Garmin Foot Pod trumps HRM. wth.

ennaejay
ennaejay Posts: 575
edited October 3 in Fitness and Exercise
Isn't a heart rate monitor supposed to calculate the calories burned from your, uh, HEART RATE?

Because it doesn't always work that way. When I use the Garmin foot pod on my treadmill (which I've found to be very consistently very accurate with my outdoor runs), if the incline is up, ultimately my pace is much slower, but my heart is still working at 87% of max.

This morning I ran for 45 minutes and burned... 220 calories? Yeah, right. But that was because the Garmin was computing the calories burned according to my PACE, which was something quite embarrassingly slow because of the incline. I looked at my average heart rate during the run which was as high as my outdoor runs (about 162 bpm). I stepped it up to 170's a few times just to make sure it was up.

I compared the run with my other outdoor runs and wondered why the Garmin only gave me half the calories I typically burn, with the same time, same heart rate, same buckets of sweat. Must be that the foot pod trumps the actual heart rate.

That doesn't seem fair.... or reliable. Next time I'm on the treadmill I'm going to log it as a "general" workout and see what that gives me.

Just food for thought - if you use any kind of pace tracker on a treadmill, with or without incline, in addition to a hrm. Might not be a very accurate computation.

Have a good day!

Replies

  • AlsDonkBoxSquat
    AlsDonkBoxSquat Posts: 6,128 Member
    I returned my Garmin 305 and went back to Polar because they informed me that many of their models (including the one I had) didn't calculate calorie burn based on hr but instead based on distance run and speed even though it has a chest strap. You can buy all the gadgets for it including the foot pod or the bike pod, you can use a map to see and calculate your route including speed at certain points and all other kinds of cool stuff, but in the more affordable models you will never get an accurate calorie count because it doesn't base it off of hr. I returned in, with a tear in my eye.
  • ennaejay
    ennaejay Posts: 575
    I returned my Garmin 305 and went back to Polar because they informed me that many of their models (including the one I had) didn't calculate calorie burn based on hr but instead based on distance run and speed even though it has a chest strap. You can buy all the gadgets for it including the foot pod or the bike pod, you can use a map to see and calculate your route including speed at certain points and all other kinds of cool stuff, but in the more affordable models you will never get an accurate calorie count because it doesn't base it off of hr. I returned in, with a tear in my eye.

    LOL! I can relate to the tear. I would be remiss to send this back. I felt like I did some decent research before purchasing (vacillated greatly between a polar and a garmin), and read a ton of reviews. ah, buyer beware. This was about $130 from amazon. What model polar do you have, and how many dead presidents did you shell out?

    How many calories will I burn by kicking myself in the *kitten* for throwing the FR60's box away?!!! :grumble:
  • AlsDonkBoxSquat
    AlsDonkBoxSquat Posts: 6,128 Member
    LOL! I can relate to the tear. I would be remiss to send this back. I felt like I did some decent research before purchasing (vacillated greatly between a polar and a garmin), and read a ton of reviews. ah, buyer beware. This was about $130 from amazon. What model polar do you have, and how many dead presidents did you shell out?

    How many calories will I burn by kicking myself in the *kitten* for throwing the FR60's box away?!!! :grumble:

    I have the Polar FT40(f of cours). It retails at 180, but I think we spent 112 on it on amazon. I had a polar before and managed to kill it, coveted my cousins 410, bought the 305 because i found it on super sale at Target and didn't have the 300 bones to lay out for the 410, returned it after a week, and went back to old faithful. every time I trail run i think, damn i wish i had a 410.
  • msowens
    msowens Posts: 15 Member
    According to the DC Rainmaker (http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2010/11/how-calorie-measurement-works-on-garmin.html) [SFW], the FR60 is supposed to be using a heartrate-based algorithm to determine calories, and will fallback to the footpod if the HR strap isn't in use.

    Were you getting accurate HR data on your watch during that session? If not, it's possible that the strap wasn't connecting and so the watch fell back to pace.

    I'd suggest checking out the DC Rainmaker's site, I just discovered it last week when researching which Garmin or Polar to buy. He has some amazing in-depth product reviews.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories