Heart Rate monitors?

KimH313
KimH313 Posts: 162
edited October 7 in Fitness and Exercise
I use the cardio machines at the gym a lot and then log how many calories I have burned using that, but how do I know if it is really accurate? I am thinking of getting a heart rate monitor / calorie counter and am looking for advice on whether they are worth it and if they tell a different number than the calories burned on the machine? Thanks!

Replies

  • tuffytuffy1
    tuffytuffy1 Posts: 920 Member
    I have a Polar FT4 and LOVE it. I got it on Amazon for about $63.00. For me, I burn less than what the gym equipment says I burn, so I am happy that I have a much better estimate now.
  • CherylR165
    CherylR165 Posts: 15
    Kim, the best way to know exactly how many calories you are burning is with a hrm with a chest strap. I have a Polar FT-4 ($89) and I love it. The cardio machines can be very inaccurate. The elliptical is the worse. I've found it to be off by as much as 50%!
  • KimH313
    KimH313 Posts: 162
    thanks! i just ordered it and got it for $62 so im pretty excited! thanks!
  • tuffytuffy1
    tuffytuffy1 Posts: 920 Member
    You will love it! Just an FYI, they tell you to run the electrodes on the strap under water. I hate doing that because the strap gets cold and wet, so I just take my water bottle and drop a few drops of water into the electrodes. Then my strap stays dry. If you do not put any water in there, you will find (as I did and many others on MFP) that your watch will say it cannot detect your heart rate. So definitely don't skip that step like I used to, lol :)
  • cmstrauch
    cmstrauch Posts: 4
    DO NOT buy a timex..they are way wrong and report way more cals burned
  • AmyLRed
    AmyLRed Posts: 856 Member
    i see you ordered the FT4, nice choice! i am responding since others interested will also read this thread.

    I compared HRM features and reviews for awhile before deciding what was best for me. I got a Polar FT60 and LOVE it! One of the big differences between the FT4 and the FT60 is that the FT60 will also track distance. I am not currently a runner, but will be starting the C25K in the spring and i didnt want to wish i had gotten that feature if i had gone with the FT4. FT60 is a little more in price, but i think it looks a little more stylish and i like the added features. I hope that helps!
  • bjz82much
    bjz82much Posts: 12 Member
    I just used my new Polar FT4 for the first time -- took a 67 minute walk/jog then looked at calories burned based on MFP rates, my pedometer's measurements, and the HRM. Check out these discrepancies: Pedometer: 391.3 calories... MFP: 418 calories... HRM (wait for it...): 602 calories!!!

    I've been exercising regularly since September, and on MFP since just before T'giving, and have only lost 5lbs. I can't help but wonder if I've been undereating because I was burning more calories than I realized.
  • crystalDRA
    crystalDRA Posts: 28 Member
    You're going to love it! I also have the FT4. You'll be surprised to see the difference in accuracy between the machine and the HRM. FYI- take the Wearlink off the chest strap when you aren't using it to save the battery. It probably seems obvious, but I was just throwing it in my bag after rinsing it. The manual probably tells this, but I didn't read it all and the battery died way to soon.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories