Anyone else having trouble with the Polar FT4 and calorie co

Options
tgaspard
tgaspard Posts: 22
in Motivation and Support
I've been using myfitnesspal for a while to track my food and my daily exercise. A couple weeks ago, I bought an iGym HRM watch and found its calorie counts pretty close to what myfitnesspal said...and I was losing just fine. That watch broke and so I bought the Polar FT4. It is saying I'm burning less than half of the calories myfitnesspal and my other watch said. I'm so frustrated!

Replies

  • laughingdani
    laughingdani Posts: 2,275 Member
    Options
    hmmm...that's weird. I have a Polar FT4 and it is pretty spot on. If I were you I would see if I could get it exchanged for a new one.
  • XFitMojoMom
    XFitMojoMom Posts: 3,255 Member
    Options
    Not sure what the features are on the F4, but I have the F11 and if I used the fitness test function to determine my V02Max, I was getting much higher calorie count. Thankfully I knew my most recent V02Max numbers, used those numbers and had much more accurate values.
  • Nina74
    Nina74 Posts: 470 Member
    Options
    I had a Polar FT4. Yes, calorie counters of HRMs are generally A LOT less than MFP or other websites, but on the FT4, it wasn't reading my HR correctly and therefore reporting ridiculously low calorie counts. I returned it w/no issues.
  • PJilly
    PJilly Posts: 21,728 Member
    Options
    I bought an F4 a while back, and it also indicated my calorie burn was significant lower than what MFP said. MFP was working just fine for me already, so in hindsight, I'm not really sure why I even bought an HRM. My solution? I quit using it and went back to what was already working.
  • laughingdani
    laughingdani Posts: 2,275 Member
    Options
    Mine always says that my cals burned are higher than MFP...and I have actually been losing more weight after getting my FT4. Are you wetting the electrodes before you put your transmitter on?

    I LOVE my FT4...... but if I were you I would definitely look into returning it if you are not satisfied!
  • PJilly
    PJilly Posts: 21,728 Member
    Options
    Mine always says that my cals burned are higher than MFP...and I have actually been losing more weight after getting my FT4. Are you wetting the electrodes before you put your transmitter on?

    I LOVE my FT4...... but if I were you I would definitely look into returning it if you are not satisfied!
    I don't think my F4 is defective and, yes, I wet the electrodes. I feel it's accurate as a heart rate monitor but not accurate for me as far as calorie burn goes. I don't really know why, although I've wondered if it's because I have low blood pressure. I'm not too worried about it. I'm keeping it because I like to wear it once in a while to keep tabs on my heart rate, but I don't rely on it for calorie burn. That's actually been quite liberating for me.
  • tgaspard
    tgaspard Posts: 22
    Options
    Well, I called Polar this morning. The rep agreed that the #'s it was giving me for calories burned did seem pretty low for my size. He walked me through resetting it to factory defaults and I will try again tonight. Though, I have to say, I'm sort of regretting buying it. I thought a HRM would help me get a more accurate picture of what i'm putting out so that I could make sure I don't over or under do it on refeuling...thus causing accidental gain or unhealthy rate of loss. I also wouldn't have been surprised if the numbers were less than what MFP was telling me on account of my actual physical ability to exert myself at the same level these calcs are based on. But less than half is just a bit ridiculous.
  • SFinn
    SFinn Posts: 43
    Options
    As far as the calorie counts that MFP gives, they're generalized and often really high. I don't know what exercises you did and what the HRM read but it still might be accurate just because it is lower than MFP.

    For cardio, you should be burning about 8 to 9 calories a minute.

    Edit: Just saw you said less than half...that's probably incorrect then. Make sure the electrodes are completely wet and that the strap doesn't lose contact with your skin.
  • tgaspard
    tgaspard Posts: 22
    Options
    I did wet the electrodes, and this morning I jogged (albeit slowly) for 30 minutes. I weigh over 300 lbs. It said I burned 170 calories. I just don't think that can be right. Even using suggestion below...I should have burned 240-270 calories at a minimum. MFP and Livestrong say I should burn about 560.
  • SFinn
    SFinn Posts: 43
    Options
    I did wet the electrodes, and this morning I jogged (albeit slowly) for 30 minutes. I weigh over 300 lbs. It said I burned 170 calories. I just don't think that can be right. Even using suggestion below...I should have burned 240-270 calories at a minimum. MFP and Livestrong say I should burn about 560.

    Yeaaah I would say that is definitely wrong. Maybe its defective? Did Polar say they would replace it?
  • laughingdani
    laughingdani Posts: 2,275 Member
    Options
    I did wet the electrodes, and this morning I jogged (albeit slowly) for 30 minutes. I weigh over 300 lbs. It said I burned 170 calories. I just don't think that can be right. Even using suggestion below...I should have burned 240-270 calories at a minimum. MFP and Livestrong say I should burn about 560.
    That sucks....especially when you pay so much money for one of those things....
  • tgaspard
    tgaspard Posts: 22
    Options
    Polar didn't offer to replace it, but they led me through the default reset...which is really tricky to do! And I'm going to try it again tonight. If I still get crazy low numbers, I'm bringing it back.

    I'll keep y'all posted. :)
  • tgaspard
    tgaspard Posts: 22
    Options
    so I just did a circuit training workout for 30 minutes, stayed in my "zone' for 25 of those minutes, really pushed myself and sweat my butt off. the watch says I only burned 148 calories. every other calculator I use says I should have burned between 550-700 cals. ?!?!?!

    I'm brining the watch back tomorrow.
  • 601creekhouse
    601creekhouse Posts: 3
    Options
    i'm really new to this. What is a Polar FT4. and how much are they?
  • tgaspard
    tgaspard Posts: 22
    Options
    Its a heart rate monitor watch...and its about $90. I don't recommend it. I got a Timex one to replace it and I love it!
  • StuAblett
    StuAblett Posts: 1,141 Member
    Options
    Its a heart rate monitor watch...and its about $90. I don't recommend it. I got a Timex one to replace it and I love it!

    This is timely for me, as I'm looking at getting a HRM, I'm not really concerned about the calorie burn, more keeping my heart rate in the zone on my C25K runs and on my longer bike rides. I am at about 266lbs now and I worry that I'm over doing it, and stressing my heart, so I want to know. The build in HRM on my treadmill sucks, It rarely goes over 110bpm:noway: and when I'm running at 7mph trust me it is MUCH higher than than :tongue:

    I think I'll cross the Polar off my list, another reason is that they say you have to send the unit back to them for battery replacement.... yeah right...... :grumble:

    Please tell me which Timex unit you got.

    Thanks!
  • tgaspard
    tgaspard Posts: 22
    Options
    This is the one I have. I love it. :)
    http://www.amazon.com/Timex-Trainer-Digital-Heart-Monitor/dp/B003JTO5LO
  • tgaspard
    tgaspard Posts: 22
    Options
    Though, it may be a bit "petite" for a man. haha!
    Timex has some for men, too. :)
  • StuAblett
    StuAblett Posts: 1,141 Member
    Options
    Thanks, I'm having trouble finding just a basic unit here, they are all selling the bells and whistles ones, and they all start at over $200, well with the yen so strong that is more like $250, I don't want to spend that much money.

    I'll try to find someone who will ship me one from the US, or get my daughter who is now in Canada going to high school to send me one, even with shipping, MUCH cheaper than here...:grumble:

    Thanks for the info!

Categories