Heart Rate Monitor Help

EchoOfYourPast

I recently purchased a New Balance Heart Rate monitor....i used it during Jillian Michaels 30 DS and it said i burned 30 calories....then about an hour later....i used it during Kettle Worx kettlebell workout and for 40 min it showed i burned 34 calories.
My height,weight,birthday, stride and all the stuff was programmed into the monitor. It is a watch style HRM. MFP shows for aerobics general i burn at least 125 calories in 20 minutes. I know i burned more during the Kettle Worx because i was really sweating. Is my heart rate monitor incorrect, is this not a good heartrate monitor...should i return it and buy a different one?

Thanks,
San

dad106

Yes, you should return it ASAP and buy a Polar.

The reason why it is giving you so low readings is because it does not have a chest strap.. so it only takes your heart rate when you touch it. So if you touch it once and it reads 90, it's going to base the calorie burn off 90 until you touch it again. If your heart rate was really low when you first touched it and if you didn't touch it again, it would explain the low calorie count.

CatseyeHardcast

Not knowing what model you have. My first thing would be to check the fit of the chest strap, make sure contact is correct. Sometimes some water rubbed on the readers will help.

But yes you should be burning much more than that.

EchoOfYourPast

Will replace it for a chest strap one either today or tomorrow....any suggestions on a good brand.....I prefer something easy to use...it took me a bit to figure out how to program the watch one...

Thank you all for your help,
San

mgs68pony

I bought the Polar FT7 and love it!

mfjutras

Polar FT7 all the way!

tryinghard71

I have a Polar FT40. It has a chest strap and watch. I have read that the ones with chest straps are more accurate.

EchoOfYourPast

Thanks ...very very much.....3 for Polar so far ..yeah...i'll look 4 a polar
San

AHoggins

FT40

EchoOfYourPast

Out of the FT7 and FT40

-what are some of the features you like
-ease of use

Thanks,
Sandra

EchoOfYourPast

Not knowing what model you have. My first thing would be to check the fit of the chest strap, make sure contact is correct. Sometimes some water rubbed on the readers will help.

But yes you should be burning much more than that.

The New Balance one...didn't have a chest strap!! It was junk

EchoOfYourPast

Thanks for your help...i switched mine for a Polar FT40 ..... it was an additional $90 ...but i can actually use it....it was super easy to program and i am very pleased with it !!!

Did the same workout today and it read at 177 calories.....sounds more reasonable than the 30 !


San

AmyRhubarb

It's not the brand, it's the type of HRM that's the problem. I started with a watch-only New Balance as well. Entered all my info and all that, but got frustrated with the fact that I had to stop and touch the watch to take a heart rate throughout the workout. Of course, the more often you take a reading the more accurate it will be in calculating calorie burn, but its not as accurate as the chest strap models which monitor your heart the entire time. And of course, it's very freeing to not have to stop & take a reading, and hope it reads the first time, etc, etc.

I ditched the watch-only model, did some research here and on Amazon, and narrowed my shopping down to either a Polar or a New Balance N4. Money is tight, so I turned to eBay and searched for auctions for both models, new in the box. I put them on my watch list and waited for the right deal to come up. Within a week I was the proud owner of a New Balance N4 - it works great, and I got it for $26 rather than the $70 retail it goes for in stores. i use it every day and I love it!