Heart Rate Monitor and Calories Burned

PamL66

I bought a cheap heart rate monitor watch today on a whim. I've seen talk about them on MFP and decided to try it out. It doesn't have a chest band (don't think I could stand that), and you regularly press the button to take a finger pulse. I pushed it every couple of minutes during a brisk 27 minute walk.

This contraption asks for your age and gender, but not your weight. I've noticed on MFP that since my weight has dropped a bit, so have my calories burned. I currently weigh 140 lbs (I would NEVER say that out loud) and MFP lists my calories burned differently, as does my iPhone pedometer (neither of which use heart rate as a factor.)

Heart Rate Monitor - 328 calories
iPhone Pedometer - 124 calories
MyFitnessPal.com - 108 calories

Talk about a discrepancy! I would think that using heart rate, weight, age, and gender would be the best way. I tried two different online calorie calculators that do use all four factors and they both listed my calories burned at 228. To me, this seems like the best choice. I don't want to enter too few or too many calories burned. 328 seems excessive, but I feel like 108 isn't enough.

Any thoughts from people with more experience than me?

PayneAS

You need one with a chest strap for it to be the most accurate. It measures your calorie burn based on your constant heart rate (and then adding in the factors of age, weight, height, etc). The ones you have to touch occasionally won't be accurate since it doesn't know your constant heart rate.

LittleRedBird18

I'm sorry. I don't have an answer for you as I am knew to this and still learning. But I was curious what site you used to calculate the 228. I would love to check it out. I, too, am concerned about wanting an accurate calories burned count.

Telugammayi87

my Ft7 with a chest strap has me burning 320 calories walking 3.0mph for 56 minutes. and I weigh 194lbs so I'd be burning more than you more than likely.

somewhere between your iphone app and MFP would be correct for your 27 minute walk I would imagine.

the HRM without the chest straps really aren't very accurate.

Also, I'd suggest one with a chest strap. I though I'd hate it, but I really don't notice it at all

Good luck!

tlynnweb

Unfortunately without a chest strap (which I thought I would hate as well, but don't) you will probably have to just guess-timate! Could you return it for a chest strap model that's more accurate???

Growtinymusclesgrow

You need one with a chest strap for it to be the most accurate. It measures your calorie burn based on your constant heart rate (and then adding in the factors of age, weight, height, etc). The ones you have to touch occasionally won't be accurate since it doesn't know your constant heart rate.

Definitely! Great Advice!

gfuller46

I will use MFP estimations, that seems about right to me.

suztheq

You need one with a chest strap for it to be the most accurate. It measures your calorie burn based on your constant heart rate (and then adding in the factors of age, weight, height, etc). The ones you have to touch occasionally won't be accurate since it doesn't know your constant heart rate.

^^^This. You'll get used to the chest strap.

PamL66

I'm sorry. I don't have an answer for you as I am knew to this and still learning. But I was curious what site you used to calculate the 228. I would love to check it out. I, too, am concerned about wanting an accurate calories burned count.

I used a couple of sites, but the easiest one was http://www.calories-calculator.net/Calories_Burned_By_Heart_Rate.html

Tan43

Hi,

The only reliable way is to get a chest strap. I have a Polar 4 and I went for an hour walk the other day (6.68km/4.1 miles) and burned 230 calories from my HRM yet my phone App (Endomondo) said I had burned 544 calories. My HRM data had my heart rate at an average of 97 beats per minute. Both have my weight (158 Pounds/71.6 kg) and height (155cm/5 foot 1 inch) as the same.

I also find the machines at my gym also over estimate what I burn so I always feed MFP what my HRM tells me.

Hope this helps

PamL66

I'm sure this isn't nearly as accurate as the chest strap model. Maybe one day I'll break down and get one. This little thing is a stepping stone for me in a way. Thanks for all the feedback!

PamL66

Hi,

The only reliable way is to get a chest strap. I have a Polar 4 and I went for an hour walk the other day (6.68km/4.1 miles) and burned 230 calories from my HRM yet my phone App (Endomondo) said I had burned 544 calories. My HRM data had my heart rate at an average of 97 beats per minute. Both have my weight (158 Pounds/71.6 kg) and height (155cm/5 foot 1 inch) as the same.

I also find the machines at my gym also over estimate what I burn so I always feed MFP what my HRM tells me.

Hope this helps

Thanks! I just looked at a Polar FT4F on Amazon.com. I might have to get one of those.

pukekolive

Hi

I am 240 lbs (111 kg) and use a Suunto M4 HRM with a chest strap (don't notice I'm wearing it). Whilst I walk I also use Endomondo for distance and my Fitbit for steps (I set the timer so calories are not counted twice).

My HRM gives me my average heartrate and my peak heartrate and I usually try and get an average heartrate around 145 bpm (approx 85% of my max heart rate of 171).

A 27minute walk for me at 3mph (5kmh) would burn around 250 calories according to my HRM but I usually take a median between the HRM, Endomondo, MFP and a couple of other sites with calories by heartrate calculators (shapesense.com, triathlontraining.com) and so I would probably log about 150 calories

Calories burned is very dependent on your personal info such as weight and fitness level and also the % of your maximum heart rate that you are working out at - also I walk non-stop without stopping to rest which keeps up my average rate

dad106

I'm with everyone else.. Ditch the cheap watch and get one with a chest strap.

If you can wear a bra, then you can wear a chest strap.

tajour

If you can wear a bra, then you can wear a chest strap.

Exactly. You won't even notice it, I promise.

LittleRedBird18

I'm sorry. I don't have an answer for you as I am knew to this and still learning. But I was curious what site you used to calculate the 228. I would love to check it out. I, too, am concerned about wanting an accurate calories burned count.

I used a couple of sites, but the easiest one was http://www.calories-calculator.net/Calories_Burned_By_Heart_Rate.html

thanks! I'll look it up.