Should i log what HR monitor says or treadmill?

tlucas69

So i just finished walking on the treadmill at a 3.0 speed with a 11.0 incline for 45 minutes. My ft4 says i burned 385 but the treadmill said 698. Thats over 300 calorie difference! Should i go by machine or HR monitor? Or log the average? Anyone know??
Btw, this is the first time I use my HR monitor at the gym (just got it last wk)

diannethegeek

Machines are notorious for overestimating. Use your HRM's number.

Rockmyskinnyjeans

I go by what my HRM says over what the machine says.

tlucas69

I can understand the machines overestimating, but by HALF???? Seriously??!!

aliciagudino

When I'd work out at my school gym on the treadmill it'd tell me that for 30 min walk at 3.3 MPH and 30 min jog, I would burn about 230 calories. What?! I went with it because I had no idea what I should have been burning. I got a HRM (the FT4) and now I burn close to 650 when I do 60 min of walk/jog. (outside, no longer attend the gym) Although that is a big difference in yours, I'd still go with your HRM, it's going to "know" you better than the machine

ekking69

HRM!! And, if I may ask, which one do you have? I want to get one and am looking for recommendations!

tlucas69

I have the Polar FT4! Like i said, i've only had it for a week, but i like it!! And it's pink!

tobeftmom

I have tne ft4 also and love it. It does record half the amont my bike does also. I go by the hrm though just to be safe.

tlucas69

bump.....

SherryTeach

I don't have an HR monitor, but I figure that my treadmill numbers are fairly accurate because I have to enter my weight. I use those numbers over the ones given for the number of minutes in MFP.

tlucas69

I don't have an HR monitor, but I figure that my treadmill numbers are fairly accurate because I have to enter my weight. I use those numbers over the ones given for the number of minutes in MFP.

That's what I used to do also, but now I'm thinking i was logging double calories actually burned according to my hrm...........booo