 which has a wrist based HRM, but, it doesn't sync with MFP. There are others that do. Not sure if UA has one now or not.

Sued0nim

mdrolle wrote: »

Actually, either will work. An HRM measures your heart rate and calculates, using that manufacturers algorithm, calorie burn. A pedometer and a vast majority of the wearables (without HRM), measure steps taken, or more accurately, how often your wrist has moved, with the exception of a clip on type, and again, calculate based on the manufacturers algorithm.
Say you're digging in the backyard, or loading a truck, expending a good deal of energy, well, the HRM is going to give you, by far, a more accurate calorie burn statistic. For the wrist based, this is assuming it is either always on, or has a really good algorithm. Some of the wrist based actually track steps in addition to HR.
The fitness tracker is going to count how many times your wrist or your legs move because it has no idea how hard you are working.
That said, from the devices I've used, the chest strap is the most accurate of the HRM's. They are not fun to wear all day though. I just picked up a Samsung Gear 2 which has a wrist based HRM, but, it doesn't sync with MFP. There are others that do. Not sure if UA has one now or not.

As long as you use bio feedback from your own weight and measured intake over time the error deviation should be ok

But an HRM measures heart rate not calorie burn as you say so any interval work like digging and resting or truck loading is going to have a larger error than a steady state because HR remains high during lack of activity and is not an exact measure of oxygen uptake ...even with a chest strap

A HR monitor will provide a calorie burn during strength training that is basically nonsense and for interval work and for heat etc

So no I don't think they are interchangeable

I love my toys but use them judiciously and rely on my body over rolling 6-8 week periods rather than an algorithm underlying activity that relies on a link between HR and VO2 that isn't there during some of my activities