WARNING! POLAR HEART RATE MONITORS DEFECTIVE!
Options
Replies
-
I have a newer FT7 (purchased new from Target in October 2012) and it does allow me to set the max HR under Training Settings>Heart rate upper limit. You can manually adjust, so you don't have to choose the standard 220-age if you don't want to or if that doesn't make sense for your averages. However, when you have the max HR setting as OFF, it will use the standard 220-age.
I previously had an F6 and the FT7 numbers are correlating very closely to the F6 and I was/am showing lower calorie burns as my weight drops. I am using the 220-age default on my watch at this time.
With the F6, my weight ranged from 218 to 176 lbs. With the FT7, my weight has bounced around the 189-197 range, so I may still be in that range that appears to be showing more accurate numbers.
Hope you find the answers you're looking for!0 -
I'm actually interested in the answer to this question. I never ended up using the calories on this device because I felt like they were so off. Maybe it's not set up correctly. I couldn't figure out how to enter my max heart rate. I don't have it on me, but I think the last time I used it was a 30 minute run with an average heart rate of 152ish... I'm 31, 161 lbs and female. The device said I burned less than 100 calories!!! WTF!!!
That's why I ended up using an online calculator that takes that VO thing into account, too. Anywhoo, it's probably user error since I'm not that great with gadgets. If you figure it out, let me know!
Yeah, something is not right. I'm guessing you should have burned about 300 calories or so.0 -
the new versions of the FT7 do NOT allow you to enter zones, VO2 max, or max heart rate.
You might want to re-check - I have a FT7 purchased one month ago. It allows me to set max heart rate under "User Information". Of course, I suppose it's possible that mine had been on the shelf a really long time before I bought it...0 -
I'm actually interested in the answer to this question. I never ended up using the calories on this device because I felt like they were so off. Maybe it's not set up correctly. I couldn't figure out how to enter my max heart rate. I don't have it on me, but I think the last time I used it was a 30 minute run with an average heart rate of 152ish... I'm 31, 161 lbs and female. The device said I burned less than 100 calories!!! WTF!!!
That's why I ended up using an online calculator that takes that VO thing into account, too. Anywhoo, it's probably user error since I'm not that great with gadgets. If you figure it out, let me know!
Yeah, something is not right. I'm guessing you should have burned about 300 calories or so.
I know! I also have a HRM watch thing I got b/f the polar. It doesn't have calories, so before I got the polar I always had to try to estimate calories based on heart rate and I have to say this device is about 1/3 of what I was expecting based on what I was doing before.0 -
109 seems a very low heart rate. I am pretty fit (cardio 5 days a week and heavy lifting 5 days as well)
MY heart rate when I'm running is in the 160's-170's. 109 for BPM seems like you're not working very hard at all.
not looking for your comments.
looking for data. please share.
How about quit being rude and repeating the same thing to just about every other person. I was going to chime in and add my input, but why should I give you that respect when you do not give respect to all have contributed in this thread.
yeah, that was kind of rude. I apologize to the original poster and everyone else here. Just a bit frustrated with not much data.
But really, I'd like to know what is going on. Again, this applies to really a relatively small amount of people. Not many people are in the very high range so not many can really reply with significant data since most replies will be at lower weights and their data is not in question. By high weight I'm saying 300+, but it could be lower. not sure.0 -
the new versions of the FT7 do NOT allow you to enter zones, VO2 max, or max heart rate.
You might want to re-check - I have a FT7 purchased one month ago. It allows me to set max heart rate under "User Information". Of course, I suppose it's possible that mine had been on the shelf a really long time before I bought it...
Nope. does not allow it. for sure. 100%, on both of mine.0 -
[/quote]
But really, I'd like to know what is going on. Again, this applies to really a relatively small amount of people. Not many people are in the very high range so not many can really reply with significant data since most replies will be at lower weights and their data is not in question. By high weight I'm saying 300+, but it could be lower. not sure.
[/quote]
Well I'm not in a very high range, but I think it's totally off for me too! I understand your frustration!0 -
My test on my watch:
3 min
3 kcal
avr 55
weight 89 kg
3 min
6 kcal
avr 55
weight 199 kg
This HRM (polar FT7) does not go higher than 199 kg. Real world test above shows no issue.
your heart rate is not high enough to be reliable. should be at least 95.
thanks for trying though.
Not just that, they are male, which we know the calculation embedded has a positive correlation to calories burned. For women some reason most calcs include a negative correlation.0 -
I have a newer FT7 (purchased new from Target in October 2012) and it does allow me to set the max HR under Training Settings>Heart rate upper limit. You can manually adjust, so you don't have to choose the standard 220-age if you don't want to or if that doesn't make sense for your averages. However, when you have the max HR setting as OFF, it will use the standard 220-age.
I previously had an F6 and the FT7 numbers are correlating very closely to the F6 and I was/am showing lower calorie burns as my weight drops. I am using the 220-age default on my watch at this time.
With the F6, my weight ranged from 218 to 176 lbs. With the FT7, my weight has bounced around the 189-197 range, so I may still be in that range that appears to be showing more accurate numbers.
Hope you find the answers you're looking for!
Thank you for your feedback and info on setting max heart rate.
I think the problem is for people at higher weights, like around 300 pounds or more.0 -
peter - you sound like you are just killing time here. you have no proof that it's defective and you should have CALLED, not emailed, CALLED Polar for assistance. Then you could SPEAK with someone who knows what’s going on with your monitor. No matter how much "data" you collect from a forum, you will not get what you really need - and what you need will only come from the manufacturer directly.
Everyone is only posting their experiences and opinions (no offense, everyone) and the factual info on the product you are questioning is best handled by a rep from Polar. Call them. Information over email and forums gets easily lost in translation. A phone call would have saved all of this.0 -
I'm actually interested in the answer to this question. I never ended up using the calories on this device because I felt like they were so off. Maybe it's not set up correctly. I couldn't figure out how to enter my max heart rate. I don't have it on me, but I think the last time I used it was a 30 minute run with an average heart rate of 152ish... I'm 31, 161 lbs and female. The device said I burned less than 100 calories!!! WTF!!!
That's why I ended up using an online calculator that takes that VO thing into account, too. Anywhoo, it's probably user error since I'm not that great with gadgets. If you figure it out, let me know!
Yeah, something is not right. I'm guessing you should have burned about 300 calories or so.
I know! I also have a HRM watch thing I got b/f the polar. It doesn't have calories, so before I got the polar I always had to try to estimate calories based on heart rate and I have to say this device is about 1/3 of what I was expecting based on what I was doing before.
Did your watch beep to notify you that it wasn't getting a good signal from the transmitter? That sounds like one of the possible reasons why it didn't give you an accurate calorie burn. Sometimes my strap will move down a bit and it stops counting calories for awhile until it is fixed or moves back into the proper place.0 -
peter - you sound like you are just killing time here. you have no proof that it's defective and you should have CALLED, not emailed, CALLED Polar for assistance. Then you could SPEAK with someone who knows what’s going on with your monitor. No matter how much "data" you collect from a forum, you will not get what you really need - and what you need will only come from the manufacturer directly.
Everyone is only posting their experiences and opinions (no offense, everyone) and the factual info on the product you are questioning is best handled by a rep from Polar. Call them. Information over email and forums gets easily lost in translation. A phone call would have saved all of this.
called also. yielded nothing. took my info and said would get back to me. offered a call tag to send mine in to have it checked. sigh.0 -
Everyone, everywhere, will find some sort of fault with HRM's. Shut up and exercise. Work hard, listen to your body, rest when you feel tired.0
-
bump0
-
I'm actually interested in the answer to this question. I never ended up using the calories on this device because I felt like they were so off. Maybe it's not set up correctly. I couldn't figure out how to enter my max heart rate. I don't have it on me, but I think the last time I used it was a 30 minute run with an average heart rate of 152ish... I'm 31, 161 lbs and female. The device said I burned less than 100 calories!!! WTF!!!
That's why I ended up using an online calculator that takes that VO thing into account, too. Anywhoo, it's probably user error since I'm not that great with gadgets. If you figure it out, let me know!
Yeah, something is not right. I'm guessing you should have burned about 300 calories or so.
I know! I also have a HRM watch thing I got b/f the polar. It doesn't have calories, so before I got the polar I always had to try to estimate calories based on heart rate and I have to say this device is about 1/3 of what I was expecting based on what I was doing before.
Did your watch beep to notify you that it wasn't getting a good signal from the transmitter? That sounds like one of the possible reasons why it didn't give you an accurate calorie burn. Sometimes my strap will move down a bit and it stops counting calories for awhile until it is fixed or moves back into the proper place.
No problem there. I know exactly what you are talking about. It does happen once in awhile and I do notice it. But its usually for only a few seconds. I have also went to the trouble of cleaning connections with a mild solvent.0 -
I recently gave away my brand new Polar FT7 because it severely underestimated my calorie burns at 300-350 pounds.0
-
I've had 2 FT4s. When I passed my first one on to my husband I tested it against my new one. I got pretty much the same numbers from both.
My husband (much heavier than me) did the same test and also got similar results.0 -
peter - you sound like you are just killing time here. you have no proof that it's defective and you should have CALLED, not emailed, CALLED Polar for assistance. Then you could SPEAK with someone who knows what’s going on with your monitor. No matter how much "data" you collect from a forum, you will not get what you really need - and what you need will only come from the manufacturer directly.
Everyone is only posting their experiences and opinions (no offense, everyone) and the factual info on the product you are questioning is best handled by a rep from Polar. Call them. Information over email and forums gets easily lost in translation. A phone call would have saved all of this.
called also. yielded nothing. took my info and said would get back to me. offered a call tag to send mine in to have it checked. sigh.
Perfect. Let the professionals do their job. 0 -
Everyone, everywhere, will find some sort of fault with HRM's. Shut up and exercise. Work hard, listen to your body, rest when you feel tired.
I suspect my HRM calculated calories burned are about 40-50% lower than they should be. This is not "some sort of fault". If it is true for other users at high weights Polar needs to address the issue. Since they ignored my calls and emails I'm trying to hash it out in public forum instead.0 -
Not enough.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions