Fitbit products - which one?????

Calorie_Counting_K
Calorie_Counting_K Posts: 48 Member
edited November 18 in Fitness and Exercise
Hi all, does anyone use a fitbit product? If so how are you using it and which is a good one for just tracking calories burnt and exercise I do at the gym etc?
Thanks!

Replies

  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    zip for general step-based activity across the day

    what do you do at the gym? If it's steady state cardio then I would personally recommend a Polar HRM with chest strap (I use an FT4)

    if it's not steady-state cardio then no HRM is going to give you an accurate estimate on your calorie burn because the formula underpinning the conversion from HR to calories is based on Steady-State

    Hope that helps
  • HalfGlass
    HalfGlass Posts: 3 Member
    Hi,
    I use a FitBit Charge HR. It's brilliant!
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    HalfGlass wrote: »
    Hi,
    I use a FitBit Charge HR. It's brilliant!

    maybe if you're tracking your HR because you have a heart condition

    but no better than the base models because I assume it defaults to the step counter version most of the time

    although I'd love to be convinced otherwise, cos I love my gadgets

    (not having a go at Fitbit .. excellent company .. it's re all these new 24 hour wearables)
  • keithcw_the_first
    keithcw_the_first Posts: 382 Member
    I have the Charge HR as well.

    I use it at the gym for mostly strength training, and it usually comes back with something around 300 calories (+/-) for an hour of vigorous activity. So in that regard, I'd say they have something basic figured out, at least.

    I let it feed calories into MFP and don't track anything here. With some tweaking, I've been tracking along my goal rather nicely. It helps (vs. TDEE) if you're more active on a rest day than usual, or slower at the gym than normal.

    I was initially skeptical that the numbers it was returning were correct and as I said, I did have to do some tweaking. Nothing will be 100%.

    I would buy it again.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    I still think 300 is over for most people - but you have the absolute answer there - if your body is playing ball with your goals it's accurate for you :smile: It is tempting

    30 min burn for a 155lb person on weight training according to this is around 112 calories .. no mention of intensity of course .. which would suggest 66% of HRM burn

    http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsweek/Calories-burned-in-30-minutes-of-leisure-and-routine-activities.htm
  • earlnabby
    earlnabby Posts: 8,171 Member
    I have the Flex for two reasons (above the general reasons for a tracker):
    1. It can be worn in water and is the only Fitbit model that can
    2. It is worn on the wrist instead of clipped to clothing so it doesn't get accidentally thrown into the laundry and I don't have to remember to put it on.

    I would definitely buy again
  • Breedy75
    Breedy75 Posts: 54 Member
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    I still think 300 is over for most people - but you have the absolute answer there - if your body is playing ball with your goals it's accurate for you :smile: It is tempting

    30 min burn for a 155lb person on weight training according to this is around 112 calories .. no mention of intensity of course .. which would suggest 66% of HRM burn

    http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsweek/Calories-burned-in-30-minutes-of-leisure-and-routine-activities.htm

    That puts "weight lifting" in the same ball park as Frisbee and Bowling, which seems a tad bit off. The reality is it depends on how much you lift and how far you move the weight,but for a more intense session in think 300k/cal is close
  • keithcw_the_first
    keithcw_the_first Posts: 382 Member
    Breedy75 wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    I still think 300 is over for most people - but you have the absolute answer there - if your body is playing ball with your goals it's accurate for you :smile: It is tempting

    30 min burn for a 155lb person on weight training according to this is around 112 calories .. no mention of intensity of course .. which would suggest 66% of HRM burn

    http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsweek/Calories-burned-in-30-minutes-of-leisure-and-routine-activities.htm

    That puts "weight lifting" in the same ball park as Frisbee and Bowling, which seems a tad bit off. The reality is it depends on how much you lift and how far you move the weight,but for a more intense session in think 300k/cal is close

    Yes, it's a very broad category. If you look at the METS table:

    http://prevention.sph.sc.edu/tools/docs/documents_compendium.pdf

    there's a few entries for weight lifting. "Vigorous" weight lifting is 6 METS, which means a 155 lb. person performing that activity for 45 minutes would burn 315 calories. That sounds a little high to me -- but even lifting at a light effort comes in at 157 calories.

    The point is, I guess, that you're right and it definitely depends on the person. I weigh 196 and I feel like the numbers I get from my fitbit for strength training are generally correct.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    You may be interested in this http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-21472
  • marinemplunkett69
    marinemplunkett69 Posts: 184 Member
    Charge HR all the way!
  • Calorie_Counting_K
    Calorie_Counting_K Posts: 48 Member
    Thanks all, alot of useful info, will read up and decide. :smile:
This discussion has been closed.

Categories