Most Accurate? Polar or Apple?

ESM34
ESM34 Posts: 4 Member
edited November 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
I currently have a polar FT4 watch with heart rate strap that I use for counting my workout calorie burn. I feel like I’m constantly replacing the batteries and have to often replace the heart rate strap. But I do feel it’s been quite accurate and trustworthy. I’ve been considering Apple’s watch as a possibly replacement but question if it’s as accurate, since it doesn’t use a heart rate strap. Any preferences out there? My main goal is accuracy in calorie burn count during workouts. Thanks!

Replies

  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,727 Member
    If you're constantly replacing batteries and straps I'd suggest moving to a different HRM.

    My Wahoo is good for 6-8 months on a battery and about the same for decent straps(not the $5-8 ones from ebay) I think it probably comes out about the same, but I definitely prefer the Garmin premium straps

    https://www.amazon.com/Garmin-Replacement-Strap-Heart-Monitor/dp/B00BI9X1OO/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1518108096&sr=8-4&keywords=garmin+hrm+strap

    Some people like the Apple watch, some find it wildly inaccurate. Me, I'm a garmin Man myself.
  • MegaMooseEsq
    MegaMooseEsq Posts: 3,118 Member
    edited February 2018
    My understanding is that anything with a chest strap is probably going to be more accurate than something worn on the wrist. The Apple Watch 3 (which I have) seems to be more accurate at measuring energy expenditure than other wrist devices, but given the price point, I wouldn't recommend it if all you care about is tracking calorie burn. It's a smartwatch that also does fitness tracking, not a dedicated fitness tracker. I found a good rundown of recent devices here - they like the Polar H7 and H10.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    MegaMooseEsq wrote: »
    My understanding is that anything with a chest strap is probably going to be more accurate than something worn on the wrist.

    It's fair to say that it really doesn't matter how accurate the measurement of HR is if the activity isn't appropriate to extrapolate a calorie guestimate from.

    Let's face it, for the vast majority of people the difference in accuracy between optical and electrical sensing isn't relevant given the errors inherent in that extrapolation.
  • shagerty777
    shagerty777 Posts: 185 Member
    If activity trackers were accurate for calories burned working out I'd weigh 120 pounds by now, not 170... Chest straps are fantastic for people who are watching their heart rate zones for endurance sports though.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories