Have you tried GLP1 medications and found it didn't work for you? We'd like to hear about your experiences, what you tried, why it didn't work and how you're doing now. Click here to tell us your story

Do you use heart rate monitor for exercising? which one?

2»

Replies

  • skyhowl
    skyhowl Posts: 206 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    Polar FT7 - used it while losing weight and getting fitter. Probably overestimated by about 15 - 20%.
    Most people with under average fitness levels are going to get an overestimate.
    Still ate all my exercise calories, you just simply adjust your calorie goal based on actual results over time - consistency and willingness to make adjustments beats accuracy!

    Polar FT60 - seems really accurate when calibrated with my tested VO2 max and max HR settings. Agrees almost perfectly with expensive power meter equipped trainers.

    Garmin Edge 800 for cycling - underestimates calories burned. Badly underestimates on lower intensity rides as I can produce reasonably good power output at low HR.

    Why could it overestimate for people under average fitness level? Iam asking because i can probably say i am not really fit.. I don't know if i am below average though.
    My readings is way off from MFP calculator. Lower not higher.
  • skyhowl
    skyhowl Posts: 206 Member
    I have a cheap sport line from walmart (no chest strap) I was wondering how accurate it was but it seems pretty accurate. On a brisk wall I burn around 100 calories in 10 mins. My calorie burn was roughly 300 for a 30 min walk give or take depending on where I go.

    Since I had a baby and push a stroller now I burn an extra 60-80 calories during a 30 min walk.

    My problem was the steps from my HRM and fitbit flex where about 1500 steps off.

    But when i was eating back half of my exercise calories according to my HRM I was still losing weight before (before my baby) and now that I don't my weight is at a stand still and I'm cranky... so I think my cheap $50 one is fairly accurate.

    I went for a high pace 35 min walk+run and it was only 225. Umm i think that i can safely eat my calories, i dunno really since it seems that most people get higher readings :D i am not sure is it because i am not fit or what, but @sijomial says that for under average fitness people, it tends to overestimate. Not sure
  • OldAssDude
    OldAssDude Posts: 1,436 Member
    skyhowl wrote: »
    bcalvanese wrote: »
    I use a Garmin fenix 3 HR, and it monitors heart rate 24/7. Seems to be pretty accurate so far. I also have a fitbit Blaze, but it does not have the advanced features like the Garmin.

    I actually looked into thw one you mentioned :D, it doesn't have chest strap, nice... But i don't think i would be able to afford it, the polar one i got is even an old model :)

    Yes it is expensive, but I love the advanced features, built in GPS w/GLONASS, waterproof up to 100 meters, and the built in HRM is pretty accurate when I compare it to my Polar H7 chest strap monitor.

    I like to record my power walks with it, and the 24/7 HRM gives me a more accurate calorie burn. Even if I don't record a workout, if I do an activity that elevates my heart rate the device picks up on that and logs the extra calories burned.

    Here is an example of what this device records on my power walks...

    https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1280424823

  • skyhowl
    skyhowl Posts: 206 Member
    bcalvanese wrote: »
    skyhowl wrote: »
    bcalvanese wrote: »
    I use a Garmin fenix 3 HR, and it monitors heart rate 24/7. Seems to be pretty accurate so far. I also have a fitbit Blaze, but it does not have the advanced features like the Garmin.

    I actually looked into thw one you mentioned :D, it doesn't have chest strap, nice... But i don't think i would be able to afford it, the polar one i got is even an old model :)

    Yes it is expensive, but I love the advanced features, built in GPS w/GLONASS, waterproof up to 100 meters, and the built in HRM is pretty accurate when I compare it to my Polar H7 chest strap monitor.

    I like to record my power walks with it, and the 24/7 HRM gives me a more accurate calorie burn. Even if I don't record a workout, if I do an activity that elevates my heart rate the device picks up on that and logs the extra calories burned.

    Here is an example of what this device records on my power walks...

    https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1280424823

    Awesome, will check the link when i go home. Maybe one day i will be able to afford it
  • srecupid
    srecupid Posts: 660 Member
    No because the one I have takes 5 minutes to put on and verify its working. I don't eat exercise calories anyways
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    skyhowl wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    Polar FT7 - used it while losing weight and getting fitter. Probably overestimated by about 15 - 20%.
    Most people with under average fitness levels are going to get an overestimate.
    Still ate all my exercise calories, you just simply adjust your calorie goal based on actual results over time - consistency and willingness to make adjustments beats accuracy!

    Polar FT60 - seems really accurate when calibrated with my tested VO2 max and max HR settings. Agrees almost perfectly with expensive power meter equipped trainers.

    Garmin Edge 800 for cycling - underestimates calories burned. Badly underestimates on lower intensity rides as I can produce reasonably good power output at low HR.

    Why could it overestimate for people under average fitness level? Iam asking because i can probably say i am not really fit.. I don't know if i am below average though.
    My readings is way off from MFP calculator. Lower not higher.

    Because typically unfit people have a higher exercise HR than someone the same age/height/weight who is fit - doesn't mean they are burning more calories but the HRM would interpret it that way.

    Imagine a super fit 200lb person walking up stairs next to a really unfit 200lb person. One would find it easy, one hard work, one with a low HR, one with a high HR.

    But they would be burning the virtually same amount of calories (mass moved over distance).
  • tns56364
    tns56364 Posts: 43 Member
    I use the scosche rhythm+. It is an armband and I love it. I feel that it's quite accurate.
  • RoseTheWarrior
    RoseTheWarrior Posts: 2,035 Member
    I use the Polar A360, but since all HRMs are for steady state cardio, if you do anything other than that, reduce your expectations of accuracy.
  • Psychgrrl
    Psychgrrl Posts: 3,177 Member
    skyhowl wrote: »
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    Garmin Vivofit (chest strap). LOVE it! Was a Polar devotee until my last upgrade and had a bad experience with the seller and then with Polar. :disappointed:

    I never had any other hr monitor, i've bought a polar one with chest strap aswell. Was it a problem with the hr monitor itslef or with the company that made you get the Garmin?

    The chest strap and watch would constantly lose connection--something which never happened with my other two. After trying everything I could think of for a couple weeks, I contacted the seller to return it. The seller said I had only 30 days to return the product. And the 30 days started when they shipped it. And it took over two weeks to get to me. My bad for missing that little gem, but the product was clearly defective. I felt as though the seller had that policy for a reason. Then I contacted Polar, and got the run around from them. For over two weeks, they attributed my issues to "user error." Chest strap not wet enough. Watch too far away from the strap (where did they think I was wearing it--my ankle?!), etc. I sent it back to Polar and could not get a response for another two weeks.

    So, I've lost over six weeks of training data at this point. I said screw it and bought the Garmin after doing some fitness tracker research. As an aside, I used to wear a BodyMedia armband (like on The Biggest Loser) and Jawbone had bought them out and were not going to support the armband any longer.

    So, I lost money with Polar--been over a year and a half and I've never heard from them. But, I am extremely happy with my Garmin. Had it for 16 months now.
  • skyhowl
    skyhowl Posts: 206 Member
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    skyhowl wrote: »
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    Garmin Vivofit (chest strap). LOVE it! Was a Polar devotee until my last upgrade and had a bad experience with the seller and then with Polar. :disappointed:

    I never had any other hr monitor, i've bought a polar one with chest strap aswell. Was it a problem with the hr monitor itslef or with the company that made you get the Garmin?

    The chest strap and watch would constantly lose connection--something which never happened with my other two. After trying everything I could think of for a couple weeks, I contacted the seller to return it. The seller said I had only 30 days to return the product. And the 30 days started when they shipped it. And it took over two weeks to get to me. My bad for missing that little gem, but the product was clearly defective. I felt as though the seller had that policy for a reason. Then I contacted Polar, and got the run around from them. For over two weeks, they attributed my issues to "user error." Chest strap not wet enough. Watch too far away from the strap (where did they think I was wearing it--my ankle?!), etc. I sent it back to Polar and could not get a response for another two weeks.

    So, I've lost over six weeks of training data at this point. I said screw it and bought the Garmin after doing some fitness tracker research. As an aside, I used to wear a BodyMedia armband (like on The Biggest Loser) and Jawbone had bought them out and were not going to support the armband any longer.

    So, I lost money with Polar--been over a year and a half and I've never heard from them. But, I am extremely happy with my Garmin. Had it for 16 months now.
    Wow, i would get extremely mad in your situation. Lool... I had only little money to spend, so if the watch i've bought was defective. I don't know what i would do... Well, i believe that any company pays one day for their customers' experience.. Even if people trust their products performance, they shouldn't take that for granted.. Sorry this happened to you.
  • skyhowl
    skyhowl Posts: 206 Member
    edited August 2016
    I use the Polar A360, but since all HRMs are for steady state cardio, if you do anything other than that, reduce your expectations of accuracy.

    Yeah, i only use mine on running sessions, walking.. So on. But i can't help myself from thinking about doing an experiment and keeping the HRM all day. Just to see what i would get.. Wonder if anyone tried something similar with HRM with chest straps
  • BigGuy47
    BigGuy47 Posts: 1,768 Member
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    So, I lost money with Polar--been over a year and a half and I've never heard from them.
    Sorry to hear that you had a bad experience with Polar. I started getting erratic readings on my H7 so I contacted their support after changing the battery and resetting the device. I sent my unit in and they sent me a replacement unit in less than two weeks. They said that the monitor has a two year warranty. All told, I lost about a month of data by the time it was sorted out.
  • skyhowl
    skyhowl Posts: 206 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    skyhowl wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    Polar FT7 - used it while losing weight and getting fitter. Probably overestimated by about 15 - 20%.
    Most people with under average fitness levels are going to get an overestimate.
    Still ate all my exercise calories, you just simply adjust your calorie goal based on actual results over time - consistency and willingness to make adjustments beats accuracy!

    Polar FT60 - seems really accurate when calibrated with my tested VO2 max and max HR settings. Agrees almost perfectly with expensive power meter equipped trainers.

    Garmin Edge 800 for cycling - underestimates calories burned. Badly underestimates on lower intensity rides as I can produce reasonably good power output at low HR.

    Why could it overestimate for people under average fitness level? Iam asking because i can probably say i am not really fit.. I don't know if i am below average though.
    My readings is way off from MFP calculator. Lower not higher.

    Because typically unfit people have a higher exercise HR than someone the same age/height/weight who is fit - doesn't mean they are burning more calories but the HRM would interpret it that way.

    Imagine a super fit 200lb person walking up stairs next to a really unfit 200lb person. One would find it easy, one hard work, one with a low HR, one with a high HR.

    But they would be burning the virtually same amount of calories (mass moved over distance).

    That makes sense, thanks for explaining.