HRM frustration

Options
MellyPfromVT
MellyPfromVT Posts: 869 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Any one else extremely disappointed when they got their HRM because the number of calories burned was so much lower than the estimates on here? My workouts average about 1/2 of what I used to say I burned. And, I lost more weight when I ate those calories. If my weight loss continues to be zero, I guess I'll have to add more calories to my diet....

Replies

  • New_Hope
    New_Hope Posts: 84
    Options
    Really? My HRM was always a lot higher than what other calculators / equipment said I burned.

    Do the calculators here take into account age, weight, etc when they tell you how much you burn? I never thought about it til now, but that does make a difference.

    I think I would go with the HRM personally, because you can have 2 people who are the exact same weight and body composition, doing the exact same exercise, but the one who gets his/her heart rate up higher while exercising is going to burn more calories. At least, that's what makes sense to me.
  • jame_104
    jame_104 Posts: 57 Member
    Options
    YES! I finally just tossed it. I was so focused on the heart rate and the calories the HRM was calculating I wasn't focusing on pushing myself during the workouts. Now I just log it however MFP says and move on. A lot less stress on my end.
  • MellyPfromVT
    MellyPfromVT Posts: 869 Member
    Options
    I think it just takes more effort for me to get my heart rate up from years and years of running. I''ll be dripping sweat but my burn will be so little....I need to start working our for an hour, too. That will help with the calorie burn!
  • cdpm
    cdpm Posts: 297 Member
    Options
    Yes! What is the make & model of your HRM?
    I have always logged my progress by my HRM thinking it was accurate as it knows my weight, age and height. Then one day it said after a 50 min workout it said I only burnt 150 calories. Most of it was on the treadmill at the gym at a known pace. I checked on here and I should have burnt over 400 cals just on the run.
  • MellyPfromVT
    MellyPfromVT Posts: 869 Member
    Options
    I have the Polar FT4. I do think it is more accurate but I just realized that even since I started using its calorie burned total, I haven't lost any weight. So, I'm thinking I just need to add in an extra 100-200 calories for my daily calorie goal.
  • Lisiebird
    Lisiebird Posts: 45
    Options
    Yep. Same thing happened to me when I got my HRM, but I believe the numbers on that since I've inputted all my info. MFP and most other online logs seem to greatly exaggerate the calorie burn. The HRM typically shows half of what MFP or the treadmill says I burned. I like having the HRM though because it motivates me to push harder.
  • pa_jorg
    pa_jorg Posts: 4,404 Member
    Options
    Yes! What is the make & model of your HRM?
    I have always logged my progress by my HRM thinking it was accurate as it knows my weight, age and height. Then one day it said after a 50 min workout it said I only burnt 150 calories. Most of it was on the treadmill at the gym at a known pace. I checked on here and I should have burnt over 400 cals just on the run.


    I have a Polar FT4 and I love having more accurate info about my workouts. And just a side note that the fitter you get, the fewer calories you will burn, so perhaps the 150 as mentioned above is accurate now because you are healthier? Just something to consider.
  • raven56706
    raven56706 Posts: 918 Member
    Options
    By the way, HRM is about as accurate as its going to get. Those machines that give you calories burnt arent accurate and might lead you to believe you burned more than you really did.

    I just got my polar and its been much better than what the machine told me.
  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,117 Member
    Options
    Read this blog by a memeber here who is decades into a career relating to fitness:

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/Azdak/view/the-real-facts-about-hrms-and-calories-what-you-need-to-know-before-purchasing-an-hrm-or-using-one-21472
  • cdpm
    cdpm Posts: 297 Member
    Options
    Yes! What is the make & model of your HRM?
    I have always logged my progress by my HRM thinking it was accurate as it knows my weight, age and height. Then one day it said after a 50 min workout it said I only burnt 150 calories. Most of it was on the treadmill at the gym at a known pace. I checked on here and I should have burnt over 400 cals just on the run.


    I have a Polar FT4 and I love having more accurate info about my workouts. And just a side note that the fitter you get, the fewer calories you will burn, so perhaps the 150 as mentioned above is accurate now because you are healthier? Just something to consider.

    My HRM is some random brand I've never heard of (it was a present from my parents) and whenever I go near the machines at the gym, if my HR is something around 160, it will show as 160 on the machine, but my watch will say something like 50! I think it's a bit nuts. Not sure if it is the HRM or the technogym equipment interfering with it.
    It could be because I am healthier now so won't be the 500 that MFP suggest, but I still sweat and go as red as an embarrassed tomato I think my run was 8.8km/h for 20 mins with no resting breaks. The machine said that I burnt over 200 cals. So many numbers.
    I think I'm too worried about the numbers!!!!
  • pa_jorg
    pa_jorg Posts: 4,404 Member
    Options
    Yes! What is the make & model of your HRM?
    I have always logged my progress by my HRM thinking it was accurate as it knows my weight, age and height. Then one day it said after a 50 min workout it said I only burnt 150 calories. Most of it was on the treadmill at the gym at a known pace. I checked on here and I should have burnt over 400 cals just on the run.


    I have a Polar FT4 and I love having more accurate info about my workouts. And just a side note that the fitter you get, the fewer calories you will burn, so perhaps the 150 as mentioned above is accurate now because you are healthier? Just something to consider.

    My HRM is some random brand I've never heard of (it was a present from my parents) and whenever I go near the machines at the gym, if my HR is something around 160, it will show as 160 on the machine, but my watch will say something like 50! I think it's a bit nuts. Not sure if it is the HRM or the technogym equipment interfering with it.
    It could be because I am healthier now so won't be the 500 that MFP suggest, but I still sweat and go as red as an embarrassed tomato I think my run was 8.8km/h for 20 mins with no resting breaks. The machine said that I burnt over 200 cals. So many numbers.
    I think I'm too worried about the numbers!!!!

    It can definitely be number overload... I just know that my calories burned have dropped even since I got the HRM because I'm in better shape so I thought that might be the case for you too. Does your HRM have a chest strap? I've heard they don't do much without one.
  • cdpm
    cdpm Posts: 297 Member
    Options
    Yes! What is the make & model of your HRM?
    I have always logged my progress by my HRM thinking it was accurate as it knows my weight, age and height. Then one day it said after a 50 min workout it said I only burnt 150 calories. Most of it was on the treadmill at the gym at a known pace. I checked on here and I should have burnt over 400 cals just on the run.


    I have a Polar FT4 and I love having more accurate info about my workouts. And just a side note that the fitter you get, the fewer calories you will burn, so perhaps the 150 as mentioned above is accurate now because you are healthier? Just something to consider.

    My HRM is some random brand I've never heard of (it was a present from my parents) and whenever I go near the machines at the gym, if my HR is something around 160, it will show as 160 on the machine, but my watch will say something like 50! I think it's a bit nuts. Not sure if it is the HRM or the technogym equipment interfering with it.
    It could be because I am healthier now so won't be the 500 that MFP suggest, but I still sweat and go as red as an embarrassed tomato I think my run was 8.8km/h for 20 mins with no resting breaks. The machine said that I burnt over 200 cals. So many numbers.
    I think I'm too worried about the numbers!!!!

    It can definitely be number overload... I just know that my calories burned have dropped even since I got the HRM because I'm in better shape so I thought that might be the case for you too. Does your HRM have a chest strap? I've heard they don't do much without one.

    It does have a chest strap and picks up reading well when I'm not near the gym equipment. The second I go near it though it seems to mess up. Its a Beurer PM 45. I'd never heard of the brand before!
  • atomiclauren
    atomiclauren Posts: 689 Member
    Options
    If you are confident the heart rate is measured correctly then you could enter the average in these sites to see what they say:

    http://www.braydenwm.com/calburn.htm

    http://www.wolframalpha.com (enter all your information in the single line like in the above site and it will figure it out - just change the activity type if needed).
  • Lisiebird
    Lisiebird Posts: 45
    Options
    Today I used my HRM (Polar FT4 that I just got yesterday) and plugged in my numbers (weight, age, etc) into the treadmill to see what the difference would be. By the end of my 4 mile run (at 7.1 mph and 1 mile warm up and cool down) my HRM said I had burned 433, treadmill read 525. I'd like to believe the treadmill but I believe my HRM. Interestingly, when I wear my HRM on the treadmill, it activates the heart rate monitor on the treadmill itself (where you normally have to grab the handles to get the heart rate to show, which never seems to work). The heart rate was pretty close to what my monitor read, but still the calories were nearly 100 above what my HRM read.

Categories