HRM Compared to MFP and Cardio Equip

got2befitnow

I bought a Polar FT4 last week, and have been using it for my workouts to get an accurate reading of calories burned. My question is, why are the calories burned so different? I get that there's going to be more precision with an HRM, but I've found that it's a really big difference compared to what MFP suggests or the cardio equipment I'm using.

An example of this would be when I workout on the elliptical. If I do 45 mins on the elliptical, the machine tells me I burned about 600 cals, MFP says it's 570 cals (both pretty close to each other), but my HRM says it's 355 calories. Yes, it's great to know what I'm actually burning, but why is it such a big difference?

Thanks for the help!

Graelwyn75

Because I guess Mfp and the machines go on averages or somesuch.
Or maybe assume the most strenuous effort level.
I burn over 600 an hour on the elliptical which is pretty close to the mfp calculation.
However, mfp tends to be off on walking for me, and for running.

missmegan831

I too have a Polar ft4 and love it... I think (dont quote me on this) that sometimes the machines are off depending on whether your personal info has been entered into it, and I personally believe that MFP over estimates a lot of the exercise/activites on this site... the trainer at the gym said that HRM is a good baseline but dont be fooled into thinking they are 100% accurate, even the website reviews show a 20-23% error , so I only log 80% of what the HRM says.