HRM vs Runtastic. Is either accurate?
AtlantaBob
Posts: 129 Member
OK. I just finished a long walk and runtastic says I burned 1,027 calories. My Polar FT7 says I burned 1,646.
I prefer to believe the Polar (of course). But, 620 cals difference?
Anyone know if the FT7 is more accurate since it actually measures heart rate?
I prefer to believe the Polar (of course). But, 620 cals difference?
Anyone know if the FT7 is more accurate since it actually measures heart rate?
0
Replies
-
Must of been one heak of a walk!!! Only thing I can think of is that Runtastic may not figure in the calories you would've burned being sedentary, but that thought would only work if it was maybe a 6-8 hour walk.... I'll wait to hear the correct answer :laugh:0
-
What? That seems crazy.
I have to run about 15 miles to get that kind of burn.0 -
I would really consider resetting your HRM. It's going to be more accurate than a generic application, but something is way off. Did you set your HRM and follow everything when you first bought it? using a chest strap? etc... ?0
-
yes. Set up the HRM this morning. Weight, height, etc. Chest strap - yes.
11 miles in 3hrs 7 min. Averaged about 3.54 mph.
and yes....I am ready to keel over0 -
The more you weigh the more calories burned. So my calories burned will be higher bannedworld.0
-
OK. I just finished a long walk and runtastic says I burned 1,027 calories. My Polar FT7 says I burned 1,646.
I prefer to believe the Polar (of course). But, 620 cals difference?
Anyone know if the FT7 is more accurate since it actually measures heart rate?
I only use heart rate monitors for their primary purpose: To see how fast my heart is beating during exercise and to observe how fast my recovery is after I stop. I ignore the calorie estimates because they may be based on data drawn from groups, for example, young or middle-aged men, and aren't accurate for me.0 -
Bump. I'll also being waiting to hear an answer on this one.0
-
The more you weigh the more calories burned. So my calories burned will be higher bannedworld.
true.
both the app and the HRM are going to be based on averages.. but it's still going to be closer for the HRM than the app. If you're still worried, take an average between the two.0 -
yes. Set up the HRM this morning. Weight, height, etc. Chest strap - yes.
11 miles in 3hrs 7 min. Averaged about 3.54 mph.
and yes....I am ready to keel over
Also, way to go on that walk!!! :flowerforyou: I think I'd collapse! :laugh:0 -
Food for thought: the additional data point ( heart rate ) allows your hrm to fall more inline with your particular workout intensity, although still estimates I think you are right to believe the numbers from the hrm are more accurate.
Happy training.0 -
thanks guys. always appreciate input from fellow travelers0
-
I walk on my lunch hour nearly daily. I use the FT4 and in 60 minutes I burn between 420-500+ calories. If I walked for 3 1/2 hours I would be closer to the 1600. I am 5' 4" 131 lbs. I would say the FT7 is more accurate.0
-
OK. I just finished a long walk and runtastic says I burned 1,027 calories. My Polar FT7 says I burned 1,646.
I prefer to believe the Polar (of course). But, 620 cals difference?
Anyone know if the FT7 is more accurate since it actually measures heart rate?
I only use heart rate monitors for their primary purpose: To see how fast my heart is beating during exercise and to observe how fast my recovery is after I stop. I ignore the calorie estimates because they may be based on data drawn from groups, for example, young or middle-aged men, and aren't accurate for me.
The Polar HRM line allows you to put in data such as age and whether you are female or male so that it can more accurately estimate the calories burned during exercise.0 -
1,027 calories for an 11 mile walk seems just about right.0
-
If it helps any, when I use Runtastic I pair my HRM with the app. The app should take HR into account when calculating caloric expenditure. Although I now prefer Digifit.0
-
If it helps any, when I use Runtastic I pair my HRM with the app. The app should take HR into account when calculating caloric expenditure. Although I now prefer Digifit.
Thanks - I will look into digifit and pairing the HRM0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions