Should I trust my HRM?

Options
lml1042
lml1042 Posts: 121
in Fitness and Exercise
I just got a polar ft7 for Christmas. I've been using it during my workouts for the past 2 days and realized that MFP was way below what my HRM says. I use the chest strap and wear the HRM correctly, but the calories burned seem a little high compared to other people doing the same workout.

For example, I did Ripped in 30 tonight, level 1 day 1 and it said I burned 340 something in the 35 minutes I had it on. Now, I was kicking butt and working at the advanced girls level, but 340? :noway: I'm 5'5'' and weigh 172 if that makes any difference.

WWYD? Trust the HRM?

Replies

  • tageekly
    tageekly Posts: 3,755 Member
    Options
    If you're really sweating that burn could be right. If you feel it's really off check your pulse to what the monitor says. Also, get that strap super wet - if the sensors on mine aren't wet enough it can skew the reading.

    I am 5'5" and weigh 193 and my burn was about 350 calories for Ripped in 30.
  • rileysowner
    rileysowner Posts: 8,237 Member
    Options
    Did you input your sex, height, weigh numbers, not to mention I think the FT7 has a fit test that you should do to get your VO2 Max number correct? If you did then I would trust the HRM. If you didn't do that.
  • schnugglebug
    schnugglebug Posts: 333 Member
    Options
    I wear my HRM it is a timex and my amount of calories burnt are WAY higher then MFP, so I go with it, and I usually only eat back half my calories... anyway just in case.

    I adjusted it, and it is apparently reading properly even had the trainer at the gym take a look at it and it is working fine...
  • ncsjodi
    ncsjodi Posts: 102 Member
    Options
    I got a HRM for Christmas too and have worn it for the past two days during Zumba and spin classes. In Zumba, it told me I burned 398 calories in about 50 minutes. For spin, I burned 410 in 48 minutes. I think it's reasonable that you could be burning 340 in 35 minutes if you're working hard. I am 5'5" and weigh about 175, so very comparable to you.
  • blink1021
    blink1021 Posts: 1,118 Member
    Options
    I have the same heart rate monitor and mine seems to be accurate. Make sure you entered your info correctly or it will be off. The instruction book will tell you how to do this. I have never done ripped in 30 so I can't compare, but the polar has worked great for me.
  • Sd0510
    Sd0510 Posts: 295 Member
    Options
    Yours sounds correct, but ironically, I asked myself this question about my HRM, except it is opposite. I know MFP usually over-estimates, so the HRM should be lower, but it is lower by about 200 calories. I might return it because it is kind of generic, only a wrist one, and my heart rate is usually lower on it than it actually is.

    Check your heart rate on it and your pulse to see how accurate it is.
  • rileysowner
    rileysowner Posts: 8,237 Member
    Options
    I wear my HRM it is a timex and my amount of calories burnt are WAY higher then MFP, so I go with it, and I usually only eat back half my calories... anyway just in case.

    I adjusted it, and it is apparently reading properly even had the trainer at the gym take a look at it and it is working fine...

    Timex HRMs are known to way over report calories burned. I have read that from a bunch of posts here.
  • rileysowner
    rileysowner Posts: 8,237 Member
    Options
    Stupid double posts.
  • CourtyMonster
    CourtyMonster Posts: 8
    Options
    As long as you have set it up correctly, it will read that heart rate the right way! I would double check your pulse against the heart rate monitor to be double sure that it's not catching a "second heart beat" if you're not wearing it in exactly the right spot on your chest.

    When I first started working out, I was pretty out of shape. I'd run 2 or 3 miles and burn tons of calories because my heart rate was so damn high - my body was working hard! My muscles were tired! My cardiovascular system was struggling! But I'm a leeeeetle bit more in shape today than I was 3 years ago - and now I find that MFP grossly OVER exaggerates my calorie burn.
  • mahidac
    mahidac Posts: 126 Member
    Options
    I had a similar experience - i ended up burning a lot more in my workouts then I originally thought, and much more then MFP estimated

    I guess trusting your HRM is the best idea
  • rileysowner
    rileysowner Posts: 8,237 Member
    Options
    Yours sounds correct, but ironically, I asked myself this question about my HRM, except it is opposite. I know MFP usually over-estimates, so the HRM should be lower, but it is lower by about 200 calories. I might return it because it is kind of generic, only a wrist one, and my heart rate is usually lower on it than it actually is.

    Check your heart rate on it and your pulse to see how accurate it is.

    A HRM without a chest strap is useless for calorie calculation. Bring it back and get one with a chest strap.
  • Sd0510
    Sd0510 Posts: 295 Member
    Options
    Yours sounds correct, but ironically, I asked myself this question about my HRM, except it is opposite. I know MFP usually over-estimates, so the HRM should be lower, but it is lower by about 200 calories. I might return it because it is kind of generic, only a wrist one, and my heart rate is usually lower on it than it actually is.

    Check your heart rate on it and your pulse to see how accurate it is.

    A HRM without a chest strap is useless for calorie calculation. Bring it back and get one with a chest strap.

    Thanks. I was planning on it, but wanted to try it out first to see how it worked. It was only $40 so I thought I would spring for it, but it seems you get what you pay for =/
  • lml1042
    lml1042 Posts: 121
    Options
    Thanks everyone! All my information was entered correctly. I'll try to pulse test to see if it's accurate. I was dripping sweat and working my butt off! Thank you again! Makes me feel good that I'm burning so many calories.
  • Pronoiac
    Pronoiac Posts: 304
    Options
    Also, test it against 'reality' for a few weeks. See what results come from esting back those calories. HRM's are generally pretty accurate.
  • dad106
    dad106 Posts: 4,868 Member
    Options
    Trust the FT7.. It is correct.

    MFP is pretty accurate but since it does not know your heart rate when calculating calories, it can be off by a bit.
  • dad106
    dad106 Posts: 4,868 Member
    Options
    I wear my HRM it is a timex and my amount of calories burnt are WAY higher then MFP, so I go with it, and I usually only eat back half my calories... anyway just in case.

    I adjusted it, and it is apparently reading properly even had the trainer at the gym take a look at it and it is working fine...

    Timex HRMs are known to way over report calories burned. I have read that from a bunch of posts here.

    This is correct.. TImex HRM"s are crap at calculating calories for women.
  • MelissaGraham7
    MelissaGraham7 Posts: 405 Member
    Options
    I tend to average 3 sources for my calories burned.... I average between the HRM (I have a Garmin 305 Forerunner), then take the MFP figure and whatever equipment I"m doing and that figure (or if running, I take a mile x113 (100 calories per mile as acknowledged by most fitness experts plus 13% over 150 which is the pounds used for the average runner). Anyway, I take the average of the 3 figures and that is what I use.
  • MelissaGraham7
    MelissaGraham7 Posts: 405 Member
    Options
    On this topic - does anyone have one of the BodyBug or similar devices that you wear all the time? I've been wanting one for about a year but keep talking myself out of it.... anyone have one??

Categories