Calorie burn--heart rate monitor vs machine vs website?

why wouldnt you go with what your HRM says? afterall its strapped to your body.

Personally, I would only accept what your HRM tells you as long as you have customized it with your height, weight, age. It's probably going to be the most accurate.

I use exclusively the HRM readings, the machine and webpages are just general estimates

I'm with them!! HRM is specific to you, it shows what effort you are actually expending to cover that distance - the others assume an effort which may not be an accurate representation of your body, fitness and strength.
:noway:

ALWAYS go with the heart-rate monitor. Everything else is an estimate.

If I were you I would definitely take the details from your HRM as they're more personal to you as opposed to those within MFP which rely on a lot of generic and broad-reaching information.

I agree with everyone else. I always go with the number that my HRM gives me. There is always a margin of error with everything, but I would trust the device that stores my specific measurements, is strapped to my chest, and monitors my constant heart rate over the others.

Personally I find it strange how there is this very popular misconception in America that HRM's can 'measure' your calorie usage more accurately than anything else, and that the results are guaranteed to be accurate. Over here in the UK there is no such myth; people rarely use heart rate monitors and when they do, it isn't to measure calorie burn. I chalk it up to excessive and genius marketing by HRM manufacturers in the US, that hasn't caught on elsewhere.
In any case, A heart rate monitor is only capable of doing one thing with any credibility: MEASURE HEART RATE! People say "don't trust the machines, they are just an estimate", "the machines just predict calorie burn based upon a formula" and "the machines don't know my heart rate so they cannot be accurate".
Yet HRM's also just make a prediction based upon a likely rough correlation between someones heart rate and their current work rate, but this formula is based upon many key assumptions that do not apply to many people. They ALSO simply use a rough formula to make a prediction.
And the fact that HRM's monitor heart rate is not in itself an edge is predicting calorie burn: calories burned through exercise is nothing over and above the physical "work" performed by someone. Someone physically fit will be able to perform huge amounts of work (and therefore burn huge amounts of calories) with little perceived effort and a low heart rate, whereas someone less fit will have a very high heart rate performing even a small amount of work. The fact that a HRM has no idea how much work has been performed, whereas a treadmill that knows your weight has a very accurate idea, clearly counts against the HRM's accuracy. Two people of the same weight running at the same speed on a treadmill will burn pretty much exactly the same amount of calories, regardless of what their HRM's may say.
Yet despite all this the HRM's calorie reading is still taken as gospel by many. In reality, a HRM simply makes a prediction, and nothing more than that. This prediction, as I have explained, is no more likely to be true than other predictions, from exercise machines, fitness websites or whatever.
To sum up I would say you can't know, without going to a lab and measuring it scientifically, which is the most accurate reading for any given activity, so don't worry about it too much. Exercise, eat well and don't worry about the little numbers - there are too many fitness myths out there distracting us from something that is ultimately rather intuitive: the basic rules of weight loss!

Since I purchased a HRM (Polar F6) and started using it, I have been able to lose weight. Prior to that, everything IMHO was a guesstimate. I would use the HRM.