HRM differences.

Gut2Glam
Gut2Glam Posts: 15
edited September 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
Why did my HRM tell me I burned 80 calories and my treadmill said 200? I was running for 25 minutes doing C25K Week 4. So it's hard to believe that could be accurate.

Replies

  • sarah44254
    sarah44254 Posts: 3,078 Member
    That is crazy low. Are you using a HRM with a chest strap? Are you able to enter your personal info (height, weight, age) into the HRM? Was it accurately reading your pulse (did you check it at all during the workout? Did it say the heart beat number and did it seem right?)
  • Gut2Glam
    Gut2Glam Posts: 15
    No, it's just the watch, and I took my heart rate many times through out my workout like the directions said. It seemed like the pulse was correct every time- it was around 170-190. I didn't see any option to enter in weight or height.
  • sarah44254
    sarah44254 Posts: 3,078 Member
    I'm not familiar with HRM as just the watches. The one I use has all the options I mentioned, and a chest strap. I have heard the ones without straps are not as accurate, and if your case included, I would say what I heard is right.

    If I go running 25 mins (especially C25K) I burn likely 300 calories. Even less than that down to 200 like your treadmill says is very reasonable. I burn close to 80 calories in a 10 minute walk to my mailbox and back. :ohwell: so that 80 is pretty far off base.
  • Gut2Glam
    Gut2Glam Posts: 15
    Yeah, I'm going to try and return it because it doesn't do anything at all that I want it to do. What brand do you recommend? Which one do you have?
  • amccrazgrl
    amccrazgrl Posts: 315 Member
    Most people including myself have Polar. They can be expensive depending on which version you have. My partner and I have the FT40 which runs $140 a piece.

    No matter which HRM you get it HAS to HAVE a chest strap. They may seem uncomfortable but its barley noticeable.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories