Polar FT7 - accurate calorie count?

misssmarita
misssmarita Posts: 130
in Fitness and Exercise
When it comes to walking (the only exercise I am able to do for any decent amount of time), there's a pretty big difference in what my heart rate monitor and the MFP database of exercises tell me I've burned. My heart rate monitor tells me I've burned 50 - 100 calories more than the MFP database. Which do I believe? I'm thinking maybe go with the lowest of them, as it's better to underestimate the calories I've burned, but I do want an accurate number. Anyone had any similar experiences?

Replies

  • badtastebetty
    badtastebetty Posts: 326 Member
    Depending on your weight, there is likely a difference between MFP and your heart rate monitor. I usually am on par, or lower with my heart rate monitor than what MFP says. I have a PolarFT4.

    All of these calculations should be considered an estimation, but I will usually trust my heart rate monitor over MFP.
  • islandgirl76_
    islandgirl76_ Posts: 86 Member
    I have been wondering the same thing. Maybe we need to subtract the calories we would have burned resting from what the HRM says.
  • jlwhit04
    jlwhit04 Posts: 5
    I have a Polar FT7, and I also always subtract my BMR from what the monitor says I've burned. My BMR is ~1 calorie/minute, so luckily it's a pretty easy calculation for me :)
  • ayankeefan51
    ayankeefan51 Posts: 135 Member
    I just bought an FT7 on Friday and started using it. For my spinning cardio, MFP was 100 calories higher than my FT7 and my spin bike was about 45 cal higher than my FT7. So I think my FT7 is probably pretty accurate whereas MFP is not.
  • famuchic
    famuchic Posts: 11
    I agree with others, MFP is always higher for me than what my FT7 states. Regardless i would go with the FT7 since that is using your actual heart rate to calculate calories burned. A machine or the computer can't calculate how many more calories you burned because you went up a steep hill.
  • __Di__
    __Di__ Posts: 1,658 Member
    Always go by your HRM, it has all your personal details on it, whereas the MFP estimates could have been put there by a 450lb male who will use up a load of calories or it may have been put there by a 50lb 2 foot tall female who uses up minimum.

    Once you have your HRM, always go by that.
  • samgao
    samgao Posts: 2
    I've been using the MFP database until I got the FT7 (thank you amazon and best buy for price matching! Got this at a steal @ 66.99 @ best buy -- price matched to amazon.com)

    Anyways, Since I do crossfit 3x a week, I just went with circuit training, perhaps 30 minutes to 60 minutes. which at most, estimates @ ~ 780 calories used.

    But yesterday, I tried out the FT7 and it said I burned 959 calories, with my avg heart rate @ 158, and my peak @ 181. (1 mile run, 60 burpees, 800m run, 30 burpees, 400m run, 15 burpees -- in 32 minutes). I then decided to stay an extra hour working on my strength, and my HR dropped down to ~120-130bpm. which also gave me another 919 calories.

    All in all, I think I trust this FT7 more than the database. I just wish I knew my BMR, or if I'm in "starvation mode" or not, since I'm actually burning quite a few more than expected.

Categories