Fitbit and a hrm

higgins8283801

So I have both a fitbit and a hrm. I got the fitbit as a bday gift where I got the polar early few weeks earlier.

Anyway, I wear both when I workout and am confused. I do 46-1 hour walking the beach and according to the hrm I burn anywhere from 400-500 calories. I've found that if I stay in the looser sand I burn more, whereas right along the coast, I burn less.

However the fitbit only says I burn 186, so I constantly have to readjust what fitbit tells mfp.

I guess I'm wondering, should I be doing that? Which one is more accurate? According to the heart rate monitor I keep my heart on zone for 30-40 minutes during the workout as well.

The_Enginerd

The fit bit acts as a pedometer and estimates your distance traveled and calories burned from your step data and the info you input. It has no way to tell what you are walking on, it assumed a hard surface. It will estimate lower than actual for loose sand.

The HRM will not be accurate for low intensity workouts such as walking, it is most accurate for activities such as running and biking when set up properly and with caveats. Most HRMs will overestimate for a walk.

Really, it's probably some where in between.

edit: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/356430-calories-burned-walking-on-the-beach?page=1

stumblinthrulife

The fit bit acts as a pedometer and estimates your distance traveled and calories burned from your step data and the info you input. It has no way to tell what you are walking on, it assumed a hard surface. It will estimate lower than actual for loose sand.

The HRM will not be accurate for low intensity workouts such as walking, it is most accurate for activities such as running and biking when set up properly and with caveats. Most HRMs will overestimate for a walk.

Really, it's probably some where in between.

edit: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/356430-calories-burned-walking-on-the-beach?page=1

Seriously, though. This.