Heart Rate monitors?
KimH313
Posts: 162
I use the cardio machines at the gym a lot and then log how many calories I have burned using that, but how do I know if it is really accurate? I am thinking of getting a heart rate monitor / calorie counter and am looking for advice on whether they are worth it and if they tell a different number than the calories burned on the machine? Thanks!
0
Replies
-
I have a Polar FT4 and LOVE it. I got it on Amazon for about $63.00. For me, I burn less than what the gym equipment says I burn, so I am happy that I have a much better estimate now.0
-
Kim, the best way to know exactly how many calories you are burning is with a hrm with a chest strap. I have a Polar FT-4 ($89) and I love it. The cardio machines can be very inaccurate. The elliptical is the worse. I've found it to be off by as much as 50%!0
-
thanks! i just ordered it and got it for $62 so im pretty excited! thanks!0
-
You will love it! Just an FYI, they tell you to run the electrodes on the strap under water. I hate doing that because the strap gets cold and wet, so I just take my water bottle and drop a few drops of water into the electrodes. Then my strap stays dry. If you do not put any water in there, you will find (as I did and many others on MFP) that your watch will say it cannot detect your heart rate. So definitely don't skip that step like I used to, lol0
-
DO NOT buy a timex..they are way wrong and report way more cals burned0
-
i see you ordered the FT4, nice choice! i am responding since others interested will also read this thread.
I compared HRM features and reviews for awhile before deciding what was best for me. I got a Polar FT60 and LOVE it! One of the big differences between the FT4 and the FT60 is that the FT60 will also track distance. I am not currently a runner, but will be starting the C25K in the spring and i didnt want to wish i had gotten that feature if i had gone with the FT4. FT60 is a little more in price, but i think it looks a little more stylish and i like the added features. I hope that helps!0 -
I just used my new Polar FT4 for the first time -- took a 67 minute walk/jog then looked at calories burned based on MFP rates, my pedometer's measurements, and the HRM. Check out these discrepancies: Pedometer: 391.3 calories... MFP: 418 calories... HRM (wait for it...): 602 calories!!!
I've been exercising regularly since September, and on MFP since just before T'giving, and have only lost 5lbs. I can't help but wonder if I've been undereating because I was burning more calories than I realized.0 -
You're going to love it! I also have the FT4. You'll be surprised to see the difference in accuracy between the machine and the HRM. FYI- take the Wearlink off the chest strap when you aren't using it to save the battery. It probably seems obvious, but I was just throwing it in my bag after rinsing it. The manual probably tells this, but I didn't read it all and the battery died way to soon.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions