Polar HRM or Elliptical Calories?

khopkins516
khopkins516 Posts: 63 Member
edited November 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
I've always heard that the calorie burn number on any elliptical or treadmill are pretty inaccurate and usually overestimate the calorie burn. Which is why I am surprised that my Polar Heart rate monitor always shows about 100 calories more burned after a cardio session than the elliptical does.
What gives? Which would you trust?
Thanks!

Replies

  • kcjchang
    kcjchang Posts: 709 Member
    [quote="khopkins516;d-10574362"What gives?[/quote]
    It depends on the inputs (e.g., your max heart rate, weight, etc), intensity of the session, and how well you match up to the limited sample pool from which the energy expenditure formula was developed.
    khopkins516 wrote: »
    Which would you trust?
    None. How close are the numbers to MET? Take the smallest expenditure.

  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Depends on how the HRM is set up; depends on the model of elliptical. There are no absolutes.
  • CatchMom11
    CatchMom11 Posts: 462 Member
    If you're wearing a chest strap (or even a wrist hrm) and all of your information (height, weight, age, etc) is up-to-date with Polar, ALWAYS go with your HRM results. The information on a lot of treadmills is junk! Unless you're inputting your age, weight and height (which I've never found a machine where you're inputting all 3) it's not going to be as accurate as that device that's ACTUALLY monitoring your actual heart rate and taking into account all of the information that goes into accurately figuring your caloric burn.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    Either, neither or both in the sense that either could be reasonably accurate, horribly inaccurate (either way as inaccurate doesn't just mean too high!) so I would actually trust both in that they are just an approximation.

    HRM could well be less accurate than a machine that measures power output with a well designed and tested calorie table. But not all machines have that.

    A basic HRM is going to have a very wide range of (in)accuracy depending on routine and the person wearing it but on the other hand you gain some consistency from one type of cardio activity to another.

    Pick one - you have a 50/50 chance you will pick the one closest to the unknown real calorie burn.
  • cs2thecox
    cs2thecox Posts: 533 Member
    I'd be inclined to go with the Polar HRM, particularly if it's one with the functionality to set it up for your specifics.
    If you're not the average person that the elliptical thinks is on it, then the calories will definitely be off!

    They may also be off on the HRM, but hopefully less so...?
  • BrianSharpe
    BrianSharpe Posts: 9,248 Member
    khopkins516 wrote: »
    Which would you trust?

    Probably neither, but given the choice between the two I'd go with the lower number. Heart rate monitors (even when you enter age, weight etc) measure time and heart rate, nothing else which is not enough data to give you a reliable estimate of calories expended.

This discussion has been closed.

Categories