HRM vs Machine

Options
rebasporty
rebasporty Posts: 287 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I workout in the mornings on a treadmill walking at 4.0 set on an interval hill incline that changes every 30 seconds as follows: 3.0 to 13.5 to 8.0 to 18.5 - for 30 minutes. The treadmill ticker shows that I burned 456 calories this morning, which is average for my workout according to that machine. To my dismay my HRM shows that I burned a little over half of that. It showed 238 burned. This is the first time I used the HRM while on that machine. I usually just use it when I do my weights workout at home.
When logging your workouts which number do you use?

Replies

  • neiltimms
    neiltimms Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    This is the age old discussion about calorie burn. It can even be different doing the same exercise for the same duration on different treadmills! My guess is that somewhere in the middle of the two readings is probably thereabouts!
  • myfitnessnmhoy
    myfitnessnmhoy Posts: 2,105 Member
    Options
    If it was a HRM with a strap, a good quality model, and one that has been adjusted properly for you, then that's probably going to be pretty accurate for a cardio workout. As long as you are running a good deficit, you won't do any real harm rounding that up to 300 calories, but I wouldn't go much higher than that.

    Look at it this way... I weigh 205# and am 6' 3" tall. If I do a max sustained (85% VO2, or about 150BPM) workout for one hour, I burn about 950 calories. Max sustained is basically just shy of gasping for breath, breathing really hard, barely able to talk.

    I'm thinking the 240 is probably a lot closer than 400.
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Options
    They are both just estimates, but in this case I'd say the machine is probably more accurate.

    Calorie burns are based on workload, and treadmills are one of the few machines that have a known/accepted workload associated with the activity. One you go to a different machine, or start working outside, I'd say the HRM is more accurate.

    But again... don't lose sight of the bigger point here... all the numbers (MFP's, the HRM's, the machine's) are just estimates.
  • rebasporty
    rebasporty Posts: 287 Member
    Options
    Thanks for the input. I was a little shocked by the large difference. I have a POLAR FT4 - HRM which is not an expensive model however it does have the chest strap that I use with it. I will have to check when I do the ARC machine tomorrow to see if there is a huge difference as well.
  • Whiskybelly
    Whiskybelly Posts: 197 Member
    Options
    HRM seems to give me a more accurate reading, same one as yours too. Interesting fact; my HRM screws with my treadmill's monitor - according to my treadmill my heart rate is 260bpm, even without it's strap being attached to me.
  • caseythirteen
    caseythirteen Posts: 956 Member
    Options
    I have the FT4 as well and always go with what that says. At least that way I'm consistent and if it's lower than reality, I'd rather be wrong that way than the other way. During my elliptical workout this morning, my HRM was about 150 calories lower than the machine.
  • iWaffle
    iWaffle Posts: 2,208 Member
    Options
    I have a POLAR FT4 - HRM which is not an expensive model however it does have the chest strap that I use with it.
    Yep, trust this HRM over the machine any day in my opinion. Walking at 4.0 mph isn't a petty exercise with an incline but don't expect to burn through hundreds of calories at that rate. Also keep in mind that the more you do this the better condition your body will be in. You'll have a lower heart rate and breathing. The HRM knows this but the machine doesn't.
  • sgthaggard
    sgthaggard Posts: 581 Member
    Options
    When I run on the treadmill, it asks me my weight and that's it. My HRM takes into account my weight, my height and the fact that I'm a woman. I'm going to go with the estimates my HRM provides every single time.
  • mfpcopine
    mfpcopine Posts: 3,093 Member
    Options
    I wouldn't trust any device's estimate but if you must, use the lower figure. The HRM is not really reliable for a weights workout unless it's so fast it's a cardio workout.
  • Sarge516
    Sarge516 Posts: 256 Member
    Options
    If it was a HRM with a strap, a good quality model, and one that has been adjusted properly for you, then that's probably going to be pretty accurate for a cardio workout. As long as you are running a good deficit, you won't do any real harm rounding that up to 300 calories, but I wouldn't go much higher than that.

    Look at it this way... I weigh 205# and am 6' 3" tall. If I do a max sustained (85% VO2, or about 150BPM) workout for one hour, I burn about 950 calories. Max sustained is basically just shy of gasping for breath, breathing really hard, barely able to talk.

    I'm thinking the 240 is probably a lot closer than 400.
    ^^ What he said.

Categories