HRM come on this is not right

vdub88
vdub88 Posts: 79
edited September 23 in Fitness and Exercise
Bought a Timex HRM - i have done several test on it - I don't trust it. today - spinning for 40 minutes HRM says 942, MFP - 497. I input my weight into both. Machines are off as well. Tredmill at home I do not put my weight into - last night ran 4 miles (i'ma big girl it takes me a while ) 50 minutes and 688 calories according to machine my HRM 1242.

glad I have been taking the lower number but i never thought this would be a gap this big. I checked to ensure it was set up with the proper weight on my hrm. it is. what gives - anyone else have this issue?

Replies

  • Sandra_M
    Sandra_M Posts: 41 Member
    I just bought a HRM (my first one) tried it out tonight but it was about 10 calories out compared to MFP exercise calories so I am very happy. Only used it twice though so it's early days. Perhaps yours is right and you have been underestimating just how much you have been burning. Hope you get it sorted out soon. I am loving my new purchase so far been wanting one for ages.
  • hardybelle83
    hardybelle83 Posts: 57
    vdub, does your HRM have a chest strap or is it just a watch? The ones with the chest strap are definitely more accurate. What kind of heart rate readings are you getting from it? Those counts do seem really high!
  • HMKan
    HMKan Posts: 472 Member
    Yep, my Timex HRM said I burned 600+ calories doing a 30 min jog/walk on my treadmill. My Nike+ said the same workout was 320. I did 30 min on the elliptical with it (staying in the fat burning zone - so going slow but at a high resistance) and it said 529 when the machine said 300 (my machine I think is a little low, but the HRM was definitely still high). Maybe it's more accurate if you're not moving around as much? I do'nt know. I use mine solely for HR monitoring now and not for calories. For that, I purchased a FitBit.
  • vdub88
    vdub88 Posts: 79
    vdub, does your HRM have a chest strap or is it just a watch? The ones with the chest strap are definitely more accurate. What kind of heart rate readings are you getting from it? Those counts do seem really high!

    yeah it has a chest strap - i checked with my personal trainer - she says HRM is likely more accurate but nothing wrong with logging the lower number. i got it so i could monitor and keep my heart rate up while working out
  • BigBoneSista
    BigBoneSista Posts: 2,389 Member
    Your HRM w/chest strap will be more accurate. 942 sounds about right for spinning for 40 minutes. I burn a little over 500 calories doing Zumba on my xbox for 40 minutes. Spinning is more high impact so much more calories would be burned.
  • fasttrack27
    fasttrack27 Posts: 324
    Very high! I've heard Timex is known for that. I spin alot and push hard. My Polar is usually 500-625 range for 45min.
  • Echoshill
    Echoshill Posts: 42 Member
    I use the TIMEX race trainer elite but double check my calories here:
    http://www.triathlontrainingblog.com/calculators/calories-burned-calculator-based-on-average-heart-rate/

    Keep in mind that calculator uses average HR while the watch algorithm looks at time in zone. Much more accurate.

    Last, I am a certified spinning instructor, 900 ish sounds high for a woman, but it is possible if you were working an honest gear.
    ******Also, I did have a Iron Man HRM that seemed to be pretty high. But the elite is usally within about 100 cals over an hour with the website above.
  • jane77
    jane77 Posts: 489
    I just bought a timex too and yes i think it calulates calories during exercise high but i did wear it twice for 24 hours, when not exercise hard and the totals for the day was right on so I really dont understand why calulates so high once your heart rate is up but so far i think its high so im just eating back about 1/2 of those calories.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories