HRM Question

navs52
navs52 Posts: 40
edited September 22 in Health and Weight Loss
I got an HRM today and used it for the first time. I did 55 min on the elliptical and the HRM told me I burned 400 more calories than MFP did. I used the method of 220-age to set my max heart rate on the device. I know that his is very generic and I should find my max heart rate by other methods(The HRM book has a way) My question for you guys is if my max heart rate was off would this affect the number of calories burned? It seems to me as long as the HRM has the correct weight I should be good. Thoughts?

Replies

  • beeckda
    beeckda Posts: 8
    ok i am new at this and may sound like a dummy but what is all this talk about HRM? what is this exactly and where do i go to get one? lots of talk here about them. thanks:)
  • navs52
    navs52 Posts: 40
    Heart rate monitor.
  • Disciplined74
    Disciplined74 Posts: 298 Member
    ok i am new at this and may sound like a dummy but what is all this talk about HRM? what is this exactly and where do i go to get one? lots of talk here about them. thanks:)

    A HRM is a heart rate monitor. Basically it takes your pulse for you. I have one that takes my pulse and based on my weight, and age it tells me at what percentage I am working at and it gives me an idea of how many calories I have burned.

    You can get an inexpensive one at Wal-mart. I'm using one of those now but one of the rewards for myself when I reach my next goal is a nice one like a bodybugg or body media. I'm still trying out to see which one is the best fit for me.

    There are lots of posts about HRM if you want to search and read some of those discussions to get an idea of which is best for you.

    Good luck.
  • abtropix
    abtropix Posts: 133 Member
    Beeckda - Heart Rate Monitor. It tracks your heartbeat during exercise. Polar is a great brand. It has a watch and band that you put around your chest when you workout. Gives you calories burned, heart rate, and it keeps you within the mode you want to work out (fat burning, aerobic, endurance, etc.)

    Navs52 - sorry, no idea! 400 cals do seem like quite a difference! My HRM is broken so I haven't been able to compare. In my case, MFP's calorie calculation seems to be too high for what I was used to burning a few yrs ago before my HRM broke down. I think I might have to get a new one... I'll ask Santa!
  • xxthursday09xx
    xxthursday09xx Posts: 85 Member
    HRM's are good at being more accurate at counting calories. But you have to take into consideration your normal burn amount with out working out. I burn 60 cal per hour without working out. so if I worked out for an hour and my HRM told me I burned 560. I actually burned 500. If I'm on a machine and it tells me I burned 250 and the HRM says 400. I go 250+400= 650 / 2 = 325 - 60 = total burn 265. Now if I dont have a machine I just deduct my 60 and a couple hundred more. I dont want to over guess. here's a formula I found online that came VERY VERY close to what MFP calculated for my standing calorie burn:

    1453. My calories that MFP gave me is 1460. I was pretty impressed. Try it out and see if it works for you!! i
    f you want to get exact then :
    your weight (in lbs) x 4.3
    add 655 plus your height (in inches)
    x 4.7 minus your age x 4.7
  • navs52
    navs52 Posts: 40
    Well after searching the forums I found out the HRM I bought(Timex Ironman) is known for listing the calories burned too high....Its going back tomorrow.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories