Polar vs Garmin for tracking cals burned

shaydon80

I'm just curious, I had been using a Polar FT4 HRM to track my calories burned and recently started using a Garmin Forerunner with a chest strap to track my running stats. The thing is that I used to burn about 11-12 calories a minute while running according to my Polar, but the Garmin is only registering about 8-9. Which one do you think is more accurate?

scottb81

The newer Garmins use a different calorie algorithm than most others. It is from Firstbeat and does not calculate from simple heartrate but rather from heart rate variability. It is supposed to be the most accurate method available but does give lower counts than other methods. When I am running (178 lbs) I'll usually get between 105 to 115 cal per mile where with other methods I get over 130 per mile.

Read the white papers here for more info. http://www.firstbeat.fi/physiology/white-papers

Also, the garmins with firstbeat continually collect and analyze your data and keep an updated athlete profile inside the watch based on that data. From my experience it takes about a week's worth of runs before enough data is collected for the calorie burns to be accurate and reasonably consistent.

jacksonpt

The newer Garmins use a different calorie algorithm than most others. It is from Firstbeat and does not calculate from simple heartrate but rather from heart rate variability. It is supposed to be the most accurate method available but does give lower counts than other methods. When I am running (178 lbs) I'll usually get between 105 to 115 cal per mile where with other methods I get over 130 per mile.

Read the white papers here for more info. http://www.firstbeat.fi/physiology/white-papers

Also, the garmins with firstbeat continually collect and analyze your data and keep an updated athlete profile inside the watch based on that data. From my experience it takes about a week's worth of runs before enough data is collected for the calorie burns to be accurate and reasonably consistent.

Agreed.

I noticed the same thing as you are seeing when I switched from my old Suunto to new Garmin.

Though big picture... both are just estimates. I'd go with the lower one just to be safe.