Heart rate monitor with calories burnt

Options
sharonmunday90
sharonmunday90 Posts: 129 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I have been exercises at a class and at home. I now want to start the c25k. I am thinking about getting a heart rate monitor to accurately show the calories i am burning as i just use the figure mfp gives me at ghe moment.
My question is do i need a hrm or just stick with what mfp gives me?
If i do get a hrm which one would give me calories burnt, really simple to use, and wont break my bank?
Any info or help greatly appreciated.

Replies

  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    A great blog
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak?month=201003

    You don't NEED a HRM. People find them useful and handy, there are benefits, however many people have lost weight just fine without one. And the accuracy of them is highly overstated here.
  • pcastagner
    pcastagner Posts: 1,606 Member
    Options
    I use a polar rs100

    Cheap, cheerful, waterproof so you can swim in it
  • mk9562
    mk9562 Posts: 186
    Options
    When I started using a heart rate monitor, I found MFP to be much lower on any things. Especially running. So MFP isn't giving you the credit deserved.

    There are many budget friendly types out there.
    Make sure you get a monitor that is a continuous read. I bought a cheap one at first from Walmart and found out you had to keep tapping screen to get an updated read on your heart rate.
    I use one with a chest strap that connects to my watch. My husband has a chest strap that connects to an app on his iPhone.
  • acpgee
    acpgee Posts: 7,627 Member
    Options
    I just bought the Polar FT4 for £40 and I am glad I did.

    My weapon of choice is the elliptical, and i eat back exercise calories. The HRM says my typical workout (65 minutes targeting a heart rate of 140 with the help of 20 second sprints if necessary) burns around 580. The machine itself says around 780. And MFP gives me 930. Now I know why I haven't been losing weight.

    I do find the clasp on the chest strap chafes a bit though.
  • sharonmunday90
    sharonmunday90 Posts: 129 Member
    Options
    Wow. Thankyou everyone.
  • roch5220x
    roch5220x Posts: 4 Member
    Options
    You can get a polar hrm for under 100 bucks, but you have to know how to use it correctly.
    Most people dont know their max hr, I know mine because I wear mine for ice hockey and I max my hr.
    When I entered the value into my hrm (as they use defaults), it caused my ranges to move, for a more accurate calorie reading (it lowered my burn by 20%).

    Also, what most people dont factor in is the calories you would have burned by just living.
    I know mine is about 2400 a day, which is 100 calories an hour, but you will burn more while awake, so I estimate 120 calories an hour awake. So if you burn 300 calories on the elliptical for an hour, you actually only burned 200 additional. Most people feel they burned an extra 300 (100 more than they actually did) so they overcount their exercise.

    Quite frankly, if you are cost sensitive, I would get a fitbit (pedometer and sleep monitor) or wait for the amiigo to be release mid year. The amiigo is a cheaper version of the basis band b1 watch and monitors heart rate all day - I am hoping that they are better monitoring HR during sports, which the basis band b1 doesnt do (though it monitors heart rate 24hrs). I would not recommend the basis band b1 if you go to the gym because of that fact. I know for hockey or treadmill, my hr goes up to 160 - 202 beats per minute, but basis band registers 58-130. In addition, basis band b1 if you can get it is 300 dollars, amiigo (which has more functionality for the gym) is only 100 - but its unproven as it hasnt been released.

    But in my experience (as I am a fitness gadget enthusiast) a HRM for your home excercises won't achieve what I think you are looking for. Fine you think you want to measure the calories you burn doing your excercises, but a pedometer like the fitbit will measure your overall daily activity, and encourage you on inactive days to take a walk. It also works at the gym if you do treadmill or elliptical cause it will measure the steps done in those exercises. So for you,either wait for the amiigo (and hope its better than the Basis band b1) or buy a fitbit. Both cost around 100. You can also get cheaper fitbits for maybe 70, or you can buy probably second hand on ebay for cheaper.
  • roch5220x
    roch5220x Posts: 4 Member
    Options
    my long winded point is that I found while using a pedometer (i tested a fitbit) is that fine I can go to the gym on an inactive day and burn 300 calories, but my overall steps on weekends are so low versus the weekdays, it indicates that no matter how much I excercise on the weekends, I need to be more active and leave the apartment.
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Options
    A great blog
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak?month=201003

    You don't NEED a HRM. People find them useful and handy, there are benefits, however many people have lost weight just fine without one. And the accuracy of them is highly overstated here.

    Quoted for emphasis



    / thread

    .
  • justmeg86
    justmeg86 Posts: 40 Member
    Options
    I use a Polar FT4, it looks like a watch so it's easy to wear and not big. It gives the basics, HR, cals burned, time you've exercised, and how long you were "in zone" I got it on Amazon for about $60 so fairly inexpensive considering. I've had it about a month and I think it has more than paid for itself! Eventually I want to upgrade to one that has a GPS! Good luck!
  • sharonmunday90
    sharonmunday90 Posts: 129 Member
    Options
    You can get a polar hrm for under 100 bucks, but you have to know how to use it correctly.
    Most people dont know their max hr, I know mine because I wear mine for ice hockey and I max my hr.
    When I entered the value into my hrm (as they use defaults), it caused my ranges to move, for a more accurate calorie reading (it lowered my burn by 20%).

    Also, what most people dont factor in is the calories you would have burned by just living.
    I know mine is about 2400 a day, which is 100 calories an hour, but you will burn more while awake, so I estimate 120 calories an hour awake. So if you burn 300 calories on the elliptical for an hour, you actually only burned 200 additional. Most people feel they burned an extra 300 (100 more than they actually did) so they overcount their exercise.

    Quite frankly, if you are cost sensitive, I would get a fitbit (pedometer and sleep monitor) or wait for the amiigo to be release mid year. The amiigo is a cheaper version of the basis band b1 watch and monitors heart rate all day - I am hoping that they are better monitoring HR during sports, which the basis band b1 doesnt do (though it monitors heart rate 24hrs). I would not recommend the basis band b1 if you go to the gym because of that fact. I know for hockey or treadmill, my hr goes up to 160 - 202 beats per minute, but basis band registers 58-130. In addition, basis band b1 if you can get it is 300 dollars, amiigo (which has more functionality for the gym) is only 100 - but its unproven as it hasnt been released.

    But in my experience (as I am a fitness gadget enthusiast) a HRM for your home excercises won't achieve what I think you are looking for. Fine you think you want to measure the calories you burn doing your excercises, but a pedometer like the fitbit will measure your overall daily activity, and encourage you on inactive days to take a walk. It also works at the gym if you do treadmill or elliptical cause it will measure the steps done in those exercises. So for you,either wait for the amiigo (and hope its better than the Basis band b1) or buy a fitbit. Both cost around 100. You can also get cheaper fitbits for maybe 70, or you can buy probably second hand on ebay for cheaper.
    Makes perfect sense. Ill look into that as an option. Thanks. Great explanation too
  • pcastagner
    pcastagner Posts: 1,606 Member
    Options
    I don't deduct any calories from what the hrm says unless I was doing low intensity exercise for long periods, just like I don't bother trying to figure out the burn from increased metabolic rate after the exercise is over. There are lots of factors in play so in my opinion this is just precision without accuracy.


    So far everything has gone according to plan. So I would say don't get too technical. Log the calories burned on the hrm, then make adjustments to your intake if you aren't losing or gaining as planned, or if you find yourself showing symptoms like low energy, sluggishness, etc...
  • mrp56839
    mrp56839 Posts: 159 Member
    Options
    I use a Polar FT4, it looks like a watch so it's easy to wear and not big. It gives the basics, HR, cals burned, time you've exercised, and how long you were "in zone" I got it on Amazon for about $60 so fairly inexpensive considering. I've had it about a month and I think it has more than paid for itself! Eventually I want to upgrade to one that has a GPS! Good luck!

    I have the FT4F (same model, but water resistant) and the GPS is the one thing I REALLY wish it had. I have to carry my cell phone to accurately track how far I've gone and that's just one more thing I wish I could leave in the car while I'm on the trails. The FT4F does a great job though tracking calories burned and I've had no problems with the strap chaffing. I do find that MFP always overestimates the burn in comparison and I have to manually adjust it. Since the HRM is attached to me and trackign what my body is doing instead of a semi generic formula MFP uses, I feel like the HRM is more accurate.
  • cwilliams080676
    cwilliams080676 Posts: 118 Member
    Options
    I use a Reebok heart rate monitor I love it. It is not needed though.. I do push harder with one to see my numbers go up:)
  • justmeg86
    justmeg86 Posts: 40 Member
    Options
    I use a Polar FT4, it looks like a watch so it's easy to wear and not big. It gives the basics, HR, cals burned, time you've exercised, and how long you were "in zone" I got it on Amazon for about $60 so fairly inexpensive considering. I've had it about a month and I think it has more than paid for itself! Eventually I want to upgrade to one that has a GPS! Good luck!

    I have the FT4F (same model, but water resistant) and the GPS is the one thing I REALLY wish it had. I have to carry my cell phone to accurately track how far I've gone and that's just one more thing I wish I could leave in the car while I'm on the trails. The FT4F does a great job though tracking calories burned and I've had no problems with the strap chaffing. I do find that MFP always overestimates the burn in comparison and I have to manually adjust it. Since the HRM is attached to me and trackign what my body is doing instead of a semi generic formula MFP uses, I feel like the HRM is more accurate.

    Mine is waterproof too =) If I am outside for a run/walk I use the Nike Fitness thing on my Ipod that tracks how far I have gone. I used it the other day and the calories were way lower on it than my HRM. It's nice that my Ipod can track distance/speed but someday I would like to have one thing that does it all!!
  • xxshelbyxx0818
    xxshelbyxx0818 Posts: 91
    Options
    I use a Polar FT4, it looks like a watch so it's easy to wear and not big. It gives the basics, HR, cals burned, time you've exercised, and how long you were "in zone" I got it on Amazon for about $60 so fairly inexpensive considering. I've had it about a month and I think it has more than paid for itself! Eventually I want to upgrade to one that has a GPS! Good luck!

    What's different with this than from the cheapy hrm? My 10 dollar one does the same as yours but how can we really tell if it works as well as yours?

Categories