What do you burn with your chest strap HRM?

just2liveagain

Great Topic and know where your coming from, just a question I'm not sure about.

I got the Polar F4 recently and say you exercise for 30mins and check the watch
should you be IN Zone for the full 30 mins, what way does that work.

Granted I'm new to this whole HRM thing, lol but if I'm reading your question right, no I don't think you should be "in the zone" for the whole 30 minutes if the video is only 30 min long. For example my turbo jam workout video I exercised 44 minutes, but was only in the zone 33 minutes, so for a 30 minute video I would think around 20-23 maybe you'd be in the actual zone, accounting for warm and cool down within those 30 min in which you're HR is not up. Hope that helps, if not I'm sorry lol

SarahMorganP

I just got my Polar F7 last week and I have found that during my walks I burn a lot more than what MFP says. The HRM says I burn 145 calories for a 20min walk but MFP says 90. But the HRM says less when I do the elliptical. HRM says 200 for 20min on the elliptical but closer to 300 on the machine and here on MFP. I am glad that my calorie burns are higher while walking than I thought because that is what I do every day.

Olive32214

Great Topic and know where your coming from, just a question I'm not sure about.

I got the Polar F4 recently and say you exercise for 30mins and check the watch
should you be IN Zone for the full 30 mins, what way does that work.

Granted I'm new to this whole HRM thing, lol but if I'm reading your question right, no I don't think you should be "in the zone" for the whole 30 minutes if the video is only 30 min long. For example my turbo jam workout video I exercised 44 minutes, but was only in the zone 33 minutes, so for a 30 minute video I would think around 20-23 maybe you'd be in the actual zone, accounting for warm and cool down within those 30 min in which you're HR is not up. Hope that helps, if not I'm sorry lol

Yes that helps,but I'll give you more detail. I'm 5'7" and 255lbs and workout on Wii Zumba 2 at home. I do 2, 35mins,
1 in the morn and 1 in the late afternoon. My HRM reads 25mins IN ZONE for morning workout (which I reckon is right) but sometimes
I only get 18mins for the afternoon. Would that be because I'm not giving it the same as the morning. I'd appreciate any
thoughts and Thanks in advance....

niknanette

I have the ft4 and burn between 360-530 for cardio party. It depends how much effort I put in on any given day. But I only do that once or twice a week, I try to switch it up every day so I don't get bored. I weigh about 175.

just2liveagain

Great Topic and know where your coming from, just a question I'm not sure about.

I got the Polar F4 recently and say you exercise for 30mins and check the watch
should you be IN Zone for the full 30 mins, what way does that work.

Granted I'm new to this whole HRM thing, lol but if I'm reading your question right, no I don't think you should be "in the zone" for the whole 30 minutes if the video is only 30 min long. For example my turbo jam workout video I exercised 44 minutes, but was only in the zone 33 minutes, so for a 30 minute video I would think around 20-23 maybe you'd be in the actual zone, accounting for warm and cool down within those 30 min in which you're HR is not up. Hope that helps, if not I'm sorry lol

Yes that helps,but I'll give you more detail. I'm 5'7" and 255lbs and workout on Wii Zumba 2 at home. I do 2, 35mins,
1 in the morn and 1 in the late afternoon. My HRM reads 25mins IN ZONE for morning workout (which I reckon is right) but sometimes
I only get 18mins for the afternoon. Would that be because I'm not giving it the same as the morning. I'd appreciate any
thoughts and Thanks in advance....

I would think that is the reason why, maybe you can try glancing at your watch more often during the workout and see if your HR is displayed the whole time, and also check to see that you're in your zone. I know mine makes a beeping sounds when I go to and from the different levels of my THR but it's so soft I can't always hear the beep, so I'm looking at my watch every few minutes just to check and see that I'm still in the zone!

just2liveagain

I have the ft4 and burn between 360-530 for cardio party. It depends how much effort I put in on any given day. But I only do that once or twice a week, I try to switch it up every day so I don't get bored. I weigh about 175.

SEE! I weigh almost twice as much as you, I push myself very hard throughout the workout, and only 248 for 40 min. It must be that I am getting used to these 2 particular videos, now I gotta go exercise and test it out, it's driving me insane!

giggitygoo

Those numbers do seem a bit low. That's really odd.

I burn 350-400 usually for 60 minutes of intense work, and I'm sitting at around 110 right now.

I have a different HRM than you, but it took me a while to get the hang of it. My readings were quite low the fist few times, and then I started wearing it higher and the results changed.


I used to wear the strap under the bottom of my sports bra, more mid rib. I changed to wearing right under my boobs, like right under the bottom crease of my breasts, and got more accurate readings. Now, my sports bra is actually over the chest strap.

Probably a boobie over-share, but hopefully useful.

Kristinemomof3

I have an FT7 and also do Turbo Jam, that's about what I burn for that. I know, sometimes it seems one should burn more, but everyone is different.

LTRUITT3

I do Walk Away The Pounds faitfully, and today I burned 253 calories for the 2mile walk. But I do use weights while doing it and instead of walking at times I jog.

Getting a HRM is a huge eye opener compared to what machines and MFP says. Good luck to you.

jody664

I got a HRM for valentines day too (how romantic!). My problem was the opposite, I was burning far more calories then I was guesstimating.

Same here. My treadmill would say I burned 150 cal in 30 minutes, but with the HRM, it's closer 230-250. Today, I did 30 minutes on the Arc Trainer, and burned 256 calories in 30 minutes. My stats: 5'0", 187 lb, age 46.

jennifershoo

I just ordered a Polar FT60. Can't wait to use it! I will post my stats in this thread when I have it.

jaygirl3

your HRM is most likely correct

Rahul_ahuja

Ok im sorry if im posting here as I guess this is the female section or something but still i would like to answer your question i use ft7 and on a daily basis i am burning approx 900 calories currently my weight is 172.6lbs and im 5'11 i am burning this by doing turbo fire 55 ez hiit 20 and stretch 10 on a daily basis i dont know why i am burning that much maybe coz im only 18 or im male however the workouts are preity much intence.

jennifershoo

@OP,
Maybe you're really fit! I have a friend who's twice my weight, but can hike a mountain every weekend. I can't. I get out of breath easily (ok, my years of smoking didn't help, even if I quit 10 years ago). So, he burns less calories than me for the same activity. I know it sucks in a way because you need to push yourself harder to burn the cals.

Taymay75

I just got my HRM on Valentine's Day and it's a Polar FT7. I do the Leslie Sansone Express Walk 4 mile DVD (54 minutes) and today I burned 408 calories and yesterday I burned 430 calories (I guess I worked harder yesterday). I'm 45 years old; 5'6 and 200 pounds.

Mmissy104

I have a polar ft7 and I love it! Definetly way under what mfp estimates, but not that drastically. Make sure all the settings are set to you. The height, weight, female....ect. Also make sure your Max heart rate is set right. That will REALLY effect your calorie burn if it is too high or too low.

just2liveagain

@OP,
Maybe you're really fit! I have a friend who's twice my weight, but can hike a mountain every weekend. I can't. I get out of breath easily (ok, my years of smoking didn't help, even if I quit 10 years ago). So, he burns less calories than me for the same activity. I know it sucks in a way because you need to push yourself harder to burn the cals.

I've had a few ppl write and tell me that, it's hard to believe because of my weight, but I guess with trying to lose weight so many times over the past year I could of gotten my body in better condition even though I haven't been steadily exercising every single day or anything throughout the last year, I still exercise on a fairly regular basis, more than what I have in the years before now. I notice a lot of ppl are saying they burn major calories on a treadmill or elliptical running or jogging, so maybe I need to take it outside and speed walk/jog to see some calories burned!

salene17

I don't trust what my new ft7 said I burned in step class this morning. I know I push, and I still have about 30 pounds to lose... but it seemed as though my heart rate seemed high... often high 180s and even 190. I found myself dropping my risers to bring it down... which it did... but only by about 10 bps. This is a class I have been doing for 4 years and is very intense... but not THAT intense... Even with my extra weight.

I read another forum that said to tighten your strap if your rate seems high so I am going to try that next time. My high was 193 with an average of 174 and that was because I was deliberately trying to bring it down which was a little boring for me... I like to get into it! I want to trust my HRM... bot I don't think I burned over 600 calories in 50 minutes of step... no matter how intense.... I am 42 and have all my stats entered correctly... and I even raised my max heart rate in the settings as advised on another MFP thread to get more accurate stats.... I know it will take awhile, but I really want to figure this thing out!

bek416

After reading this thread, I have some questions.
I've seen posts from all different weights, height, workout intensity --- why does any of that matter, if calorie burn is based on heart rate intensity? The percentage of your own max heart rate, and how long you stay there is what I thought this device was for, and that's how I thought calorie burn was calculated, is this not correct?

Let me give an example... many of you have said what your heart rate is (ex, 150-160, etc) - depending on age, that is a different PERCENTAGE for each person.
In other words, I am 40 years old. I am a woman. My max HR is 186. Working at 75% of this means my heart rate is staying at 139. Working at 80% it is 148. Obviously working at a higher percentage will yield more of a calorie burn. The difference is the EFFORT each person has to exert in order to get to this heart rate zone. Personally, because I'm out of shape and overweight, it doesn't take long or much effort to get to 80% of my max, whereas someone younger, lighter and in better shape may take quite a bit of effort to get to 80% and hold there for 45 minutes. That person is going to have to work harder than I will to maintain that level of exertion - whereas, since I haven't gotten my *kitten* off the couch for 6 months, it only takes me a leisurely pace to maintain that level. Once I get in better shape, I will have to work harder to get that rate up and keep it there. But isn't it apples to apples when we talk about calories burned at a certain percentage? If my friend Sara is 300 lbs, and I am only 160 - and we both walk for 45 minutes, me at 4 mph, her at 1 mph - but we both maintain that 75% of max HR, aren't we burning the same calories? I realize she is pulling more weight, but she's also walking much slower (exerting less effort) than I am to get to 75% and stay there.

Please tell me this makes sense to someone.......lol I'm just trying to get a handle on heart rate training and why/how it benefits me in my efforts to lose weight.

just2liveagain

After reading this thread, I have some questions.
I've seen posts from all different weights, height, workout intensity --- why does any of that matter, if calorie burn is based on heart rate intensity? The percentage of your own max heart rate, and how long you stay there is what I thought this device was for, and that's how I thought calorie burn was calculated, is this not correct?

Let me give an example... many of you have said what your heart rate is (ex, 150-160, etc) - depending on age, that is a different PERCENTAGE for each person.
In other words, I am 40 years old. I am a woman. My max HR is 186. Working at 75% of this means my heart rate is staying at 139. Working at 80% it is 148. Obviously working at a higher percentage will yield more of a calorie burn. The difference is the EFFORT each person has to exert in order to get to this heart rate zone. Personally, because I'm out of shape and overweight, it doesn't take long or much effort to get to 80% of my max, whereas someone younger, lighter and in better shape may take quite a bit of effort to get to 80% and hold there for 45 minutes. That person is going to have to work harder than I will to maintain that level of exertion - whereas, since I haven't gotten my *kitten* off the couch for 6 months, it only takes me a leisurely pace to maintain that level. Once I get in better shape, I will have to work harder to get that rate up and keep it there. But isn't it apples to apples when we talk about calories burned at a certain percentage? If my friend Sara is 300 lbs, and I am only 160 - and we both walk for 45 minutes, me at 4 mph, her at 1 mph - but we both maintain that 75% of max HR, aren't we burning the same calories? I realize she is pulling more weight, but she's also walking much slower (exerting less effort) than I am to get to 75% and stay there.

Please tell me this makes sense to someone.......lol I'm just trying to get a handle on heart rate training and why/how it benefits me in my efforts to lose weight.

I see what you're saying and I found myself the same thing, how can one person no matter what age, weight, burn more than another of a different age and weight if they are both working at the same percentage of each individual's max HR. I don't get it myself, and would be interested in seeing how this works, because after using my HR a few more time since this post, one of which was the 4 mile express walk for an hour, I kept my heart rate steadily at 80% of my max HR except for in the last about 10 minutes, (cooking down), and didn't even burn 300 calories in that hour, I really worked myself to the max, even jogging in place for most of the workout, I figure at over 300 lbs working at that 80% for an hour straight, I would burn more, a lot more than 280. It seems no matter workout I do for whatever time, 30-60 minutes, I burn the same amount of calories, doesn't make sense to me.

I'm beginning to wonder if the whole "the more you weigh the more calories you burn" thing is a load of crap and it really doesn't matter what your stats are. Idk I'm just confused. I feel like it's a waste of money to have bought this, I mean it's good cuz now I know what I typically burn for 30-60 min of exercise, as I've tried various different workouts, if in fact my HRM is in good working condition and it's telling me my calories burned accurately, what do I really need it for now? I mean, if the whole weight per calories thing is true, then the thinner I get I'm just gonna burn less and less than 200-something an hour right? So as it stands right now, it seems I will never burn more than that in an hour of exercise no matter what? I can just eat my calories MFP sets for me, and not even worry about eating back exercise calories, since it's so few anyway.