Heart Rate monitor

Options
2»

Replies

  • debraran1
    debraran1 Posts: 520 Member
    Options
    I have a Polar Ft4 and like it a lot. I use gel more than water (spectra 360) it lasts longer and you only need a little bit.
    My HRM never gives me high calories burned as other devices but I don't mind, I feel it's accurate within 50 calories and I know when I ran, I burned around 100 calories a mile, so I don't expect more when doing a similar time/cardio type exercise. I also notice the calories dropping slightly as I get in better shape for the same DVD for instance and I think that is also a good indicator...less energy expended so you have to bump it up a notch if you want to burn more...a good thing though to see as you progress. I also notice the quick drop in HR as I got more in shape when I rested.

    When I have to start eating back some calories, which I don't do now, I would rather err on the side of caution...I knew years ago the 700 calories on the EFX was wrong but it still made me feel a little too generous with the snacks later. ; )
  • WAHMto5
    WAHMto5 Posts: 375 Member
    Options
    I also have the FT4 and love it!
  • wmbrett
    wmbrett Posts: 31 Member
    Options
    Another option besides a heart rate monitor is a Fitbit. It may not be as accurate as a HRM, but it works well in my maintenance phase. It is a fancy pedometer that syncs with MFP and tells you how many calories you burn during the day above your expected MFP calorie burn. It then adds (or subtracts) calories to your MFP daily calorie numbers. You can wear it on your wrist and forget it. It is fairly accurate for counting calories, and in my case, probably under counts calories when I exercise by about 1/4. A bonus is that you get competitive with friends to see who can log more steps and makes you much more mobile.
  • skadoosh33
    skadoosh33 Posts: 353 Member
    Options
    I've had the Polar FT7 for over a year and it is nice. I'm thinking of getting the Polar RC3 next. It has built in GPS since my iphone battery just decides to die when it wants.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    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
  • Wiltord1982
    Wiltord1982 Posts: 311 Member
    Options
    I own a Garmin Forerunner 405. It has a GPS and HR function so it's pretty useful when you want to analyze at what point of your workout you slowed down or started slacking.

    I've used it for over a year and I can't believe the progress I made. Pretty useful! It also works for indoors activity, but you have to disable the GPS function. Best thing I ever bought since I started in my fitness journey
  • SarahBeth0625
    SarahBeth0625 Posts: 685 Member
    Options
    Another Polar FT4 user here. I've had it since the end of March. I like that it made me push myself because if I see my HR dropping to 160 ("above the zone" for me is anything 161 and higher), I will push myself harder. It's caused my caloric burns to go up over time. I have nothing to compare it to but the FT4 came highly recommended by friends (on here and in real life) so you really can't beat the ~$60 pricetag.
  • VegasFit
    VegasFit Posts: 1,232 Member
    Options
    I have the Polar F11 and minus replacing the batteries it's never let me down. I use a Garmin 305 for walks, jogs and hikes. It's cool to upload and track and analyze my data. I'm waiting for my Polar Loop to come so I will probably retire my F11 now.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    Just a note on Garmins - not every model that comes with a HRM uses the HR for calorie computation. Both the 405 and 305 do not. I realize they are valuable for other reasons but if you are looking for calorie estimates based on HR makes sure it uses heart rate based calorie computation.
  • VegasFit
    VegasFit Posts: 1,232 Member
    Options
    Just a note on Garmins - not every model that comes with a HRM uses the HR for calorie computation. Both the 405 and 305 do not. I realize they are valuable for other reasons but if you are looking for calorie estimates based on HR makes sure it uses heart rate based calorie computation.

    Then how is it calculating. I never thought about it before but I check my HR wearing it at times and the calorie report seems reasonable to my activity.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    Just a note on Garmins - not every model that comes with a HRM uses the HR for calorie computation. Both the 405 and 305 do not. I realize they are valuable for other reasons but if you are looking for calorie estimates based on HR makes sure it uses heart rate based calorie computation.

    Then how is it calculating. I never thought about it before but I check my HR wearing it at times and the calorie report seems reasonable to my activity.

    It uses similar data tables to things like mapmyrun.
    I'm not saying it's not reasonable, most of these data tables are well researched and fairly reliable. Just pointing out that it isn't HR based. HR base is not necessarily the best way. The link above gives a great explanation.
  • cyndilie
    cyndilie Posts: 52
    Options
    Polar FT7!!!
  • perfect_storm
    perfect_storm Posts: 326 Member
    Options
    I have a Polar too, love it, it is almost 3 years old and still going strong.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    Since it hasn't been mentioned.

    All the currently sold Garmins base calorie burn on HR, you'd have to find an older model that didn't. As mentioned though, accurate pace (with GPS you got that) and weight (your running weight not naked weight), will have walking and running probably more accurate than cheaper HRM's. Biking can be decent if longer rides. Other activities forget it like gym classes forget it on older ones.

    In which case use this to figure out.
    http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2010/11/how-calorie-measurement-works-on-garmin.html

    For Polar, if you want a chance at any accuracy, skip the cheaper models that make the most assumptions about your stats, don't show them to you, and don't let you manually correct them with better - so skip the FT4 and FT7 and several other cheaper ones.

    The cheapest I've found with the required VO2max stat and self-test and means to manually change it - Polar RS300X.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    Since it hasn't been mentioned.

    All the currently sold Garmins base calorie burn on HR, you'd have to find an older model that didn't. As mentioned though, accurate pace (with GPS you got that) and weight (your running weight not naked weight), will have walking and running probably more accurate than cheaper HRM's. Biking can be decent if longer rides. Other activities forget it like gym classes forget it on older ones.

    In which case use this to figure out.
    http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2010/11/how-calorie-measurement-works-on-garmin.html

    For Polar, if you want a chance at any accuracy, skip the cheaper models that make the most assumptions about your stats, don't show them to you, and don't let you manually correct them with better - so skip the FT4 and FT7 and several other cheaper ones.

    The cheapest I've found with the required VO2max stat and self-test and means to manually change it - Polar RS300X.


    Good to know. I didn't realize all the new ones did. I just knew I found out my 305 didn't.
  • kariparks08
    kariparks08 Posts: 3
    Options
    I have the Polar FT7 and love it. Polar is the brand I hear most people using, but I'm sure most are good. Just make sure you get the chest strap as someone else mentioned, it is far more accurate. Also I found the website heartratemonitors.com has the best prices on them. Congrats on being so close to your goal weight, that is awesome!!!!

Categories