For those with a HRM..which is more accurate?

luvmytwins02

Ok, so I read all the time, those of you who got a HRM, say that the gym machines are way off in their total calories burned. My question is, how does MFP rank? For example, do you see that the gym machines are closer to what your HRM says, or is MFP closer?

My gym elliptical says I burn 270 calories in 31 minutes, but on this site it says I would burn 341. Just wondering how both compare with those of you who also have a HRM.

Thanks

luvmytwins02

Ok, so I read all the time, those of you who got a HRM, say that the gym machines are way off in their total calories burned. My question is, how does MFP rank? For example, do you see that the gym machines are closer to what your HRM says, or is MFP closer?

My gym elliptical says I burn 270 calories in 31 minutes, but on this site it says I would burn 341. Just wondering how both compare with those of you who also have a HRM.

Thanks

pmkelly409

MFP is very close when you can log the activity accurately - meaning when it is a specific activity like running - 6mph, or walking 3.5 mph (mod pace).

I do weight training i.e. Body Pump class three times a week with different instructors - one instructor does more of a Boot Camp style class - If I log that class as strength training - I am WAY off! It burns closer to a Kick Boxing class. If it were not for my HRM I would not be logging correctly and then of course, way off on my calorie intake.

Hope this makes sense to you.

thalli1

I also think the number of calories burned depends on your height, weight, age and fitness level. That's why the ones at the gym are often not quite as accurate.

Helawat

When I use the elliptical at the gym I input my weight and age into the machine while wearing my Polar F6 HRM; however, I often find that the elliptical tells me that I burn more than I actually do. Forty five minutes into my routine the machine will say that I burned 450 calories but I only really burned about 300.

This is my experience with the elliptical machines vs. heart rate monitor. I hope this gives you some insight.

shorerider

I have found that MFP is usually higher in its estimate that what my HRM says I've burned. Depending upon amount of time exercised, the difference increases from a few to over a hundred or more calories. It's not MFP's fault but it's simply that MFP does what any machine or website does--give an estimate and that's all it is--an estimate.

Get a HRM and be sure.

timisw

I also think the number of calories burned depends on your height, weight, age and fitness level. That's why the ones at the gym are often not quite as accurate.

Dont the formula's on MFP account for your weight? ~curious look~

I could swear my calorie usage on running is going down as my spare tire gets smaller.

hamilton4beaumont

When I use the elliptical at the gym I input my weight and age into the machine while wearing my Polar F6 HRM; however, I often find that the elliptical tells me that I burn more than I actually do. Forty five minutes into my routine the machine will say that I burned 450 calories but I only really burned about 300.

This is my experience with the elliptical machines vs. heart rate monitor. I hope this gives you some insight.

It's the same for me. MFP is a lot closer to my HRM than the machines at the gym. Sure am glad I bought one though because it's more than a few calories off at the gym... like a hundred usually.
Except for the stairmaster. It's much higher on my hrm than the machine or mfp. I think it depends on the rate at which I'm climbing.

msarro

MFP tries its best, but its only as good as the information you feed it.