Accuracy? HR Monitor VS Machine

Options
staci_metzger
staci_metzger Posts: 29 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I have a Golds Gym treadmill at home that I use almost every day. It doesn't let you put in your age/weight but does have a hr check and shows calories burned. I have been going with that for months but for the last month now I have been going with my HR monitor. It allows me to put in my age/gender and shows my calories burned. The problem I am having is the calories burned are way off from each other. Just today I did 60 minutes on the treadmill. It showed 397 calories burned. My HR monitor, which I forgot to set until after I had already been going for 13 minutes, said I burned 689 calories. This seems like a big difference to me. When I'm on the treadmill I do intervals, changing the speed every few minutes, use different weights in my hands, and change the incline. This makes it difficult to "label" my exercise with MFP so I really need to go off of my HR but I don't know which one is the accurate one to use. I'm female, 5'3 and 247 pounds so I know I'm not close to the manufacturers 'preset' weight on my machine or monitor. Any suggestions on which one I should go with or if there is a formula I can use to see which is more accurate? Thanks ahead of time:)

Replies

  • Mad_Dog_Muscle
    Mad_Dog_Muscle Posts: 1,251 Member
    Options
    ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS trust the HRM versus the machine. Assuming you have a HRM with a chest strap. I have literally found machines to be as much as half off. In one case, my HRM showed I had burned around 700 cals, but the machine said over 1300!!! I was a bit taken back to be honest, but have never worked out without my HRM since.
  • fitniknik
    fitniknik Posts: 713 Member
    Options
    go with the hrm with chest strap... its still not exact- but its lots closer!
  • katcena
    katcena Posts: 326 Member
    Options
    I agree, go wtiht he HRM. You cal burn on the treadmill are way too low in my estimation based on the info you just gave with your weight and height, etc. The HRM will be much more accurate.
  • kim_mc
    kim_mc Posts: 321 Member
    Options
    What about HRM with chest strap vs bodybugg??
    I really want to say the HRM is more accurate because it's so much higher, but i just make myself put the lower of the two. Sometimes it's over 100 cal difference?!
  • angebean
    angebean Posts: 195 Member
    Options
    Go with the HRM if it's the kind with a chest strap. I bought one a month or so ago and for the first time wore it on the ellipitcal for an hour. The machine said 861 cals and my HRM was 516!! 350 cals difference. =(
  • staci_metzger
    staci_metzger Posts: 29 Member
    Options
    Thank you all for your suggestions! I will go with my HR monitor, I had a feeling it was better but now I feel more comfortable going with it:)
  • Simone1970
    Simone1970 Posts: 67
    Options
    Most definitely the Heart Rate Monitor.
  • wolfchild59
    wolfchild59 Posts: 2,608 Member
    Options
    I'd say you can trust the HRM. I'm 5'5" and just under 133lbs and do a similar thing on the treadmill (changing inclines, speeds, etc., though, no additional weights) and I burn around 600ish for 60 min. So yours sounds pretty right on.

    And I hated seeing my HRM burn vs. the elliptical machine burn. That one was definitely painful. Even with my age and weight entered, the elliptical is always 175-200 more than my HRM. Grrrr...

Categories