Reality check... HRM vs. Treadmill Calories Burned

dsak
dsak Posts: 367 Member
edited September 2024 in Health and Weight Loss
So.... I've been exercising regularly on the treadmill for the past several months, and I've been slowing increasing my speed and endurance. to date I've lost 38lbs. I've been using the CALORIES BURNED as stated on my treadmill, and all has been happy in my world. Then I decided... ya know... maybe I should buy a Heart Rate Monitor (HRM) to better track my calories burned, heart rate and exercise, etc. I got on the treadmill the other day and did some walking/jogging for about 40 minutes. The treadmill said 414 calories burned, and.... when I checked my HRM, it only showed 251!!!!! Wow... was I surprised. I knew the treadmill was probably high, but... I didn't expect there to be such a big difference. Sigh..... now I have to work twice as hard to lose the calories. I feel deflated, and I need a good swift kick in the pants to get me motivated again!!!!

Just a heads up for those out there tracking calories directly from your treadmill.....

Replies

  • olpbabe
    olpbabe Posts: 89
    If you've been using the treadmill calories and still lost 38 pounds, then I you're still doing great stuff.
  • arkenny
    arkenny Posts: 125
    what kind of HRM are you using???? are you sure its accurate>?
  • mommachef
    mommachef Posts: 52
    If you've been using the treadmill calories and still lost 38 pounds, then I you're still doing great stuff.

    That's what I was thinking. Not to mention you are improving your health!
  • IamJustSanie
    IamJustSanie Posts: 93 Member
    If you've been using the treadmill calories and still lost 38 pounds, then I you're still doing great stuff.
    I agree!
  • mgmlap
    mgmlap Posts: 1,377 Member
    Don't sell yourself short..you are still doing what you need to in order to lose weight. 38 pounds is nothing to shake a stick at...
  • VeganGal84
    VeganGal84 Posts: 938 Member
    If you've been using the treadmill calories and still lost 38 pounds, then I you're still doing great stuff.

    I agree with this! Don't fix what isn't broken. :laugh:

    I use the calories calculated by MFP, and unless I start having issues (stop losing weight), I don't see the need to get more accurate with it than that.
  • Amber_Kunkel
    Amber_Kunkel Posts: 52
    I agree with Olpbabe! :bigsmile:
  • Gilbrod
    Gilbrod Posts: 1,216 Member
    So losing 38 pounds on your current methods is deflating?! Cmon maaaaaan! Keep increasnig the intensity each week. You'll continue losing. Also, does your HRM have a chest strap? Does it ask for height, weight, sex and D.O.B.?
  • sandy729
    sandy729 Posts: 232 Member
    Yep..You must be doing something right. Don't be so hard on yourself. What you're doing is working
  • andreae13
    andreae13 Posts: 239 Member
    I noticed the same thing. Usually the treadmill ranges from 100-150 calories more than my HRM. I'm really glad I got the HRM now because I want to make sure I'm burning enough.
  • jagh09
    jagh09 Posts: 555 Member
    Shoot, you're doing something right! You've lost 38 pounds. Maybe your HRM isn't accurate either. But keep with it, because it's working!
  • dsak
    dsak Posts: 367 Member
    Using a Polar FT4.... I assume it's accurate.... not sure how to really test that out.
  • dsak
    dsak Posts: 367 Member
    So losing 38 pounds on your current methods is deflating?! Cmon maaaaaan! Keep increasnig the intensity each week. You'll continue losing. Also, does your HRM have a chest strap? Does it ask for height, weight, sex and D.O.B.?

    I know, I know... I shouldn't be so hard on myself.... I was just in complete shock at the huge difference. I'm ecstatic at losing 38lbs, and I'm going to continue doing what I've been doing for the past few months. You're right... I should increase my intensity each week!!!

    I have a Polar FT4 with a chest strap, and I am able to input my height, weight, sex and DOB. I figured being 46 and overweight I'd get a few extra calories burned!!!!! :happy:
  • dsak
    dsak Posts: 367 Member
    I noticed the same thing. Usually the treadmill ranges from 100-150 calories more than my HRM. I'm really glad I got the HRM now because I want to make sure I'm burning enough.

    I'm glad I got the HRM too.... for the same reason. And.... congratulations to you on your 60+lb loss.... that is awesome!!!!!
  • afwg1979
    afwg1979 Posts: 170 Member
    Hi, dsak! Your best bet is to stick with the MFP calculator just to keep things simple. I stopped using the treadmill's info as well as my heart rate monitor (cheap quality). Out of curiousity, I tried using different treadmills (same exact model) at the gym, using the same exact settings and got different results. Bottom line: If you're losing, you're on the right track. Keep focus and stay true. :flowerforyou:
  • Rae6503
    Rae6503 Posts: 6,294 Member
    Using a Polar FT4.... I assume it's accurate.... not sure how to really test that out.

    I just ordered that one. Do you like it?

    And yeah, you are obviously doing great! If you find you aren't getting enough food now that you know more accurately what you are burning, just decrease your weekly loss goal to give yourself more calories. I'm all about eating more when possible even if that means losing slightly slower.
  • WillWorkout4Food
    WillWorkout4Food Posts: 94 Member
    The same thing happened to me, though my heart rate wasn't off by that much, when I initially recorded my treadmill exercise. I believe the best bang for my buck regarding a HRM is the fact that it motivates me to maximize my workouts. I wear a chest strap so it's closer to my body, and therefore provides a better calculation when recording my heart rate than the treadmill. It completely boosts my endurance. I TOTALLY agree, if you've already lost 38 pounds then you are doing great, but I also understand the feeling of knowing that you could have lost more if you had a better idea of what you were burning. I'm not saying the HRM is the only way to track, just one of the best ways. I have lost 16 pounds but I know that number could have been at least 20 had I purchased a FT7Polar HRM sooner.

    Best of luck!
  • Whatnow50
    Whatnow50 Posts: 93
    I noticed the same thing. Usually the treadmill ranges from 100-150 calories more than my HRM. I'm really glad I got the HRM now because I want to make sure I'm burning enough.
    That's about what I have found also. Using Polar FT7 with chest strap. I like having one so when I'm not on a machine but still doing stuff for exercise I can have an accurate account of it. I find MFP is high also.
    I'm a gadget geek also... so any excuse to get one! :laugh:

    Also agree OP is on the right track considering she is losing and doing great!:flowerforyou:
  • dsak
    dsak Posts: 367 Member
    Using a Polar FT4.... I assume it's accurate.... not sure how to really test that out.

    I just ordered that one. Do you like it?

    And yeah, you are obviously doing great! If you find you aren't getting enough food now that you know more accurately what you are burning, just decrease your weekly loss goal to give yourself more calories. I'm all about eating more when possible even if that means losing slightly slower.

    So far the Polar FT4 isn't bad... it's comparable to one I had a few years ago (F6) which I lost. It tracks your heart rate, min/max and calories burned. I think the FT7 offers more features and tells you whether your are training in the right zone (fat burning, etc.), but... I figured I didn't really need that. The FT4 does have the chest strap, so it is more accurate than those that don't (IMO), and... it's easy to program and use.
  • YukonJoy
    YukonJoy Posts: 1,279 Member
    I don't use the treadmill (rugby injury) but I do use the stepper and I find the calories there are pretty accurate to what my HRM says.

    However, I find MFP seriously, seriously over-estimates the calories burned if you go by their calculations. That kind of pisses me off since they have all this flout about eating back your exercise calories, and then tell you that you are burning twice as much as you actually are.
  • csch79
    csch79 Posts: 37 Member
    I have the opposite problem. I just purchased a Polar FT7. I always knew the calories on the treadmill were exaggerated so I never paid attention to them.

    I've worked out twice with the new HRM monitor and both times the calories on the HRM are a lot higher than the machine display. Last night the Life Fitness treadmill stated that I had burned 403 calories. The HRM stated that I had burned 600. It was very similar the previous day. It is funny because I was fully expecting the HRM to tell me I had only burned about 300-350 and I would have been fine with that. Now I'm second guessing it. If I really did burn 600 calories in 53 minutes then I am very pleased.

    The gym has a couple different types of treadmills so I may try one of the other styles just to see what it's calculator says.
  • Gilbrod
    Gilbrod Posts: 1,216 Member
    That's what I use. When I use a Polar treadmill at my gym, it syncs my heart rate with the machine. But the calories on the treadmill are about 120 less than what the HRM says. It's never accurate. But a good guesstimate.
  • Richard170
    Richard170 Posts: 37
    I have been thinking about getting a HRM and I have been thinking about the accuracy issue with estimating calories burned using a HRM. At the office, we have a bike and a treadmill, both of which calculate calories, but I must work a lot harder on the treadmill to get the same numbers as on the bike. The treadmill is just making an estimate because two different people, one heavy and one light, will do significantly different amounts of work walking up the same incline over the same distance.

    Work is the amount of energy transferred by a force acting through a distance. The common unit for expressing work is the joule which is a force of one newton over a distance of one meter. A treadmill knows how far you have walked and at what incline but it does not know your mass, at least not the one I use at the office, so it can not accurately calculate the work you have done. A calorie is about 4.2 joules. Dietary calories are really kilo-calories so 1 dietary calorie is about 4.2 kJ.

    W = F * d

    An exercise bike knows both how many revolutions you have peddled ( the distance) and how much force was used and can easily, and accurately calculate calories expended during a workout, at least if it is not a pile of junk. It can also accurately calculate the rate of work performed (Power W = PT ) which is commonly displayed in Watts with 1 watt equal to one joule per second.

    If you want to have an idea how accurate a HRM is at estimating calories burned in a workout, I would get on an exercise bike and compare results. From this, it would not be at all difficulty to calculate a factor to be used to adjust a HRM estimated calories so that you can more accurately record your caloric expenditures.
  • evesacks
    evesacks Posts: 94 Member
    A good rule of thumb with running / jogging is 1 mile = 100 calories.

    I borrowed a kifit (which calculates calories more accurately than a HRM (pulse/pedometer/temperature/sweat and motion) and it was consistent with the 1 mile = 100 calories.

    Its only a problem if you plan to eat all your exercise calories.
  • HMonsterX
    HMonsterX Posts: 3,000 Member
    My HRM should be here in a few days, and i cant wait to try it and compare things.

    I never believe what MFP says for my calories burned, especially as my sports are kinda hard to judge calorie burn (Badminton and Tenpin Bowling competitive). For badminton competitive, does it mean singles or doubles? Does it take into account the time between games, between points? Easy or hard game? Im already halving the value MFP gives my badminton sessions, and im expecting my HRM to say its even less, but at least them ill know for sure.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories