Most Accurate Calorie Counter Watch

TomBristow
TomBristow Posts: 22 Member
edited November 20 in Fitness and Exercise
Hi MFPers!

I'm bit of a stickler for numbers when it comes to managing my food plan/exercise and I'm looking for a way to best track calories that I burn when I work out.

I have membership at two different gyms, and their cardio equipment seems to give me different readings of the same exercise. For example, one cross trainer would tell me I'm burning 450 calories in 40 mins, whilst another would tell me I'm burning 650 in 40 minutes. Doesn't make sense right?!

So I'm hoping there is a watch out there that is really good at measuring calories based on my weight, height, heart rate etc specifically for WORKOUTS. I'm not too interested in how many I burn in my sleep or outside of the gym (I work an office job from home).

Its confusing me how to assess what I'm burning whilst lifting weights or whilst doing exercise classes where there are no electronic readings or machines to assist, so something that can take this confusion away will be a huge asset for me.

Any help or tips would be much appreciated!

Thanks
Tom

Replies

  • vorgas
    vorgas Posts: 741 Member
    Ok, how big of a stickler are you? Here's what it takes to accurately calculate calories burned from exercise.
    • VO2 Max
    • Resting Heart Rate
    • Maximum Heart Rate
    • Gender
    • Age
    • Weight
    • Percentage of body fat/Muscle mass
    • Minimal HR for aerobic uptake
    • Maximal HR for aerobic uptake
    • Average HR during steady state, aerobic exercise
    • HR variances due to caffeine, temperature, elevation, stress, etc.
    Getting an HRM that handles all of these things will be wildly expensive. Cheaper to find a HRM that will give you average heart rate, max heart rate, and time in a programmable zone or HR range. Then use various websites/spreadsheets to calculate your burn using known formulas.

    You can't use a HRM to calculate calorie burns during weight lifting. Entirely different energy chains, entirely different HR response loads. Search the forums on here for about 3,000 posts asking and explaining why.

    Any class that doesn't keep you moving non-stop will be inaccurate as well.



  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    Based on what you say you do, there isn't an accurate option. None of the motion trackers or HRMs are designed to accurately estimate caloric burn from lifting.
  • TomBristow
    TomBristow Posts: 22 Member
    OK, how about classes that don't use equipment (circuit training or boxing) - would the HRM still be able to give accurate readings of calories burned even though they aren't solely step based?
  • brianpperkins
    brianpperkins Posts: 6,124 Member
    HRMs only approach accurate for steady state cardio activities ... not intervals, not anaerobic ... it's really a narrow band of activities that they come close for. Boxing is interval in nature, so not well suited to HRM measurement.
  • TomBristow
    TomBristow Posts: 22 Member
    vorgas wrote: »
    Ok, how big of a stickler are you? Here's what it takes to accurately calculate calories burned from exercise.
    • VO2 Max
    • Resting Heart Rate
    • Maximum Heart Rate
    • Gender
    • Age
    • Weight
    • Percentage of body fat/Muscle mass
    • Minimal HR for aerobic uptake
    • Maximal HR for aerobic uptake
    • Average HR during steady state, aerobic exercise
    • HR variances due to caffeine, temperature, elevation, stress, etc.
    Getting an HRM that handles all of these things will be wildly expensive. Cheaper to find a HRM that will give you average heart rate, max heart rate, and time in a programmable zone or HR range. Then use various websites/spreadsheets to calculate your burn using known formulas.

    You can't use a HRM to calculate calorie burns during weight lifting. Entirely different energy chains, entirely different HR response loads. Search the forums on here for about 3,000 posts asking and explaining why.

    Any class that doesn't keep you moving non-stop will be inaccurate as well.



    Ok, got it - thank you. Most of the classes involve movement for 95% of the time for 45-60 minutes and I guess I'm looking for a ballpark calorie burn from those. Even in that 5% 'interval' rest time I'd be walking around with my heart pounding waiting to continue.

    Would I be right in saying they're only useful for singular continuous exercises like long runs, cycling, walking etc rather than just an overall mix of exercise?
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    edited June 2015
    TomBristow wrote: »
    I'm bit of a stickler for numbers when it comes to managing my food plan/exercise and I'm looking for a way to best track calories that I burn when I work out.

    There is no accurate method, based on the exercises you're talking about.

    If accuracy is that important, swap your current regime for running, because for that we have fairly accurate numbers.

    ETA: HMRs will over-estimate for walking, too. And cycling is a mess with HRMs as well. They are really creations of marketing and honestly, the dieting world would be a better place if they all just disappeared.
  • ScubaSteve1962
    ScubaSteve1962 Posts: 609 Member
    edited June 2015
    If you're still interested in one. and all you will ever get is an estimate. Like you I use different gyms and can't always get the same piece of equipment, that's why I like using a heart rate monitor, that's the one thing that is consistent.

    http://www.heartratemonitors.com/

    http://www.polar.com/us-en
This discussion has been closed.

Categories