Heart rate monitor calories burned!

Options
nfrank43
nfrank43 Posts: 28 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
Ok I'm sure this was asked and I tried to look at the archive, but I am asking cause I cannot find it.

For those of you who have been using a heart rate monitor to track calories burned. Can you tell me what the difference is in calories burned track on the watch and from the machine or from what MFP tells you that you burned in 45 minutes of whatever exercise you do?
I know when I had the bodybugg a long time ago, the calories burned on it was lower then what the machine told me and what the sites were saying I was burning.
I am waiting for my HRM to come but just wanted to know how big or little the difference was in calories burned?
Thanks

Replies

  • liberaltendencies
    liberaltendencies Posts: 150 Member
    Options
    Definitely interested to know what people say!
  • velix
    velix Posts: 437 Member
    Options
    While it is surely different for everyone, on average, I burn about 100 -150 less than the machine tells me when I am done my cardio (I use a Polar FT7).
  • nfrank43
    nfrank43 Posts: 28 Member
    Options
    Thank you Velix, I believe my bodybugg was the same way it showed calories burned less than the machine. I too ordered the FT7, can't wait til it gets here.
  • LJCDuke11
    LJCDuke11 Posts: 103 Member
    Options
    Thank you Velix, I believe my bodybugg was the same way it showed calories burned less than the machine. I too ordered the FT7, can't wait til it gets here.

    ME TOO!!! I heard from a trainer at my gym too!!
  • stc74
    stc74 Posts: 297 Member
    Options
    I tend to burn more than the machine says, but I use interval training.
  • kirstyfromscotland
    kirstyfromscotland Posts: 555 Member
    Options
    i have been working out using the wii fit and wii your shape and when i got my hrm with chest strap it worked out only half the amount of calories burned on the hrm, i can only assume that the hrm is correct as it has all my measurements and birthdate so i go by that. I wasnt expecting to see that much difference so im glad i got the hrm. hope that helps.x
  • velix
    velix Posts: 437 Member
    Options
    I tend to burn more than the machine says, but I use interval training.

    I burn about the same doing both endurance and interval training - I know the benefits are different (as my trainer always reminds me), but I find it weird since most people seem to burn more ...
  • tomsmmns7
    tomsmmns7 Posts: 3
    Options
    I am afaid I do not know but there is a great tracking system on livestrong>com I just want to give my congrays to you and all you responders. Great Job Everyone. Keeo Going For Life:)
  • Sublog
    Sublog Posts: 1,296 Member
    Options
    No machine outside a Whole Room Calorimeter can accurately measure calories burned. Most make fairly accurate guesses, but none are completely accurate.
  • Bumblebee26
    Bumblebee26 Posts: 118 Member
    Options
    No machine outside a Whole Room Calorimeter can accurately measure calories burned. Most make fairly accurate guesses, but none are completely accurate.

    DING DING! As a general rule, you go by the HRM if it has a chest strap because it is monitoring your heart rate all the time. Machines go by algorithms and is a "guess" for the information you put in. I say go with the HRM always,even though they won't be 100%, it won't be so far off that it would make much of a differance in the end of a workout.
  • PositiveGoals
    PositiveGoals Posts: 50
    Options
    I use this website that calculates calories burned based on height, weight, age, regular activity level, specific exercise, and time put in:

    http://www.lowfatlifestyle.com/caloriecalculator.htm
  • SoCalSwimmerDude
    SoCalSwimmerDude Posts: 480 Member
    Options
    I hope this helps because I've tracked all the differences very closely. First I'll say that it really does depend on the person. I'm a former distance swimmer and, therefore, I've seen the 'endurance athlete' in me come out through not only the cals burned, but the pace at which I burn them. (I have a Polar FT7)

    For instance, if I run for an hour... The machine will over-estimate by about 50-100 cals for the first 20-30 minutes. However, when I get around the 30-35 minute mark, I hit my stride and will burn MORE than the machine tells me. By the time an hour is up, my HRM burns about 50-100 more cals than the machine (which was shocking to me the first couple times I used the HRM). And actually, what MFP tells me is usually fairly accurate for that hour run.

    I've also found that the easier or the lower your heart rate is on a cardio machine for a longer period of time, the more it will overestimate your cals. I use the elliptical for all weight lifting warm-ups and typically a low HR cardio day about once a week for 30 minutes and it will typically overcalculate by 50-75 cals.

    Last, if you're doing high intensity cardio, circuit training, HIIT, etc... then you will most likely burn MORE using your HRM then what you may typically think. Yesterday, I worked out for 40 minutes. I did 5 minute elliptical warm-up, 20 minutes of HIIT, then 15 minutes of low HR cardio on the elliptical. For those 40 minutes (20 of which was easy cardio), my HRM said I burned 454.

    Hope this helps!

Categories