MFP inflated calorie compared to HRM?

I am having the same experience. I just purchased a Polar ft40. I was also wondering if both the gym equipement and Mfp are off. If I'm lucky, I can get around 250 calories for strength training and about 350 for cardio in 60 mins each. Now, I am still very overweight and clearly not as fit as I thought I was. When I compare Calories burned for my age , height etc on Sparkspeople , they come up with numbers closer to what I achieve.
Either way . I am only using my HRM numbers now. Right or wrong it is a fantastic tool to help better your experience.

Your HRM is going to be the most accurate but just note that it won't be for weight lifting because your HR usually doesn't get high enough to make the algorithms work properly so you get exaggerated numbers.

Yep...mines about half (Polar FT7) than the stuff posted here and on RunKeeper as well as my bike's console. Drives me nuts as both those are closer to each other than my HRM is, but my HRM has my height/weight/HR calculated so I just deal with the discrepancies and use what I get from Polar.

Mine are pretty even so far. I've only had my HRM for a week but I was expecting HUGE differences from everything I've heard. MFP overestimates a tad for my Jillian Michaels (HRM has me burning 200-205, MFP says 213), but it was under by a bit for my Leslie Sansone walk at home stuff.

I have also found this, With all the hoo ha- lately about the polar being off also made me wonder but I've made my peace with it now if I'm burning lower then that's fine by me means I'm not eating additional cals for nothing!

Just got my polar FT7 this week and was surprised how far off they are gyn equipment was off and MFP was really off Just glad I normally dont eat exercise calorie s back

Way over for me, but I think the problem is that MFP doesn't account for as many individualities as there are, and let's face it, it's free, so it's not going to be perfect. Use your HRM. I have a BodyMedia Fit and use those numbers for the most part, altho I allow Endomodo to upload my walks. Sometimes I tweak those calories based on my BMF if they are way off.

That said, it's all really a guess. Nothing is 100% accurate. See how your weight loss progresses and alter your plan as needed to get the results you want.

Yes, MFP seems pretty generous. That's why I never eat all of my exercise calories back. I eat 0 to half. I let my hunger be my guide. If I'm hungry, I eat but I almost am never hungry enough to eat more than half of them back.

I have found them to be pretty similar for me.

I just workout and eat right

MFP can only estimate the level of intensity. It may be lose for some people but way off for others.

I was using MFP for over a year, and lost about 25 pounds. Then, when it came to maintenance, I bought an Polar FT7 and found out how much MFP and the gym was overestimated on calories burnt.
I think that if you have a good amount of weight to use, it probably doesn't matter a whole lot. But for people who have about 5 or 10 or on maintenance, a HRM is vital.
My Polar died a few months ago, and I got a new Garmin ForeRunner 110 last week. So far it's working really well, and I absolutely go by those numbers versus what MFP gives me.

PS. My trainer told me that the machines at the gym are mostly set for male bodies even though that might be an option to put in.