Calorie Trackers

bikerchick82
bikerchick82 Posts: 11 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Hello All! Thanks for reading my post. I was hoping to get some advice from someone who may know better than me. I am an avid biker, biking up to 2.5 hours a day. I use Endomondo to track my speed, duration, calories, etc. Endomondo synchs with myfitnesspal. Usually my calories burned per hour is slightly less than a 1,000 per hour. That is. . . . . until tonight. My friend let me use her heart rate tracker (Polar FT4) and according to the tracker I only burned 636 in 1.5 hours (Endomondo said 1400). I biked 20 miles with an average speed of around 12 MPH.

My question is: Does anyone know which calculation is most accurate? Everything I have read online says the heart rate monitor is the best - it just seems so low. . . .

I had the monitor set correctly, I am 32 years old and weigh 190 with a resting heart rate around 65. My heart rate while working our ranged from 90-165.

Thanks for any advice :)

Replies

  • h7463
    h7463 Posts: 626 Member
    Hello! Any heart rate monitor needs to be programmed with the vital stats of the person who is wearing it, otherwise the results will not likely be correct. Out of experience with my heart rate monitors (Polar FT7 and Polar H7) the MFP calories are mostly generously overestimated. I'm only riding a stationary bike at this time, but I have compared the calorie 'guess'timates before, and they were similar to yours in MFP. The results on the bike's computer and of the heart rate monitor, however, were almost the same and much lower. E.g. 1 hr at average speed of 15 mph, 530 calories.
    If you need to track more accurately, I suggest you invest in a HR monitor, and log your results manually.
    Good luck!

Categories