Kinect and polar Ft7

Options
coopahson
coopahson Posts: 4 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
hope this has not been covered before but I just wanted to share my experience with these two gadgets. I have been using the KInect Ea sports active game for a while now with good results. Most of the routines I have designed for myself involve lots of running on the spot and dodging and ducking and doing squats I need fairly low impact because of the shape my knees are in. The hrm that comes with the game is accurate if placed properly, but I was not sure about the accuracy of the calorie counter, so I purchased an FT 7 hrm and wear it while playing the KInect.
As I say, the hrm monitors are really close, but the calorie count is quite different. After a typical 50 min workout the KInect tells me I burn about 450 calories, but the Polar hrm has 600 calories burned. I think the kinect stops counting calorie burn between exercises, and the Polar does not. But I am not even sure that is accurate because after this workout I take my dog for a moderate 45 min walk and according to the Polar, I burn about 400 calories. Just 200 less than the Kinect workout.
I find I need the feedback od these gadgets, including weighing daily and using my fitness pal, to motivate myself. It's working, as I have lost 25 pounds in about 6 weeks. There are a few more KInect fitness games I want to get, now that I can more accurately track how many calories I am burning. Hope somebody finds this info useful.

Replies

  • SarahofTwins
    SarahofTwins Posts: 1,169 Member
    Options
    This was helpful to me! Thank you! Ive been doing dance central these past 2 months and wondered if the cals were the same bc I just bought an HRM. I hope I can get the exact cals now :)
  • gatorflyer
    gatorflyer Posts: 536 Member
    Options
    I would be more inclined to believe the Polar HRM than the Kinect. The polar is very specific to you. The kinect is as specific as can be, but I think its less able to detect "effort" you make doing individual exercises. I'm sure there are parameters in the Kinect that are at least partially based on "a typical person weighing X amount of pounds" vs the Polar HRM (or any other reliable HRM) that is reading your numbers based on you, weighing X amount of pounds and having other specific features such as age, weight, height, etc.
  • wightsurfer
    wightsurfer Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    I've used three different Polar HRMs and they are usually very accurate, as long as you have input your settings accurately. As for burning 400 calories in 45 minutes walking, that is definately possible if your heart rate gets into your fat burning zone for the time you are walking. If you are unsure of the different zones, may I suggest downloading Brian Mac's Fat Burning Zone Excel Spreadsheet as this will tell you what heart rates are in which zone http://www.brianmac.co.uk/hrm1.htm).

    I sometimes use my HRM on one of the Exercise machines (treadmill, Cross Trainer etc) that have been designed to use with Polar HRMs and I find, if anything, that the machine says I burn more calories than my HRM says I have.

Categories