Heart rate monitors...

Options
saratague
saratague Posts: 49 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I want to find out (accurately) how many calories I’m burning each day, especially during my workouts. I’ve lost a significant amount of weight since I started, but the weight loss has been slower lately (partially due to not watching what I eat as carefully).

I have a feeling that my treadmill tracks calories based on the “average” person. As a heavy person I’m not sure if it’s not calculating enough calories or calculating too many.

I also have decided to start back up with Power 90 but REALLY want to keep track of how many calories I’m burning vs. how many calories I’m consuming.

Anyone have any suggestions?

I have done some reading online and the Fibit seems to be one of the more popular brands.

The “Polar RS100 Heart Rate Monitor and Stopwatch” is the most popular one sold on Amazon but it has a chest strap and I’m not 100% confident a mass-produced chest strap would fit someone of my size.

So…I’m back to thinking about the Fibit.

The problem is that I have NO idea what these things do or if they are worth the cost - $99 is a decent amount to me.

I also don’t know if I should be looking at the Fibit One or the Fibit Flex and I’m HOPING that someone here can help offer some insight as to the pros and cons of each.

The biggest thing I’m looking for is to track calories burned and making sure I don’t make my heart explode from exercising. :)

I use MFP for calories I consume, I’m not too worried about my sleep schedule, but want to make sure I’m doing this right.

ANY suggestions – Fibit or other suggestions – Would be GREATLY appreciated.

Replies

  • Prephred
    Prephred Posts: 140 Member
    Options
    I am in the same boat only I need something that is waterproof as I am water walking again.

    Any suggestions would be wonderful. Thanks in advance.
  • saratague
    saratague Posts: 49 Member
    Options
    I thought I read something that the fibit is pretty water resistant, but I'm hoping someone will be able to offer some insight! :)
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Options
    HRMs are generally considered the best for measure workout cals. However, even those are just an estimate. The better ones work reasonably well for steady state cardio, but the less steady state your workouts become, or the less cardio based they are, the less accurate the HRM will likely be.

    They are also terrible gauges for total daily calories.

    Activity monitors (like fitbit) are also estimators, and generally the least accurate. That said, they do seem to offer a reasonable estimate for "rest" calories (cals burned while doing anything NOT exercise related).

    I've worn my FB Flex swimming several times and never had any problems with it.
  • a25556
    a25556 Posts: 2
    Options
    I love my Polar F4 heart monitor watch. It is waterproof, but you do have to wear the strap around your chest. It tracks calories and tells you how how long you were in the zone during your work. Also the cardio machines can read the sensor without you having to hold onto the equipment to get a read out.
  • Tim_Moelelr
    Tim_Moelelr Posts: 4
    Options
    I have not purchased any tracking devices, often pondered and researched, but found this device to be the most comoprehensive and graphically pleasing for easy data retrieval.

    I hope this helps:

    http://www.bodymedia.com/Shop/Armband-Packages
  • kariweighsin
    kariweighsin Posts: 61 Member
    Options
    It sounds like a HRM is definitely what you want because they will track your calories burned and also let you know when you are below or way over your expected heart rate. I personally use the Polar FT7 and that measures your heart rate, calories burned and times in both fitness and fat burning zones. I have also had the Polar FT4 which did everything the FT7 does except tell you your times in the fitness and fat burning zones; instead, it tells you your time in the zone (your suggested heart rate zone).

    On the other hand, I also have a Fitbit Zip (the smallest one the offer, so it's smaller than the Flex and One and does less) but I use that simply as a pedometer and deactivated the calorie counting feature because it was giving me a running daily total (so calories burned from doing nothing as well as working out) and that wasn't what I was looking for.

    I'm not trying to persuade you from either Fitbit product (the one or flex) but based on what you are searching for, the HRM seems to be what will give you the desired results. As far as the band not fitting, they are adjustable so you may want to check the Polar site or search Google to figure out how far the chest strap will go (especially since you want it to "fit" you to give an accurate reading).

    When it comes to the Polar HRM you enter your information (age, height, weight, etc.) and you are ready to go. You can also set the watch to beep when you are outside of your suggested heart rate.

    Hope this information helps, good luck with your search!
  • dixielawgirl
    dixielawgirl Posts: 437 Member
    Options
    I second the Polar HRMs...I love mine, and it is also waterproof.
  • dailytammy
    dailytammy Posts: 49 Member
    Options
    I have recently purchased the polar FT7 which has really helped. The calories on this site and treadmill are way off.
  • KatC_88
    KatC_88 Posts: 101 Member
    Options
    I use Polar FT4 and I love it. usually the machines are WAAY off from my HRM.
  • marcoscu
    marcoscu Posts: 99 Member
    Options
    An HRM is probably the least inaccurate way of measuring your personal calorie burn. I currently use an Garmin 910 with HRM and before that a Polar FT7, which is inexpensive and pretty reliable.

    I also have a Fitbit Flex, which is good fun and an effective motivator but not much use as a guide to calorie burn.
  • jacksonpt
    jacksonpt Posts: 10,413 Member
    Options
    I use Polar FT4 and I love it. usually the machines are WAAY off from my HRM.

    Just FYI... that doesn't necessarily mean the machines are wrong. Just because you bought a specialized device doesn't mean it's always right.
  • majica8
    majica8 Posts: 210 Member
    Options
    I've had a Polar FT7 for a week a would highly recommend it.
    As others have pointed out, it is still just an estimate at calories burned, but they all are and it's going to be a lot more accurate than using MFP, built in counters on exercise machines or an app on your phone. I've found the FT7 shows I actually burn around twice as many calories as I thought I was, then I take off maybe 15%-20% to account for any error.

    Going from my measurements and how much of the strap I have "spare", I would say they would fit up to a 130cm chest although if you're worried about that I'd do some research into it, perhaps e-mail Polar, I'm sure they have exact measurements :)
  • justmeg86
    justmeg86 Posts: 40 Member
    Options
    I love mine too. I have the Polar FT4 and it does everything I want it to do without over complicating things. I got it for $65 on Amazon and have used it pretty much daily since I got it in April. In using it I found out that the cardio machines were accurate up to a certain point and then the readings were usually lower. I also like that it syncs up with the HRM on the machines for readings without having to hold on to anything.
  • JonathanBB
    JonathanBB Posts: 252 Member
    Options
    I haven't gotten one yet but after a lot of research, including Consumer Reports, I was going to get the Polar FT7. Someone gave me a body bug with an armband monitor and I am using that to see how I like it. Frtom all I have read it is not as accurate as the Polar FT 7 or other chest strap monitors.
  • Heidi_11913
    Heidi_11913 Posts: 54
    Options
    I also have the Polar FT4 and love it. It's my first HRM and although IDK what all the beeps mean, it works great for me and was not too expensive. :)
  • Bekahmardis
    Bekahmardis Posts: 602 Member
    Options
    I use both a Polar FT4 and a FitBit Flex. The HRM is for specific exercise times (treadmill, workout DVD's, etc.) while the FitBit Flex is for my everyday movements at work and at home. Using both specifically for those purposes has been a real eye-opener for me and works like a charm. :)
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    Nothing exists for both your wishes - unless, your exercise right now is walking or jogging.

    Then the FitBit will be just great.

    But HRM isn't useful for daily burn.

    And FitBit isn't for non-step related workouts.

    But if mainly walking, which is very reliable, go for that. Water, non-step related anyway.

    Lifting, use MFP estimate, it's low compared to equal time cardio, but that is absolutely true anyway.

    And ignore all those saying the HRM tracks calories burned or measures them, they don't understand how they work.

    The measure HR only, hence the name. The estimate calories burned based on your age, weight, height, gender to estimate a VO2max, and then try to tie that to a HR that is seen. That correlation may be decent, then again may be way off.

    Another thing to consider between which one may be best.

    Of the 168 hrs in a week, how many hrs will the HRM be used for exercise, compared to a device measuring everything, and perhaps exercise not so great.

    Say 2 hrs of water aerobics it won't measure. 2/168 = 1.2% of your time would be off.
    Say 1 hr of spin class. 0.6% of the time a tad off.

    That doesn't add up much. But...
    1.25 hrs lifting weekly. Oh, still not much.
  • BrunetteRunner87
    BrunetteRunner87 Posts: 591 Member
    Options
    I have a fitbit zip I wear all day to track my calories I burn from walking around, and when I do cardio I wear my heart rate monitor with a chest strap (sorry I don't remember which one). Then I go in and make an activity log on my fitbit account and log my cardio calories through MFP. The HRM isn't water resistant, but I don't think it matters because your heart rate is higher in the water anyway and I don't think it would be accurate. When I go swimming I just guess a little lower than an average number of calories for someone at my weight.

Categories