New Balance HRM vs. Cardio Machines

oldernotwiser

For Christmas my wife bought me a New Balance strap type HRM that tracks heart rate & calories burned among other things. I used it this morning to track calories along with the elliptical trainer and treadmill at my gym. The HRM showed 156 calories burned during a 60 minute workout that included strength training and cardio.

The machines showed 450 calories burned with cardio alone. I have read that neither the machines nor the HRM are very reliable or accurate but I didn't expect such a big difference. I know that I don't necessarily need to track heart rate to have an effective workout for losing weight and/or getting fit but I have read a lot about eating back the calories you burn during exersize.

Any insight on which system is more reliable? In the 20 days since I registered for MFP I have lost 2 lbs. and I am fine with that. It's not a race...it's a lifestyle. Any advice you can give to accurately monitor calories burned without, frankly, spending a lot of money for a questionable device would be very appreciated. Thanks!

MommaKit79

I am hoping to get an HRM soon as well.

I have read on other topics thru MFP that your HRM is mor accurate because it is measuring YOUR heart, not a presumtion like the machines can be. The HRM is attached to you, not the machines.

Just my thoughts on it...hope someone else can give more insight on this for you. :-)

athenaheim

Good question.

oldernotwiser

Actually, these machines measure heart rate through sensors that you grip while working out. You also enter your weight and amount of time you will spend exercising.

parmoute

I would also like more information on how others are handling this difference. I have a Pyle PHRM38BK heart rate monitor and I'm having the opposite problem as the OP: treadmill says approx. 200 calories for a 2 mile walk, HRM has been giving me numbers in the neighborhood of 360. I also have my profile set up so that I'm eating back exercise calories, so right now I'm eating back the lower number.

I will say that I've done the same walk for 6 of the last 7 days and the HRM calorie count better reflects my perceived exertion during the workout. The day I walked with hand weights I worked harder, my HR was higher, and the calorie count was higher. That at least makes me feel like the HRM is a better number, but then I have to wonder why my body is burning so many more calories than the treadmill expects it to (unless I'm a lot more out of shape than I think I am!).

ETA: Both the treadmills I was on picked up the HRM belt, so I didn't have to use the hand sensors. Although they displayed my HR, it doesn't seem to have been part of the calorie algorithm. I can also enter my weight on the treadmills, but my HRM has my age and weight.

MinnieInMaine

HRMs with chest straps are definitely more accurate than watch only models and also tend to be more accurate than cardio machines BUT it still depends on several factors.

Did you follow the directions in the owner's manual? I'm not sure how the New Balance model works but I know with the chest straps for some of the Polar HRMS, you have to wet the sensors on the chest strap before each use, wash them periodically, make sure they fit snugly to your chest and store them properly - all in order to make sure you get the most accurate readings.

Did you program the HRM with your personal info? I'm assuming there will be at least basic inof that needs to be input such as gender, height and weight. Maybe even age and resting heart rate. The more data input, the more accurate the calculations will be.

Azdak

Here are three articles that provide more detail.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/new-hrm-how-to-make-the-calorie-estimate-more-accurate-183102

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/estimating-calories-activity-databases-198041

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/exercise-calories-sometimes-the-cardio-machines-are-more-accurate-404739

It's a lot of info, but if you can work though it, hopefully you'll get a better understanding of how all this works.

parmoute

Thanks for the articles Azdak!

I knew my HRM allowed me to input VO2max, but even after I found out what that was, I couldn't find a good way to estimate it. I used the worksheet in the article you linked to and I would agree with where those numbers put me on a scale of physical fitness, so I updated the HRM accordingly (my HRM thought I was already more fit than I am).

I've also been suspicious about the conventional maximum heart rate numbers and know that I have a family history of higher-than-usual heart rates. It looks like my HRM won't let me manually change that setting, but I can customize my target heart rate zone, which is good enough for me -- especially if the treadmill can be counted on to produce an accurate calorie burn.

Thanks again!

oldernotwiser

Thanks Azdak. Great info. I am going to have to take a closer look at setting up personal info on my HRM. The instructions are pretty good at telling you what the unit can do but not so good at what you should be doing to ensure accuracy.

Azdak

Thanks Azdak. Great info. I am going to have to take a closer look at setting up personal info on my HRM. The instructions are pretty good at telling you what the unit can do but not so good at what you should be doing to ensure accuracy.

There are good reasons for that:

1. They don't know.

2. There is no benefit in it for them. The more details they would include the higher the expectations, and the more accountability they would have to take. Most people cannot tell of it's accurate or not so why take on the extra aggravation.