Heart Rate Monitors

Options
2»

Replies

  • Felicia714
    Felicia714 Posts: 21 Member
    Options
    I have the Garmin Forerunner 305 and I absolutely love it. I'm not sure about the other HRM but this one has GPS so it is able to give me my pace as well as my HR. I'm not sure how much it cost, my husband bought it for me last year.
  • RAFValentina
    RAFValentina Posts: 1,231 Member
    Options
    i have a timex and i find the calorie burn to be very accurate.

    How do you know its accurate!??!

    you're right, i don't know if its 100% accurate, but that can be said about all heart rate monitors. they take the information you enter, such as age, height, weight, hair color, maximum heart rate, education, etc, and merely estimate how many calories you've burned over time based on your heart rate.

    between the HRM, exercise, calorie deficiency, healthier food, and kick *kitten* attitude, i'm losing weight, and being awesome while doing it.

    That's cool! I wasn't knocking you! Just wondering! i know that the more variables it takes in to account then "generally" it gives a closer to accurate reading... Just wondered if there is any way of checking the accuracy of a piece of equipment be it hrm or CV eqpt etc. other than rigging oneself up everytime to very uncomfortable equipment! I try to cross check the accuracy of mine online where i can input the variables I can't on the treadmill for example such as height, weight, Average heart Rate, Gender, last recorded VO2 max etc... and yeah, I have no idea if they are accurate enough still but Hey,I lost the weight and achieved my fitness goals but now I'm working more on physical fitness goals, I find that these calorie burns that the eqpt tell me could be actually quite UNDER as continuing to lose weight... makes finding correct nutrition tough!
  • beckysiz
    beckysiz Posts: 54 Member
    Options
    Polar.. FT4 or FT7. If you feel like getting fancy, FT40 and FT60 are also good.

    Stay away from Timex...Very inflated calorie burn.

    I have a Timex and I have lost 75+ pounds using it....
  • hotelsierra
    hotelsierra Posts: 53
    Options
    I've had a Polar FT 60 for 3 years. Its awesome! But pricey!
  • MaraDiaz
    MaraDiaz Posts: 4,604 Member
    Options
    If you need to go really cheap, the $30 Sportline seems to be doing the trick for me. At first I worried it was overestimating, but it's showing a steady calorie decrease per hour that matches the lower heart rate and breathing I'm starting to have from getting used to working out.

    You do have to frequently reach over and press and hold a button on the watch to get it to take your pulse, but none of the workouts I do right now make that an issue. It also has a timer so you know exactly how long you've worked out for and that works great. But it doesn't have a pedometer.

    The really bizarre thing is that it doesn't keep good time on the regular watch function. I haven't figured out why yet, but I didn't buy it to keep time, so I don't really mind having to correct it every few days or let it run slow.
  • laurae
    laurae Posts: 115 Member
    Options
    I have a Timex as well. I do wonder if the calorie burn is inflated, but I also think I had my maximum heart rate set too low. I recalculated it doing the two sub-max tests that the booklet which came with my monitor mentioned (Sally Edwards is the author) and set it higher and now my calorie burns seem more realistic. Be sure to get a monitor that you can change the batteries yourself. Also, one that allows you to input your own personal maximum heart rate. Some monitors just use the standard 220 - Age = MHR calculation, and that is not accurate. Mine would be 173 that way, but just this morning I saw 175 on my monitor.

    Going over your max HR does not mean it's wrong.. I go over mine all the time... Do you think your heart stops beating just because it reaches what your max HR should be?

    Yes, the timex is inflated because as I stated above, you can't input gender.. so it assumes you are a male, and thus gives you the calorie burn of one. You can adjust it all you want, but it will still give you a higher then normal calorie burn.

    For accuracy, you need one that takes all info.. age, weight, height, gender and a chest strap.



    I have read that the reason it is called "Maximum Heart Rate" is because it is the MAXIMUM that your heart can reach. Most people do not actually attain it with normal exercise. When, and if, they do, they see stars and/or pass out - according to several people online who have mentioned that they went to a facility to get their maximum heart rate tested for the purpose of inputting into their HRM. I feel that to be the most accurate, you need to determine by a physical test what your maximum heart rate is and have the option to input it into your watch. Not all females that are the same age, height, weight have the same heart rate factors. Heart rate is what determines calories burned. The higher your heart rate is to your maximum, the more calories you burn. See link: http://www.howtobefit.com/determine-maximum-heart-rate.htm
  • dad106
    dad106 Posts: 4,868 Member
    Options
    I have a Timex as well. I do wonder if the calorie burn is inflated, but I also think I had my maximum heart rate set too low. I recalculated it doing the two sub-max tests that the booklet which came with my monitor mentioned (Sally Edwards is the author) and set it higher and now my calorie burns seem more realistic. Be sure to get a monitor that you can change the batteries yourself. Also, one that allows you to input your own personal maximum heart rate. Some monitors just use the standard 220 - Age = MHR calculation, and that is not accurate. Mine would be 173 that way, but just this morning I saw 175 on my monitor.
    Going over your max HR does not mean it's wrong.. I go over mine all the time... Do you think your heart stops beating just because it reaches what your max HR should be?

    Yes, the timex is inflated because as I stated above, you can't input gender.. so it assumes you are a male, and thus gives you the calorie burn of one. You can adjust it all you want, but it will still give you a higher then normal calorie burn.

    For accuracy, you need one that takes all info.. age, weight, height, gender and a chest strap.
    I have read that the reason it is called "Maximum Heart Rate" is because it is the MAXIMUM that your heart can reach. Most people do not actually attain it with normal exercise. When, and if, they do, they see stars and/or pass out - according to several people online who have mentioned that they went to a facility to get their maximum heart rate tested for the purpose of inputting into their HRM. I feel that to be the most accurate, you need to determine by a physical test what your maximum heart rate is and have the option to input it into your watch. Not all females that are the same age, height, weight have the same heart rate factors. Heart rate is what determines calories burned. The higher your heart rate is to your maximum, the more calories you burn. See link: http://www.howtobefit.com/determine-maximum-heart-rate.htm

    I def. attain mine with normal exercise.. One round with my PT and I'm between 190-197.. and my max is 197 BTW. I have never seen stars nor have I passed out.... so I must be an abnormality.

    Yes your heart rate plays a role in determining but so do other factors, like males will burn more then females, people who are a lower weight will burn less then someone who weighs more and tall people burn a different amount then short people. Which is why it's important to have an HRM That takes all info, so that you can get the most accurate calorie estimation.

    I also took a look at the link and it's full of bro-science in my opinion.. and people who just want to sell expensive tests. For most people 220-minus age works just fine... and there really is no need to pay 100-300 dollars to get a test to tell you your true max heart rate.
  • laurae
    laurae Posts: 115 Member
    Options
    A non-Timex option would be the PolarFT40. It is one of the few Polar monitors that has an option to enter your own MHR if you choose to rather than just an age calculation. It also asks for other data like weight, etc...
  • dad106
    dad106 Posts: 4,868 Member
    Options
    A non-Timex option would be the PolarFT40. It is one of the few Polar monitors that has an option to enter your own MHR if you choose to rather than just an age calculation. It also asks for other data like weight, etc...

    Again, wrong.

    I have the FT7 and I can manually enter my max heart rate... and lets me enter all data. I just don't manually enter mine because I don't see a need.

    Both FT40 and FT60 come with the ability to do a Vo2Max test that your article wants to charge 75 dollars for.. and it's just as accurate. You also can enter max heart rate on both.

    Like I stated earlier, there really is no need.. a lot of people push it to the max or higher and are just fine. If you don't feel dizzy or sick, then it's no big deal.
  • linnapee
    linnapee Posts: 14 Member
    Options
    I have a Polar FT4 and I love it! I believe it's very accurate because all my stats are considered (gender, age, height. weight) and as my fitness has improved my calories burnt has decreased (which I think is a good thing?) Haha
  • HealthyWayorNoWay
    HealthyWayorNoWay Posts: 83 Member
    Options
    HealthyWayorN Are you able to put your weight into this one?

    Yes!
  • Speedtrap
    Speedtrap Posts: 216
    Options
    I use a Polar RS200 and I love it. It is a bit on the higher price compared to some of the generics out there, but it is accurate.

Categories