Recommendations for heart rate monitor

Options
lwfromny
lwfromny Posts: 3
in Fitness and Exercise
I am interested in purchasing a heart rate monitor to measure calories burned during strength training and cardio workouts. I already have a Garmin Forerunner 10 for when I run but need something for other workouts. I care about accuracy more than price (ie, I'm willing to pay more to get better accuracy). Anyone have a recommendation?
«1

Replies

  • jzs20
    jzs20 Posts: 58 Member
    Options
    Polar F-T4
    about 65$ on amazon.com
  • knightreader
    knightreader Posts: 813 Member
    Options
    Polar F-T4
    about 65$ on amazon.com

    this.
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Options
    OP, do you want a HRM that links to a GPS to incorporate heart rate data from your running as well or just a stand alone HRM?
  • HisStrengthCounselor
    HisStrengthCounselor Posts: 191 Member
    Options
    The polar brand is great, I have one
  • JerseyChic76
    JerseyChic76 Posts: 91 Member
    Options
    Polar FT4
  • itsbasschick
    itsbasschick Posts: 1,584 Member
    Options
    i use the H7 with endomondo on my phone - endomondo uses the heart rate info from the H7 to adjust the calorie burn of all exercises including weight training, and i'm super happy with it. the H7 doesn't include a watch, though - i use it with the FT1, and that combination works perfectly for me, but i don't think a watch is really needed.
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Options
    I am interested in purchasing a heart rate monitor to measure calories burned during strength training and cardio workouts. I already have a Garmin Forerunner 10 for when I run but need something for other workouts. I care about accuracy more than price (ie, I'm willing to pay more to get better accuracy). Anyone have a recommendation?

    Another critical question is what do your workouts consist of? HRMs only approach accurate for steady state cardio. Depending on what you do, accuracy might be an issue.

    Now back to the knee jerk listing of entry level Polar HRMs.
  • queenierz
    queenierz Posts: 210 Member
    Options
    Polar Ft14 or F17 (I'm using F17)
  • SnuggleSmacks
    SnuggleSmacks Posts: 3,731 Member
    Options
    First, you won't use the HRM for weight lifting, only for steady-state cardio. It won't be accurate for anything else.

    Second, ask yourself if you want a HRM that connects to a watch or to an app, and then search accordingly.

    I take my phone with me when I run, and I have it at the gym, so I preferred an app to a watch. I bought a Zephyr bluetooth chest strap which connects to my phone and syncs with a bunch of different apps like iCardio and Endomondo and Runkeeper. The apps also use GPS and measure all sorts of other things, connect with websites, sync with MFP, etc. etc. that most watch HRMs won't do.

    So, considerations: Do you want it to connect with a watch or a phone app? If phone app, does your phone use Bluetooth, Bluetooth Smart, or Bluetooth Low Energy, or ANT? Then look at Zephyr, Polar and Garmin options.
  • FatFreeFrolicking
    FatFreeFrolicking Posts: 4,252 Member
    Options
    Polar FT4.
  • SnuggleSmacks
    SnuggleSmacks Posts: 3,731 Member
    Options
    Just wanted to mention also that with a HRM that connects to an app, you can have the app speak your HR and zone into your earbuds so you don't have to look at anything at all. This is a feature I really appreciate with my Zephyr. I can go running and not have to constantly look at either my wrist or my phone. I can keep my eyes on my surroundings and still get all the info I need.
  • lwfromny
    lwfromny Posts: 3
    Options
    I actually didn't really think about syncing. All I wanted is to see calories burned so I could enter them into MFP. I don't care if it gives me any info while working out - I just want the info after. HOWEVER, other than running which my watch already takes care of tracking, my primary activity is either strength training or some form of combo cardio/strength training. I never use ellipticals, treadmills etc., and never do Zumba, aerobics, etc. So if an HRM won't give me a calorie burned reading during strength training, maybe it won't help me.

    If using my phone to sync with the HRM gives me any advantage I'm open to it, but I don't want to have to have the phone with me while working out.
  • playful1510
    playful1510 Posts: 21 Member
    Options
    Sorry to kind of co-opt this thread, but between chest, wrist, or any other mounted sensors, which are better?

    EDIT: By better, I mean more accurate. Sorry :3

    Double Edit: Also, any suggestions that can integrate w/ MFP would be greatly appreciated :P
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Options
    Sorry to kind of co-opt this thread, but between chest, wrist, or any other mounted sensors, which are better?

    EDIT: By better, I mean more accurate. Sorry :3

    Double Edit: Also, any suggestions that can integrate w/ MFP would be greatly appreciated :P

    Better is a completely subjective term. When it comes to measuring heart rate the major makers are comparable in accuracy across the form factors. Mio and TomTom both make continuous wrist mounted HRMs that test well. Garmin, Polar, Zephyr, Wahoo all make continuous read chest straps that span the Bluetooth and ANT+ compatibility ranges.

    Where they differ is in the software and algorithms used to estimate caloric burn from that heart rate data. Some incorporate a lot more data points than others. None are "accurate" across all exercises ... they are designed for steady state cardio with the forumlae holding up best for running, cycling, etc.
  • playful1510
    playful1510 Posts: 21 Member
    Options
    So then is choosing a HRM just based on personal preference? If there aren't any differences really, other than the algorithms, what sets the different products apart?
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Options
    So then is choosing a HRM just based on personal preference? If there aren't any differences really, other than the algorithms, what sets the different products apart?

    The algorithms determine how each model estimates caloric burn. The bells and whistles differ between models. How the major brands count heart beats, the primary function of a HRM, really doesn't vary much.
  • jocoff2012
    jocoff2012 Posts: 7 Member
    Options
    The Scosche Rhythm has worked great for me & my wife. You can find them on Ebay for $30
  • playful1510
    playful1510 Posts: 21 Member
    Options
    I had a bad experience with a Timex HRM (Timex Personal Trainer) at one point. the chest sensor would not actually read my heart rate, most likely because my chest was/is a landscape of rolling hills and valleys (lumpy). Did I just get a really bad/cheap HRM or should I look more closely to wrist mounted HRMs?
  • 34blast
    34blast Posts: 166 Member
    Options
    If you wear a chest strap at the correct tightness and maybe wet it a bit first, it will read very accurately your heart rate . The wrist ones are much less accurate. For low cost heart rate monitors the Polar FT-4 and FT-7 will fit the bill. If you want something more complicated it will cost more such as integration with IPhone or GPS tracking. I have an iphone and use MapMyRun. I have an FT-7 as well. It's a pretty good combination to mark out your distance, time, average heart rate.
  • lwfromny
    lwfromny Posts: 3
    Options
    Thanks for all the feedback. Based on everything here, I'm not going to go for one. I really wanted something to help me measure calories burned during strength work and it sounds like that doesn't exist. I'll just keep conservatively counting all strength training as 100 calories. Glad I didn't waste the money!

Categories