which one should i log?

BeautyFromPain
BeautyFromPain Posts: 4,951 Member
edited October 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
okay so i used my ipod AND my hrm today for my walk to work/back to see what the calorie counts are..

45 min walk/run interval was 289 for ipod which includes weight but not hr and hrm includes hr and said almost 700. which one should i log? :S

Replies

  • rfarinha
    rfarinha Posts: 388 Member
    That is a huge discrepancy. I would probably err on the conservative side, and log the lower of the two, and check the hrm to make sure that it is recording correctly, set up correctly, etc....

    Good luck!
  • goron59
    goron59 Posts: 889 Member
    I'd guess your HRM is way out if you're doing run/walk intervals for 45. For me, a 45 min run would only burn about 600. I know weight plays a big part, but that does sound a tad high?

    What app are you using on iPod, or a shoe pod Nike+ thing ?

    Update to say that when I use Endomondo app on iPhone, (or similar) and Polar FT40 HRM, on the flat for a run, they usually come in within about 15% of each other.
  • BeautyFromPain
    BeautyFromPain Posts: 4,951 Member
    I'd guess your HRM is way out if you're doing run/walk intervals for 45. For me, a 45 min run would only burn about 600. I know weight plays a big part, but that does sound a tad high?

    What app are you using on iPod, or a shoe pod Nike+ thing ?

    No app, I have an oldie ipod which just has a "Fitness" setting - I think it's a NANO?
  • Le_Joy
    Le_Joy Posts: 545 Member
    Well based on us being in the same challenge I would say go with the lower one. BUT if your hrm takes weight into account I would go with it. Or if you aren't sure do 500, which is in the middle of the 2 #s you got.
  • Pebble321
    Pebble321 Posts: 6,423 Member
    I tend to cross check numbers from Runkeeper and MFP with a basic cals/minute equation.
    When I run around 12min/miles I estimate 10 cals/minute.
    For walking I estimate cals/min.
    For any other activity I tend to judge whether I'm working more or less than a steady run or a brisk walk.
    For intervals I would be working on around 7 or 8 cals/minute which means that I'd exepct to see a calorie burn around 360 for 45 mins.

    These numbers are what works for me - you could check some of the online calculators to see what they estimate for your height and weight - or you could just assume that your HRM is accurate and enjoy the extra cals!
  • kennethmgreen
    kennethmgreen Posts: 1,759 Member
    okay so i used my ipod AND my hrm today for my walk to work/back to see what the calorie counts are..

    45 min walk/run interval was 289 for ipod which includes weight but not hr and hrm includes hr and said almost 700. which one should i log? :S
    Generally, a HRM will give more accurate results. I say "generally" because it's another data point. More data "generally" means more accuracy. But HRMs can be off. They tend to be VERY accurate measuring heart rate, so-so accurate measuring caloric burn. It's all guesswork, really.

    A lot depends on weight. More weight translates to more effort (moving 200 pounds at rate X requires more work than moving 150 pounds at same rate X). Does your HRM have a chest strap? Check multiple online sources for calorie burns (one that allow you to enter age, weight, etc.) and compare the numbers.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories