Calories burned appear higher than I think on my watch.

Blr31977
Blr31977 Posts: 49
edited September 27 in Health and Weight Loss
Does anyone have the Sportline 915 Heart Rate monitor watch? I find that my calories burned is a bit high.. I walked 2.6 miles in 45 minutes and its reading 734 calories burned and according to MFP Walking at about 5mph it's less than 500 calories burned.. Could this be wrong or could I have possibly burned this many calories? ohwell

Replies

  • jrich1
    jrich1 Posts: 2,408 Member
    I would use a HRM reading over what MFP says
  • Angela4Health
    Angela4Health Posts: 1,319 Member
    Any HRM without a chest strap is useless.
  • Sasha_Bear
    Sasha_Bear Posts: 625 Member
    This model doesn't seem to have a chest strap? So the reading is more then likely inaccurate.
  • SaraBrown12
    SaraBrown12 Posts: 277 Member
    The HRM reading sounds WAY too high. Your always better to use the lower calorie burn to make sure your not accidently going over your goals. Have u set it up correctly, put correct weight in etc....?
  • KTNemo
    KTNemo Posts: 100
    I don't even burn that much running 6mph (10 minute mile) for 45 minutes. Do you have a HRM with a chest strap? That is the only way you are going to get an accurate reading.
  • Only1ladyk
    Only1ladyk Posts: 15 Member
    I have a sportsline watch. Did you set it to your age and gender. That makes a difference. My trainer first had me use this watch and he had it set on 99 M (general because all his clients use it) I would do a training session with him and burn like 1500 cal in 45 min!

    When I got my own watch and set it for the correct setting 37 F then It calcuated more corrected per what I was doing.
  • peimomof2
    peimomof2 Posts: 79 Member
    Does anyone have the Sportline 915 Heart Rate monitor watch? I find that my calories burned is a bit high.. I walked 2.6 miles in 45 minutes and its reading 734 calories burned and according to MFP Walking at about 5mph it's less than 500 calories burned.. Could this be wrong or could I have possibly burned this many calories? ohwell

    I have the same HRM and i find it burns a bit high too. I'll enter it as what appears on my HRM, but i'm extra careful in regards to what i eat. Everyone tells me to go by what my HRM says. The MFP data i think underestimates as well.
  • Blr31977
    Blr31977 Posts: 49
    I hate the chest strap so I got this one that I just manually check every like 5 minutes by touching the bezel. My heart rate is consistently between 156-171 the entire time when im walking/jogging according to the watch but not sure... I think I just might have to use the one with the strap.
  • CarolMorris66
    CarolMorris66 Posts: 59
    Seems a bit high to me.....

    I did 21 miles walking in 7.45 hours yesterday with a HRM with chest strap on and burnt 2360. I am 5ft 9 and weigh 150 lbs, so unless you are double my height and weight, I would say it is not that accurate!!
  • tigerblue
    tigerblue Posts: 1,526 Member
    I find the website values here on MFP to be pretty close to what my HRM with a chest strap says. I'd go with the website, but maybe add 20 calories or so by increasing your minutes.
  • Blr31977
    Blr31977 Posts: 49
    I have it set to me 34 F and I always check to make sure my kids didn't change it before I start a workout.. I also wear it when I do zumba and the burn varies depending on how intense the work out is... It's usually between 587-830 per 45 minute session on my game.

    I usually put less on MFP than the watch says only because I don't believe it sometimes.. Lol! I was just wondering if anyone else is having this same issue.

    Thanks all :wink:
  • rileysowner
    rileysowner Posts: 8,332 Member
    I hate the chest strap so I got this one that I just manually check every like 5 minutes by touching the bezel. My heart rate is consistently between 156-171 the entire time when im walking/jogging according to the watch but not sure... I think I just might have to use the one with the strap.

    Whether you hate the chest strap or not, your heart rate monitor is only useful for one thing without it, measuring your heart rate. The calories burned in calculates without a chest strap are no more accurate a reflection of how hard you worked than MFP or another calorie calculation site. I personally think HRM manufacturers should stop leading people astray thinking that without a chest strap your HRM can calculate any sort of meaningful calorie burned data. It cannot. You would be better spending the money on a Bodymedia fit or Body bugg.
  • wooddie14
    wooddie14 Posts: 79 Member
    Sounds high for sure...you definitely need to set up the watch correctly with age, gender, etc. I personally haven’t had very good luck with HRM without a chest strap. The last Sportline I had wasn't very good. I recommend the Polar HRM's. Lots of good reviews and I have had great results with mine.
  • KasinoRoyale
    KasinoRoyale Posts: 4
    n/m
  • mamaDaisyJ
    mamaDaisyJ Posts: 395
    My friend and I both have the same watch. When we workout together, her reading is always quite a bit higher than me. Her doctor told her it was because she has a higher resting heartrate, so the percentages are skewed for her. As endurance increases, the amount burned should reduce.
    I'd say do the same workout with the chest strap if you have one and see how much of a difference there actually is. You may need to check your rate more often with the watch, or just don't eat quite all your calories back.
  • Blr31977
    Blr31977 Posts: 49
    My friend and I both have the same watch. When we workout together, her reading is always quite a bit higher than me. Her doctor told her it was because she has a higher resting heartrate, so the percentages are skewed for her. As endurance increases, the amount burned should reduce.
    I'd say do the same workout with the chest strap if you have one and see how much of a difference there actually is. You may need to check your rate more often with the watch, or just don't eat quite all your calories back.

    All my setting are correct so maybe it's because I probably have no endurance... Or it's just defective, i've had it for a little over 2 months. I do have a good one with a chest strap my husband purchased over a year ago I'll look for it and compare the 2..
  • runnergirl2027
    runnergirl2027 Posts: 15
    I have a Garmin FR60 that I LOVE. I ran 3 miles this morning at about a 10:30min/mile, and my HRM said I only burned 337 cals. That's about right for me - about 100 cals/mile. I don't mind the chest strap - I wear it under the lower band of my sports bra, and found that it's much more comfy than wearing it above my girls. :) Less confining.

    Good luck!!
  • peimomof2
    peimomof2 Posts: 79 Member
    I also have the Sportline 915 female HRM. The only reason i bought it was it was all i could afford at the time. I know it's not the best watch out there. I do find it high as well. The one thing i don't like about the watch is it only asks you for your age and gender, and not your weight. A person at my age at a heavier weight would burn the calories that are showing up on my HRM. I think shortly down the road i will have to invest in a better watch with a chest strap. That seems to be the way to go and have a more accurate calorie burn.
  • peimomof2
    peimomof2 Posts: 79 Member
    I also have the Sportline 915 female HRM. The only reason i bought it was it was all i could afford at the time. I know it's not the best watch out there. I do find it high as well. The one thing i don't like about the watch is it only asks you for your age and gender, and not your weight. A person at my age at a heavier weight would burn the calories that are showing up on my HRM. I think shortly down the road i will have to invest in a better watch with a chest strap. That seems to be the way to go and have a more accurate calorie burn.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories