New heart rate monitor!

Options
erin1205
erin1205 Posts: 99
in Health and Weight Loss
I received my Polar F11 heart rate monitor early this afternoon. Spent about an hour playing with it-so much fun! And used it for the first time for exercise this evening at the gym. I am really loving it...but curious about one thing. I obviously know that the heart rate monitor is more accurate as far as telling me how many calories I've burned because it takes in more factors than the treadmill (height, gender, fitness level..) but how could the two be SO drastically different. For example, tonight I ran/walked for 40 minutes. The treadmill told me I burned 390 calories, while the new heart rate monitor said 640!!! :noway: WHAT?!?! All this time I have been THAT far off...is that really possible?

All of you with heart rate monitors out there...did you find the same thing when you got yours?

Replies

  • erin1205
    erin1205 Posts: 99
    Options
    I received my Polar F11 heart rate monitor early this afternoon. Spent about an hour playing with it-so much fun! And used it for the first time for exercise this evening at the gym. I am really loving it...but curious about one thing. I obviously know that the heart rate monitor is more accurate as far as telling me how many calories I've burned because it takes in more factors than the treadmill (height, gender, fitness level..) but how could the two be SO drastically different. For example, tonight I ran/walked for 40 minutes. The treadmill told me I burned 390 calories, while the new heart rate monitor said 640!!! :noway: WHAT?!?! All this time I have been THAT far off...is that really possible?

    All of you with heart rate monitors out there...did you find the same thing when you got yours?
  • lizard9800
    lizard9800 Posts: 474 Member
    Options
    I should get mine tomorrow so I will try it out and let you know.
  • jvball21
    jvball21 Posts: 33
    Options
    I have a Mio wrist heart rate monitor and I too find that it reads different than my treadmill at home. I trust it more than the treadmill reading because it tends to be more in line with other activities I've compared ti to online. Does the one you have give you a constant reading as you're working out? Just curious because I'm looking for one that does just that.
  • erin1205
    erin1205 Posts: 99
    Options
    I should get mine tomorrow so I will try it out and let you know.

    Thanks lizard-I'm sure you will love it! I was able to run so much longer because I was so distracted by concentrating on my heart rate that I didn't get bored or tired! :laugh:

    By no means am I complaining about burning more calories than I have thought but just wanted to make sure I wasn't the only one!!
  • erin1205
    erin1205 Posts: 99
    Options
    I have a Mio wrist heart rate monitor and I too find that it reads different than my treadmill at home. I trust it more than the treadmill reading because it tends to be more in line with other activities I've compared ti to online. Does the one you have give you a constant reading as you're working out? Just curious because I'm looking for one that does just that.

    Hey jvball-yeah I think I definitely trust this one more than the machines. Especially considering they take in a few more factors than the standard gym equipment. The Polar F11 does do a running heart rate and calorie burn. It has a ton of other really cool features-I'm still figuring it all out!
  • songbyrdsweet
    songbyrdsweet Posts: 5,691 Member
    Options
    The Polar is accurate within 15%, but it also includes your BMR (you'd burn those calories jut sitting around) so for the best accuracy, subtract what your BMR would burn in that amount of time.

    For instance:

    My BMR is 1265, or 53 cal/hr for 24 hours.
    If I exercise for one hour and burn 600 calories, I subtract 53 calories; I've burnt 547.

    That way you don't get a doubling-up of BMR calories from what MFP calculates and what your watch includes.
  • erin1205
    erin1205 Posts: 99
    Options
    The Polar is accurate within 15%, but it also includes your BMR (you'd burn those calories jut sitting around) so for the best accuracy, subtract what your BMR would burn in that amount of time.

    For instance:

    My BMR is 1265, or 53 cal/hr for 24 hours.
    If I exercise for one hour and burn 600 calories, I subtract 53 calories; I've burnt 547.

    That way you don't get a doubling-up of BMR calories from what MFP calculates and what your watch includes.

    Ah ha! Well, now that makes a bit more sense-I didn't think of that! :smile:

    Thanks songbyrdsweet-you are a wealth of knowledge!!
  • songbyrdsweet
    songbyrdsweet Posts: 5,691 Member
    Options
    The Polar is accurate within 15%, but it also includes your BMR (you'd burn those calories jut sitting around) so for the best accuracy, subtract what your BMR would burn in that amount of time.

    For instance:

    My BMR is 1265, or 53 cal/hr for 24 hours.
    If I exercise for one hour and burn 600 calories, I subtract 53 calories; I've burnt 547.

    That way you don't get a doubling-up of BMR calories from what MFP calculates and what your watch includes.

    Ah ha! Well, now that makes a bit more sense-I didn't think of that! :smile:

    Thanks songbyrdsweet-you are a wealth of knowledge!!

    Thank you :) I hope you enjoy your watch, I love mine!! I love all the cool stuff it has. :)
  • banks1850
    banks1850 Posts: 3,475 Member
    Options
    600 does sound like a lot for 40 minutes. You may want to check and make sure you put everything in correctly. My polar has a different rate then my treadmill, but ALWAYS lower. For instance, I ran for 30 minutes yesterday at 7.5 mph and the treadmill said I worked somewhere in the neighborhood of 560 cals, where my polar said 450 (I use the polar). I wasn't aware that you needed to subtract your BMR from the watch. I would have assumed it did that for you but you learn something new...
  • erin1205
    erin1205 Posts: 99
    Options
    600 does sound like a lot for 40 minutes. You may want to check and make sure you put everything in correctly. My polar has a different rate then my treadmill, but ALWAYS lower. For instance, I ran for 30 minutes yesterday at 7.5 mph and the treadmill said I worked somewhere in the neighborhood of 560 cals, where my polar said 450 (I use the polar). I wasn't aware that you needed to subtract your BMR from the watch. I would have assumed it did that for you but you learn something new...

    Hey banks-thanks for the tip! I went through all of the settings again this morning and as far as I can tell-it is all set correctly. It does seem high though doesn't it? Well, today I head to the gym for bodypump and spin class. We'll see what it says today, although I don't have machines to compare it to for either of those classes...hmm.
  • pam0206
    pam0206 Posts: 700 Member
    Options
    Yeah, I have an F4 and I've found that the hrm is lower than what my treadmill says. I love it, though. I can see how hard my heart is working and it's definitely a distraction! Enjoy your classes and let us know about your cals!
  • banks1850
    banks1850 Posts: 3,475 Member
    Options
    Hmm, well, I guess if it's right, it's right. I'm not sure what that difference correlates too though. I.E. that big of a difference could mean something, I don't know what though. Maybe you should send an email to the company. they will answer emails relatively quickly. it's at PolarUSA.com and click on the contact us section at the top.
  • erin1205
    erin1205 Posts: 99
    Options
    Pam, how weird that yours and banks is lower than the treadmill but mine is higher...so strange!

    Well, I just got back from the gym. For bodypump, the monitor said I burned 540 calories in 60 minutes. For RPM it said 640 in 45 minutes. I certainly believe the RPM reading because boy oh boy was I working hard! Bodypump I'm not so sure about....Oh, and those numbers are before I subtract my BMR as songbyrdsweet suggested. So my BMR per hour comes to 67 calories so I went ahead and subtracted those.

    Banks, your wife teaches bodypump right? Does that seem like an accurate reading? I am going to email Polar today-good suggestion!

    Thanks for the advice everyone-I love the help everyone gives on here, it really is awesome!

    Erin
  • lizard9800
    lizard9800 Posts: 474 Member
    Options
    The Polar is accurate within 15%, but it also includes your BMR (you'd burn those calories jut sitting around) so for the best accuracy, subtract what your BMR would burn in that amount of time.

    For instance:

    My BMR is 1265, or 53 cal/hr for 24 hours.
    If I exercise for one hour and burn 600 calories, I subtract 53 calories; I've burnt 547.

    That way you don't get a doubling-up of BMR calories from what MFP calculates and what your watch includes.

    Thanks for mentioning that. I was wondering. I am still waiting for mine this afternoon... UPS man!!!
  • banks1850
    banks1850 Posts: 3,475 Member
    Options
    Pam, how weird that yours and banks is lower than the treadmill but mine is higher...so strange!

    Well, I just got back from the gym. For bodypump, the monitor said I burned 540 calories in 60 minutes. For RPM it said 640 in 45 minutes. I certainly believe the RPM reading because boy oh boy was I working hard! Bodypump I'm not so sure about....Oh, and those numbers are before I subtract my BMR as songbyrdsweet suggested. So my BMR per hour comes to 67 calories so I went ahead and subtracted those.

    Banks, your wife teaches bodypump right? Does that seem like an accurate reading? I am going to email Polar today-good suggestion!

    Thanks for the advice everyone-I love the help everyone gives on here, it really is awesome!

    Erin

    I'll ask her, I don't put the polar on for Bodypump, I usually do it when I run. I know she does sometimes though.

Categories