Yes, another HRM question

BRFMcKay

I did a quick search before asking this, and I didn't find any topics started.

Went to the gym today, ran for 31 minutes. My heart rate average was between 160 and 175 bpm. (I am 26, 5'4" and 159 pounds.) I just got back into running, so it is difficult for me to run right now, but doable.

The treadmill reads 300 calories, which I logged. I was wearing a HRM and strap, so it was checking my heart rate at all times.

I just bought the HRM so I could have more efficient workouts, especially while lifting. For those 30 minutes, the HRM (not the treadmill) said I burned 480kcals. (this is the same as Calories used on this website, right?)

So, as you see, I do maintain a higher heart rate, so do I log the 480, or the 300? Which one is more accurate?

Thanks.

ValerieMomof2

The calorie counters on the machines are very inaccurate. Even if you input your weight, it doesn't account for your fitness level and so many other factors so I never even pay attention to them.

xtrout

HRM would be more accurate. Mine read just over 500 cals for 33 min at about the same heart rate as you. But I weight 50 lbs more. You can always go conservative and go with the lower number though.

moustache_flavored_lube

Your HRM is likely the most accurate measure (assuming you have entered your age, gender, and weight).

FYI Your average heart rate should be reported as single number, and not a range


Also HRM is not a very accurate way of measuring calories burned during weight training. It is only accurate if maintaining heart rate above 120 (not usually the case for lifting) Circuit training and the like being the exception

BRFMcKay

Thank you, all. I only gave a range because I don't remember what my HRM and the treadmill said this morning. I was too worried about getting to work on time! lol