Polar Watch FT7

Options
annziexo
annziexo Posts: 90 Member
in Getting Started
Hey guys! Yesterday I got my first Polar watch and decided to test it today on a 25 minute walk.

My calories burned are a lot more than what my fitness pal and run keeper think I've burned. I don't know which one to base myself on!

Replies

  • angelaneale
    angelaneale Posts: 102 Member
    Options
    I have the same watch and I base my calories burned off the watch as that's based off your actual heart rate, weight, age, etc. Just make sure you set it up correctly. MFP and RunKeeper just use averages based on the activity and time spent doing the activity.
  • WandaMM1
    WandaMM1 Posts: 132 Member
    Options
    I agree completely. If the watch is properly set up, it will be more accurate than MFP and the machines.
  • dammitjanet0161
    dammitjanet0161 Posts: 319 Member
    Options
    Assuming that you input your stats correctly, I'd go with the watch. Maybe you were walking more briskly than you thought?

    I recently got the FT4 and tested it for the first time on a 2.5 hr hike. I was quite surprised by how many calories it suggested I burned (735) compared to MFP's suggestion for moderate paced walking for that length of time (600-ish), but then again MFP suggested over 1000 for hiking/uphill walking!
  • rhoule76
    rhoule76 Posts: 217 Member
    Options
    Make sure you set the watch up right and that's what you use! MFP and RunKeeper use estimates.
  • klbaierwalter
    klbaierwalter Posts: 309 Member
    Options
    I have the FT7 as well and I agree with the other ladies. It depends on age, weight, etc to determine your actual calories burned. I'm super sad, I went to put mine on this morning and the battery was dead! I was hoping I could get one more workout in before the battery died. So I had to guesstimate my burn for today, but I just won't eat those calories back to be safe.
  • jmapes9
    jmapes9 Posts: 144 Member
    Options
    I have the same one, and have been using it since October. I wouldn't trust any other default source of supposed "calories burned". How is an exercise machine, or a generic cardio exercise input in MFP, supposed to know your body? Always trust a heart rate monitor, as long as you've input your specs properly.
  • jim9097
    jim9097 Posts: 341 Member
    Options
    The FT7 is pretty good, as you get in better shape the numbers will come down. This is normal.
  • annziexo
    annziexo Posts: 90 Member
    Options
    Oh great guys thanks for the advise! I have set it up correctly with all my user information I will be following the watch and no other source :)

    I am so excited to working towards my targets with the watch!
  • alansturge1981
    alansturge1981 Posts: 13 Member
    Options
    Hi Annziexo, I have just started with MFP and last week bought a cross trainer and the Polar FT7. Like the rest of the posts here I would say that the HRM is definitely the way to record calories burnt. My cross trainer seems extremely low, MFP seems to think i'm an athlete and my FT7 is kinda of between the pair so I believe it is giving a correct reading.

    The more we exercise the digits for calories burnt will probably drop doing the same things so then we need to power through and do more, but like I said.........have faith in the HRM :-)
  • faceoff4
    faceoff4 Posts: 1,599 Member
    Options
    MFP is just a database of other peoples entries and as most know heart rates and calories burned will vary greatly by person. So your HRM will always be more accurate than MFP as it is based on your information and not averages from others who may have completely different physical characteristics. Plus it doesn't take into account effort, etc. I have some exercises I do regularly and when I enter it into MFP it is always off from my HRM and I always default to my Polar. I hope this helps and good luck!

Categories