How accurate is a HRM with calories burnt?

lizbeth436
lizbeth436 Posts: 40 Member
edited September 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
I got a HRM about a week ago and I just started using it today, I checked my calories burnt as soon as I stopped my 15 min elliptical workout and it said I burnt 505 calories. Always before I used the database on MFP for my elliptical workout and for 15 mins it says I burnt 270 calories. Which one is more accurate? I personally think the 505 seems kinda high but I could be wrong.

Replies

  • LavenderBouquet
    LavenderBouquet Posts: 736 Member
    I would personally go with the HRM, as it is much more personally tailored to what is going on with you rather then a generic number that MFP generates.
  • CDGolden
    CDGolden Posts: 343 Member
    You HRM will generally be more accurate since it is based YOUR actual heart rate. You need to make sure you have programmed the HRM with your personal info, height, age, weight, etc.

    MFP doesn't know how hard, fast you are actually working out but will be based on a general formula.

    What type of HRM do you have, is only wrist based or does it use a chest strap?
  • julwills
    julwills Posts: 286 Member
    What type of HRM is it, does it have a strap? The wrist ones are generally less accurate because they don't constantly monitor your heart rate like one with a strap.

    505 cals in 15 mins seems insanely high, I usually burn that in 45 mins of super high intensity! In this case I would go with MFP especially if you eat your exercise calories it's better to underestimate than over!
  • leix
    leix Posts: 176
    If youve put in all the correct data go with HRM.
  • amandavictoria80
    amandavictoria80 Posts: 734 Member
    The HRM is most likely accurate.

    Don't forget that it also greatly depends on how hard you are working, how fast your stride is, etc. For example, I burn a lot more calories doing the elliptical at 90% of my MHR (maximum hart rate) than doing it at 70%.
  • lizbeth436
    lizbeth436 Posts: 40 Member
    It's just the wrist band. And I've put all of my info into it.
  • Tkhk0514
    Tkhk0514 Posts: 100 Member
    When I am on the elyptical I have found that regardless of how fast I go or at what setting...it still seems to average that I burn 10 calories per minute...give or take a few...so with 15 minutes of elyptical set at 4, 5 or sometimes 6 and my speed is maybe about 6.5 it says that I burn about 150 calories. This is lower than MFP which seems to shoot high. I too was wondering what is accurate and what an HRM would actually show.

    Your 505 on the HRM seems pretty high though especialy for only 15 min.
  • lizbeth436
    lizbeth436 Posts: 40 Member
    I thought it was kind of high too but thought maybe it was bc of my weight
  • zudleymarie
    zudleymarie Posts: 100 Member
    THE HRM would be more accurate. It takes into account your own personal heart rate...some people who weigh the same may burn more than someone else of the same weight depending on their level of fitness. Definitely go with the monitor.
  • TTHdred
    TTHdred Posts: 380 Member
    You HRM will generally be more accurate since it is based YOUR actual heart rate. You need to make sure you have programmed the HRM with your personal info, height, age, weight, etc.

    MFP doesn't know how hard, fast you are actually working out but will be based on a general formula.

    What type of HRM do you have, is only wrist based or does it use a chest strap?

    No need to repeat. This was perfectly said.

    To add, for OP, you confirmed it is just a wrist band. While I despise the ones around your chest, I have found them to be significantly more accurate. If you like math, the link below shows how to manually calculate your calories burned, based on your average heart rate (which your HRM should provide) your weight, height and age. You could calculate it manually a few times to compare and confirm which is most accurate. However, for simplicity, your HRM is likely to be closer, even without the chest strap.

    http://www.livestrong.com/article/78365-estimate-calories-burned-heart-rate/


    Best of luck!
    T
  • dad106
    dad106 Posts: 4,868 Member
    It's just the wrist band. And I've put all of my info into it.

    I honestly wouldn't trust it, mainly because it only is a wrist band and does not have a chest strap. To get an accurate calorie count, you need one with a chest strap that is continuously feeding you're heart rate to the watch.. other wise it's just taking into account when you actually touch the watch... and depending on how many times you touch it, depends on what kind of calorie burn you get.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories