HRM: Too high calories burned?

Options
Aprilxlirpa
Aprilxlirpa Posts: 46 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I know everyone says the gym machines estimate too high, and I also thought the general rule of thumb was around 100 cals/mile
Today was my first day using my monitor. Im a 30 yo female who weights 153.
Gym machine said 350, but my HRM said 487. That's a HUGE difference. Can 487 after 40 min running (3.3 miles total) really be legit? I got the monitor so I wouldn't over eat exercise calories, but was not expecting to see a larger # on the monitor?
Ah Im so clueless, thank you in advance for your help!

Replies

  • SweetestLibby
    SweetestLibby Posts: 607 Member
    Options
    what kind of HRM do you have? does it have a chest strap?
  • slimgoody05
    slimgoody05 Posts: 25 Member
    Options
    Your HRM should be fairly accurate. Did you check your stats that you put in to make sure everything is correct? Keep using it and see how it goes.
  • Aprilxlirpa
    Aprilxlirpa Posts: 46 Member
    Options
    I have the Polar F4, with a chest strap
  • halimaiqbal00
    halimaiqbal00 Posts: 288 Member
    Options
    I have the polar ft4 too and it's accurate. Your cals burnt sound about right. I'm 5' 7, 29 years old and weigh 148 pounds and I burn 550 cals during 50 mins cardio, sometimes a bit more
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    A great blog on this topic
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak

    It really isn't a huge difference, a little over 100 calories. You probably vary by that in your food calculations too.
    Personally, I always go for the lower number.
  • Aprilxlirpa
    Aprilxlirpa Posts: 46 Member
    Options
    Awesome, thanks for the input!
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,868 Member
    Options
    The Polar models have been independently tested to be about 75% accurate. It's all estimation...just knock off 20-25%...that's what I used to do. I actually don't look at calorie burn anymore...it's irrelevant for the most part if you have your calories and routine locked in. One of the reasons I love the TDEE method over the MFP method...got way too obsessed about my calorie burn and it was becoming the all consuming reason for me to exercise. I've found that the TDEE method has freed me to perform my exercise for independent fitness goals rather than calorie burn.
  • KristyTonn
    KristyTonn Posts: 46 Member
    Options
    I have a Polar F4 with chest strap as well and I love it. I find the machines estimate lower than I actually burn, and I burn about 150-175 walking a mile at 3.0 if that helps at all. When I work hard, I burn about 100 cal for every 10 mintues, but as someone else said too, it depends on your weight/height. I'd go with what it says. I find also that MFP estimates much higher than what I actually burn.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    People are assuming that HRMs are accurate which is not necessarily true.
  • MinnieInMaine
    MinnieInMaine Posts: 6,400 Member
    Options
    I don't think that's too far off. For running, I see more like 120-130 calories per miles, especially if there are hills or I'm working on my speed. Make sure your personal setting are all correct (height, weight, gender, d.o.b.) and if they are, I think it's safe to trust it.

Categories