That Cant Be Right

Options
dasexiimommy
dasexiimommy Posts: 68
in Motivation and Support
I went to the Gym yesterday and decided to take my HRM along with me and see how many calories it says I burn versus what the treadmill says. At the end of 41 minutes I had burned 821 calories according my HRM and the treadmill read I had only burned 303 calories. I did a little over half of day 4 of c25k (my legs started hurting really bad due to lack of stretching) so I walk the rest of the time. Has anyone else had this problem should I go by the HRM or the treadmill?

Replies

  • imtrinat
    imtrinat Posts: 153 Member
    Options
    My husband is a personal trainer and some of his clients burn over 1000 calories an hour. Depending on your weight, that is probably on point. I guess there could be a problem with your monitor but the treadmill most likely isnt as accurate as the HRM.
  • Mads1997
    Mads1997 Posts: 1,494 Member
    Options
    Just going by what i burn in 30 mins I would definitely say your HRM is closer to the mark. Never trust the machines unless you can put your age, weight, sex etc in


    Edited to add whoops i thought you were saying your HRM said you burned 300.

    Is your HRM one with a chest strap?
  • Heather032190
    Heather032190 Posts: 138 Member
    Options
    I do not know from experience but I have read & heard more than enough to not trust the machines they do not give you any type of accurate reading even after putting in your stats.

    You always want to check your HR throughout your workout that is the most accurate way.
  • wareagle8706
    wareagle8706 Posts: 1,090 Member
    Options
    If we're talking about cardio, go by the HRM not the treadmill. HRM measures more things than the treadmill can (VO2 Max and such)
  • jhstroebel
    jhstroebel Posts: 49 Member
    Options
    Looking at Day 4 of C25K, your HRM burn seems really high... the Treadmill burn by experience is probably a little low, so you're somewhere in the middle if I had to guess... You might look at your HRM data and see if the data looks realistic or if its spiking all over the place and showing numbers pushing 200 BPM (this would indicate bad data). I have had issues with my HRM recently and found getting electro-conductive gel (i think this is what it is) and applying it to the sensors before strapping it on has fixed my irregularities and got an accurate reading for the first time in forever yesterday with a 27 minute 5k clocking in at about 431 calories. Obviously that number varies with your stamina and conditioning, but if you were alternating a jog and a walk and finished the 2nd half with a walk, getting to 800+ calories seems like quite a stretch.
  • dasexiimommy
    dasexiimommy Posts: 68
    Options
    Thanx guys Im going to double check my HRM and see what happens tonight!!!
  • dasexiimommy
    dasexiimommy Posts: 68
    Options
    My husband is a personal trainer and some of his clients burn over 1000 calories an hour. Depending on your weight, that is probably on point. I guess there could be a problem with your monitor but the treadmill most likely isnt as accurate as the HRM.

    Thats what I thought too!!! I figured it would be higher but those numbers seem unreal!!!
  • dasexiimommy
    dasexiimommy Posts: 68
    Options
    Just going by what i burn in 30 mins I would definitely say your HRM is closer to the mark. Never trust the machines unless you can put your age, weight, sex etc in


    Edited to add whoops i thought you were saying your HRM said you burned 300.

    Is your HRM one with a chest strap?

    No I have one I wear on my wrist
  • tsdaughe
    tsdaughe Posts: 88
    Options
    Get one with a strap for your chest. I have a Polar HRM. The most I have burnt is 45 minutes on the treadmill and it was some intense intervals and running at a speed of as high at 7.0 was 545 calories. The over 800 does seem pretty high. and actually, when i wear my HRM it seems like the treadmill picks it up because the treadmill will then mirror what my HRM says. But definetly that seems really high. It is probably somewhere in the middle of the treadmills numbers and the HRM. What was your average hear rate?
  • juicemoogan
    juicemoogan Posts: 999 Member
    Options
    you need one with a watch and accompanying chest strap if you are going to use a HRM.

    no point in using one without it.
  • HereWeGoAgain7
    HereWeGoAgain7 Posts: 163 Member
    Options
    Get one with a strap for your chest. I have a Polar HRM. The most I have burnt is 45 minutes on the treadmill and it was some intense intervals and running at a speed of as high at 7.0 was 545 calories. The over 800 does seem pretty high. and actually, when i wear my HRM it seems like the treadmill picks it up because the treadmill will then mirror what my HRM says. But definetly that seems really high. It is probably somewhere in the middle of the treadmills numbers and the HRM. What was your average hear rate?

    Most of the machines that I have seen at several different gyms do pickup my Polar HRM. The machine still shows a slightly different number than my watch. Also, the machines at my current gym are close enough together that my Polar shows on the machines to either side of me. Took my MIL a while to figure out that the calories burned and HR showing weren't hers...she was very annoyed to realize that her walk wasn't burning as many calories as my run was. :bigsmile:
  • rachaelaldora
    rachaelaldora Posts: 99 Member
    Options
    dont trust the machines unless it can go with your watch.
    If your watch has a chest strap its pretty accurate.
    I use the polar ft7
    I burn 400 in 30 minutes of hiit exercise

Categories