mfp's number are wayyyyyy to far off.

MANdown_145
MANdown_145 Posts: 46
in Fitness and Exercise
I just got my polar hrm and did 30 minutes on my elliptical . when i added it to mfp it said 657 but using my hrm it was really 375 so now i know that if i keep that same pace i can burn 750 an hour. Has anyone compared their hrm to mfp's numbers?

Replies

  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    So how do you know you HRMs numbers are accurate? Either one could be off. Why does the fresh out the box HRM get the benefit of the doubt?
  • wellbert
    wellbert Posts: 3,924 Member
    My polar reads much HIGHER than MFP.
  • solarfish
    solarfish Posts: 50 Member
    This is what I do. I have a Polar that provides not only HR but also (using a VO2 Max calculation) provides Calories burnt. I take the HR measurement and enter it into Endomondo, it calculates calories based on exercise, weight, duration and average heart rate. I then put the exercise and time into MFP. The result is three different calorie readings, I take the average and enter it into MFP.

    The one reading I don't believe is the one on the exercise machine because it is not reading the heart rate and always comes up with significantly higher value than everything else. In particular as I have lost significant weight and exercise at least once per day, my fitness has increased and my heart rate come down a lot, therefore I know that I must be burning few calories than I used to for the same effort and duration.

    Another really important point is that I never attempt to eat back all those calories. The exercise allows me to feel a little relaxed about going 100 or 200 calories over from time to time, but I wouldn't trust any of the readings (or my consumption) enough to manage right to the limit.
  • drmerc
    drmerc Posts: 2,603 Member
    Seems most mfp estimates for exercise are high
  • DrMAvDPhD
    DrMAvDPhD Posts: 2,097 Member
    MFP just estimates. It basically assumes that someone of the same weight will burn the the same amount as another person doing the same exercise. It doesn't account for how hard you exercised. Go with your HRM.
  • caraiselite
    caraiselite Posts: 2,631 Member
    mfp is a lot higher for me too
  • Barbellerella
    Barbellerella Posts: 1,838 Member
    I think it runs high for cardio type exercises but calculates low for strength training. IMO
  • drmerc
    drmerc Posts: 2,603 Member
    I think it runs high for cardio type exercises but calculates low for strength training. IMO

    Strength training is a tough one. You can't really measure it with a HRM.
    Truth be told I don't believe it burns many calories
  • Barbellerella
    Barbellerella Posts: 1,838 Member
    true but I always thought you get a better afterburn from lifting... guess we can't know for sure.
  • MANdown_145
    MANdown_145 Posts: 46
    don't get me wrong, the Net Calories Consumed* / Day are right on, its just that i googled my weight and moderate intensity for an elliptical and the calculations for 30 minutes were between 350 and 400 calories. I'm closer to taking the hrm over mfp's since they are about 300 off compared to the hrm being at 375
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    true but I always thought you get a better afterburn from lifting... guess we can't know for sure.

    You do but exactly how much is hard to measure. To answer the OPs question, my HRM numbers and MFP numbers come is within 10% of eachother. Are you sure you have your HRM set up right with age, weight etc?
  • solarfish
    solarfish Posts: 50 Member
    don't get me wrong, the Net Calories Consumed* / Day are right on, its just that i googled my weight and moderate intensity for an elliptical and the calculations for 30 minutes were between 350 and 400 calories. I'm closer to taking the hrm over mfp's since they are about 300 off compared to the hrm being at 375

    Most of my workouts are on an eliptical. When I started MFP was significantly lower than the HRM based data, now it is a bit higher. For cardio workout it is important to take into account how hard you are working and MFP has no way to determine that. For the brief period of time that I was average fitness for my weight the MFP figures were close :)

Categories