HRM for weight training?

Your heart rate monitor will be more accurate because it is actually reading your heart rate and if you have one that calculates the calories burned then it will know your gender, height, weight, and age whereas machines only know weight and age. You most definitely can use a HRM while doing weightlifting! I do it all the time, and I'm sweating and working by butt off so those calories definitely count.

Also I noticed you do have one that gets all of your information--definitely believe the HRM over the machine.

I don't think the HRM will work accurately for weight training. I'd still try to keep track of the #s...but, I believe in previous threads people said it wasn't very accurate.

No you can't use your HRM to get an accurate read for weight lifting because your HR isn't in a constant state of elevation like it is during cardio.
Weight lifting isn't about burning calories it's about building muscle/toning. If that's your goal you should actually be worried about getting sufficient protein, not burning more calories, which can actually make it harder to build muscle BC your body needs adequate nutrition.
If you're gonna do cardio and weights on the same day, make sure you do weights BEFORE cardio. And try and get some protein in within an hour of your work out.
But an HRM should only be used for cardio, it is not accurate otherwise. Elliptical also give wildly inaccurate calorie counts that are WAY higher than what you actually burn.

No you can't use your HRM to get an accurate read for weight lifting because your HR isn't in a constant state of elevation like it is during cardio.
Weight lifting isn't about burning calories it's about building muscle/toning. If that's your goal you should actually be worried about getting sufficient protein, not burning more calories, which can actually make it harder to build muscle BC your body needs adequate nutrition.
If you're gonna do cardio and weights on the same day, make sure you do weights BEFORE cardio. And try and get some protein in within an hour of your work out.
But an HRM should only be used for cardio, it is not accurate otherwise. Elliptical also give wildly inaccurate calorie counts that are WAY higher than what you actually burn.

Well said!

If you are circuit training, or working out quickly where you HR stays elevated the whole time, wouldn't that equal a cardio workout of the same HR range, as far as calories go?
For the people who do only lifting and no intentional cardio workouts, that would explain their higher TDEEs even before they add a lot of muscle mass. There is no other way that they are burning so many calories unless they burn them while they are lifting and their HR is elevated. It may not be as accurate as when they are say, running, but they HAVE to be burning calories while they are lifting. And even if their HR doesn't stay elevated the whole time, wouldn't that be similar to the HIIT burns, just at a lower level?

For those who are trying to eat back their calories burned, if they don't do cardio, how else are they to calculate the calories burned in the gym, unless they wear a HRM?

Do they simply use a higher activity multiplier and eat at a higher level every day?

If you are circuit training, or working out quickly where you HR stays elevated the whole time, wouldn't that equal a cardio workout of the same HR range, as far as calories go?
For the people who do only lifting and no intentional cardio workouts, that would explain their higher TDEEs even before they add a lot of muscle mass. There is no other way that they are burning so many calories unless they burn them while they are lifting and their HR is elevated. It may not be as accurate as when they are say, running, but they HAVE to be burning calories while they are lifting. And even if their HR doesn't stay elevated the whole time, wouldn't that be similar to the HIIT burns, just at a lower level?

For those who are trying to eat back their calories burned, if they don't do cardio, how else are they to calculate the calories burned in the gym, unless they wear a HRM?

Do they simply use a higher activity multiplier and eat at a higher level every day?

There is no such thing as one type of "circuit training", so it will depend on precisely what kind of exercises make up the circuit and how the circuit is performed.

The HRM is of less value for calories because the HRM is set up only to estimate calories under aerobic steady-state conditions. Heart rate itself has NOTHING to do with calorie burn. Calorie burn is determined by oxygen uptake. During steady-state aerobics, heart rate changes more accurately track changes in oxygen uptake, so it can be used under those conditions.

However under other conditions--illness, fatigue, thermal stress, lifting weights, etc--the increase in heart rate DOES NOT reflect an increase in oxygen uptake, therefore heart rate is not reliable under those conditions.

I like to say there is a "aerobic/resistance" continuum for exercise movements and they are inversely related. That means that the higher the resistive component, the lower the aerobic effect and vice-versa.

Basically, that means that if you do lighter weights, with less rest, and dynamic movements, yes, you will get more of an aerobic training effect. However, that will come at the expense of strength improvement. (And your HRM calories will still be inflated).

Now that's not a judgement against circuit training. It is what it is--and what it is may be suitable for someone's needs. There are few right or wrong answers--it's mainly a matter of matching the activity to one's goals and preferences.

Still confused over here, lol.

I understand that the HRM estimate of calories burned will not be accurate for weightlifting. But surely a weightlifting session must burn more calories than just sitting watching TV? Is there a way of estimating that burn, or do you just ignore it (and therefore not "eating back" those calories"?

HRMs are not accurate for any form of weight training that revolves around isolation movements. ONLY compound based movements, even then not totally accurate, a LOT more than for isolation movements. Isolation movements burn practically nothing at all but HRM will say otherwise.

My HR jumps up 60-70 bpm during the heavy compound moves, only 10-25 on iso lifts.

Iso would actually have chance of being tad more aerobic in nature, as the HR usually doesn't get as high, because the strain for specific muscle is less.

Much farther off on the compound moves, because you have even less steady state.

So if I am understanding this correctly (and correct me if I am wrong) I should use my HRM for running, elliptical, walking, anything directly cardio, and for weights, I should just stop using it. Does this sound good to those who were against the HRM for weight training?

Just want to clarify!

If you are curious how high the HR gets, or you make your rest last until it gets down to certain point, then still fine to use.

It's just not valid for giving you an estimate of calories burned.

If you knew your gas gauge was broken, how long are you going to trust where it's pointing?

I have found it interesting to use to see that some times when it feels like you are really pressing hard and the effort is incredible, the HR didn't really get that high. Usually because I did something too intense the previous day, and the lift is hard not because of the load I just placed on the muscles, but rather because they are already tired and couldn't handle the load as well as previous time.

I will comment, I have a Garmin using Firstbeat algorithms, and they claim it is valid for lifting and anaerobic for calorie estimates.
It can tell from the HR and breathing when it's anaerobic, and ignores those HR's for counting calories.

So comparing that more valid HRM to a Polar, it was 1/4 to 1/3 the calories. Actually in line with what MFP gives as estimate. And that was 1 min rest between reps, maybe 2 or 3 min between lifts.