Different HRM question.

Options
eates
eates Posts: 334 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
A friend of mine and I did exactly the same workout this morning right next to each other. 45 minutes of spin, 45 minutes of Zumba Toning & 30 minutes of Butts & Gutts. She has a Timex HRM and I have the New Balance N4. I weigh about 40 lbs more than she does.
At the end of our workout her HRM said 1890 Calories burned & mine said 860. :huh: Her HR range & mine were pretty close, her high was few higher than mine but nothing really significant.

So why the incredible difference in the number of calories burned?

Replies

  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    Timex are notoriously inaccurate. I doubt that in 2 hours she burned 1860 that would be 15.5 cals/minute, which I don't think is sustainable for that long. I would have to sprint to get that type of burn, and there is no way I can sprint for 2 hours.
  • Sasha_Bear
    Sasha_Bear Posts: 625 Member
    Options
    Yep I agree with Eric something must be off off with her Timex, especially seeing as though your heavier you should have burned more calories then she did.
  • scarletleavy
    scarletleavy Posts: 841 Member
    Options
    I've actually been wondering a similar question. I seem to burn a lot less calories than other people doing the same activities and don't quite know why. I know everyone's different, but I wonder why there's such a huge range in calories burned.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    I've actually been wondering a similar question. I seem to burn a lot less calories than other people doing the same activities and don't quite know why. I know everyone's different, but I wonder why there's such a huge range in calories burned.
    If you are using the same HRM as someone else, there is a built in equation that takes into account age, weight, gender, HR, duration. So if these vary from one person to another your HRM will give you a different calorie burn.

    Gender - males burn more than females (at the same weight)
    HR - the Higher your HR the more cals burned (less fit people will have higher HRs doing the same thing)
    Weight - those that weigh more will burn more (assuming HR and gender are the same
    Age - I beleive the older you are the less you burn
    duration - the longer you workout the more you burn (assuming same HR)

    Hopefully this helps explain some difference.
  • AlsDonkBoxSquat
    AlsDonkBoxSquat Posts: 6,128 Member
    Options
    Timex are notoriously inaccurate. I doubt that in 2 hours she burned 1860 that would be 15.5 cals/minute, which I don't think is sustainable for that long. I would have to sprint to get that type of burn, and there is no way I can sprint for 2 hours.

    Hum, the timex was actually published as cr's best buy back in feb (I was looking last night) and rated really high for accuracy. Not that I disagree, I went with a polar anyway, just saying that this surprises me.

    99% of my gym has polar hrm's and the calorie from one person to another can be dramatically off. I'm 3 inches shorter than one of the other intructors there, and a good bit over all smaller. We do the same class, I do it with higher intensity and her monitor will say that she burned 1000 calories and mine will say 600 . . . depressing.
  • jagfan
    jagfan Posts: 255 Member
    Options
    I have a Timex, also. It seems to have a pretty high calorie burn which has made me question what it says. But, when I put my exercise in to MFP, I use the calories it says I burned towards my credit, not what I show.

    I have only had the Timex for a short period of time...when I finally get a new one, I will be looking for something else!!
  • scarletleavy
    scarletleavy Posts: 841 Member
    Options
    I've actually been wondering a similar question. I seem to burn a lot less calories than other people doing the same activities and don't quite know why. I know everyone's different, but I wonder why there's such a huge range in calories burned.
    If you are using the same HRM as someone else, there is a built in equation that takes into account age, weight, gender, HR, duration. So if these vary from one person to another your HRM will give you a different calorie burn.

    Gender - males burn more than females (at the same weight)
    HR - the Higher your HR the more cals burned (less fit people will have higher HRs doing the same thing)
    Weight - those that weigh more will burn more (assuming HR and gender are the same
    Age - I beleive the older you are the less you burn
    duration - the longer you workout the more you burn (assuming same HR)

    Hopefully this helps explain some difference.

    Thanks! That does explain a lot. Does that mean the more fit you are the less calories you will burn doing the same things?
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    I've actually been wondering a similar question. I seem to burn a lot less calories than other people doing the same activities and don't quite know why. I know everyone's different, but I wonder why there's such a huge range in calories burned.
    If you are using the same HRM as someone else, there is a built in equation that takes into account age, weight, gender, HR, duration. So if these vary from one person to another your HRM will give you a different calorie burn.

    Gender - males burn more than females (at the same weight)
    HR - the Higher your HR the more cals burned (less fit people will have higher HRs doing the same thing)
    Weight - those that weigh more will burn more (assuming HR and gender are the same
    Age - I beleive the older you are the less you burn
    duration - the longer you workout the more you burn (assuming same HR)

    Hopefully this helps explain some difference.

    Thanks! That does explain a lot. Does that mean the more fit you are the less calories you will burn doing the same things?

    Yes, which is an issue when trying to lose weight and burn a certain number of calories, as you get hit by lower burns on 2 fronts. 1 from being more fit, and 2 from weighing less.
  • AlsDonkBoxSquat
    AlsDonkBoxSquat Posts: 6,128 Member
    Options

    Yes, which is an issue when trying to lose weight and burn a certain number of calories, as you get hit by lower burns on 2 fronts. 1 from being more fit, and 2 from weighing less.

    Sucks, right? It also explains why the hrm on machines is so unreliable. Even the ones that ask your weight rarely ask your height or age or gender and unless you have one that works with your chest strap isn't getting a constant hr reating.
  • kjphipps
    kjphipps Posts: 14
    Options
    I have a body bugg and love it... I think that is better than some of the HRM....
  • eates
    eates Posts: 334 Member
    Options
    Thanks! I was trying to figure out how she'd burned more than twice as many calories as me doing the same exercises!!

Categories