Trust my HRM or Treadmill???

I would go with your HRM. It is measuring your calorie burn based on your heartbeat. I woudl think that the ones on the machines aren't as accurate because it doesn't usually take into affect your body measurements. I know my HRM does take all that into account.

I have found that the treadmill really isn't accurate unless it knows your heart rate. I will run for 3 miles and the treadmill says something totally different than MFP says it should be. My vote is the HRM.

I just bought a rather inexpensive Heart Rate Monitor. I used it for the first time a few minutes ago.

On a usual day, I will go on the treadmill and run until it tells me I burned 500 calories which is usually 60 minutes.

However, today I ran for 40 minutes and the HRM said I had already reached 500 calories burned. Does this sound more accurate? At that point, I ran 3.3 miles.

I know that in the end its all excercise and putting in 60 minutes will be a great workout regardless of the calories burned. But I would really like some insight on whether or not I should trust my (cheap) HRM or another calculation.

No way to tell without knowing your weight, speed of treadmill, whether you were running or walking, and elevation (if any).

Cheap HRMs can be no more accurate than making a number up out of thin air.

I just bought a rather inexpensive Heart Rate Monitor. I used it for the first time a few minutes ago.

On a usual day, I will go on the treadmill and run until it tells me I burned 500 calories which is usually 60 minutes.

However, today I ran for 40 minutes and the HRM said I had already reached 500 calories burned. Does this sound more accurate? At that point, I ran 3.3 miles.

I know that in the end its all excercise and putting in 60 minutes will be a great workout regardless of the calories burned. But I would really like some insight on whether or not I should trust my (cheap) HRM or another calculation.

No way to tell without knowing your weight, speed of treadmill, whether you were running or walking, and elevation (if any).

Cheap HRMs can be no more accurate than making a number up out of thin air.

Alright then.. What HRM do you use? How much do you need to spend in order to get a certain level of accuracy?

In my mind, if calorie counting is important, then you need an HRM that allows you to manually input your VO2 max, max heart rate, resting heart rate, and to set your own target zones. I believe the minimum is the equivalent of a Polar F6, or whatever model has replaced that. I don't really rely on my HRM for calories--the calorie count is just one of several data sources I use. My personal choices are either Suunto or Polar. Primarily because I am most familiar with their technology and software. There might be other ones out there that are as good, but, unless you look at some of the research behind the methodology they use to estimate caloric expenditure, you really have no way of telling whether they are accurate or not. But that's my personal choice--for me the extra $$ are worth the reassurance. Rather than buy a cheaper model, I would wait and scour ebay or other aftermarket outlets, or save my money until I could get what I want. But that's not necessarily the best choice for everyone.