Body Bugg vs. HRM

ktmunchie

I have been using a heart rate monitor for about 2 years now. A friend just lent me a body bugg to try. I wore them both a few times while I was exercising and the calories burned is VERY different, like the HRM says I burned 750 calories and the body bugg say I burned only 400 calories. Does anyone know which is more accurate for determining calories burned during a work out? I am so frustrated! I don't want to eat more calories that I burn!!

Thanks for any help or advice you may have!

Awkward30

When you used the body bugg did you configure it with your stats? Those are supposed to be more accurate because they use more metrics

ktmunchie

I did configure it to me. It was actually brand new, he got it free when he joined a gym and didn't want it! :happy:

femmerides

it's always better to have a lower number...it's probably more accurate. i use the bodybugg and i work out hard and an hour workout is max at 500. never higher.

DopeItUp

Good question, I've been looking to get a new HRM or a Body Bugg. Curious to see the consensus.

stubbysticks

I use a Bodymedia Fit (similar to Bodybugg) & I've found it to be pretty accurate. I would trust that over a HRM or machine readout (or a weight loss website estimate) any day.

If you want to know for sure, just track your food & exercise for a month & compare your deficits to your actual rate of weight loss. Then you'll know which is more accurate.