Polar FT4 Higher calories burned then MFP?!

abwemb

I purchased a Polar FT4 heart rate monitor because I thought that MFP was overestimating my cardio workouts. I like to eat back every calorie

Well I used it for the the first time today. I did a 45 minute workout (37 minutes of walking at 4.0, and 8 minutes of running at 5.2). I have done this same exercise the past three days (using C25K plan). The first two days (without my hrm), the treadmill and mfp were only off 3 calories from each other, saying that I had burned 254 and 257 respectively. When I did that same workout with my hrm, it said I had burned 356 calories!!

After reading up on here, some said to take away the calories that you would burn normally if you weren't working out, which for me is about 1 calorie a minute, so taking 45 calories away, I get 311...

That seems really high for me. Is anyone else experiencing this with their hrm? I am very interested to see what it says for a Zumba or other cardio class. (I'm going to Zumba tomorrow afternoon hopefully, and I'm interested to see what it says!)

For Zumba, I feel like mfp really overestimates for me, so when I do a full class, I usually just put it that I did 30-40 minutes depending on how hard I pushed myself...

jzs20

I have the ft4 and noticed the same thing.
My elliptical gives about 160 calories less than my ft4 ... Bottom line
I would trust the hrm before the treadmill or MFP calculator.
Or just go with whatever gives the higher calorie read lol

abwemb

Sounds good to me
My husband told me that I had to do whatever the HRM said since I spent money on it! Lol.

baileyang33

I get the opposite. Yesterday the elliptical was about 10-20 calories off with machine higher and MFP was 70 calories higher. I always go with the HRM.

sewwy

Trust the HRM. The device has been given information including weight, height, and is regularly measuring your heart rate, and so should more accurately be able to calculate your calorie output than any training machine or MFP.

debraran1

MIne seemed lower but then I realized I hadn't put my weight in accurately. Overall I trust the HRM over the estimated MFP calories, how can 350 for circuit training fit everyone?

It seemed very accurate when I walked/ran, the least when I do a lot of circuits with floor work...for some reason it says my heart rate drops a lot but I know I'm still huffing and puffing with the same exertion.

FirecrackerJess

MIne seemed lower but then I realized I hadn't put my weight in accurately. Overall I trust the HRM over the estimated MFP calories, how can 350 for circuit training fit everyone?

It seemed very accurate when I walked/ran, the least when I do a lot of circuits with floor work...for some reason it says my heart rate drops a lot but I know I'm still huffing and puffing with the same exertion.

Crap. This reminded me I haven't updated my HRM with my current weight...

But yeah, go with the HRM. I always get the opposite, the machine would say 534 or whatever, and my HRM would say 354 or so. Machine is always HIGHER than my HRM for me at least.

debraran1

I've read many times the EFX machine is the worst among the "too high" offenders. I remember thinking, "No way did I do 700 cal burn on this machine" for an under hour workout.

I just try to stay within my lowest estimates most of the time, allowing for fluctuations. I forgot to change my weight after 25 pounds....not huge difference but one of my DVD workouts dropped from a little over 200 to under 200. Makes sense though, the fitter you are, the less you burn.

abwemb

I figured out that I burn about 1.8 calories per minute when just sitting, so I subtract those calories from what the HRM says, to get the amount of calories I should actually eat back.