HRM and Calories Burned

ljbennett1
ljbennett1 Posts: 10 Member
edited November 10 in Fitness and Exercise
I just bought a Polar F7 the other day and used it for the first time yesterday. I read the directions, made sure to wet the chest strap, double checked all my information was correct. I did circuits (alternating treadmill and weights) for 1 hr and 20 mins and my HRM said I burned 855 calories. I feel like this is very high, but it was the first time I did this work out so maybe my body was just "shocked" into burning more calories because it wasn't my normal cardio workout? I'm 5'6, 166, and 26 years old. Any idea if there was something I did wrong, or do you think this could be correct?
«1

Replies

  • hbrittingham
    hbrittingham Posts: 2,518 Member
    I think that could be correct. I generally do cardio for 40 minutes and then do some strength training for 20 minutes and I burn anywhere from 550-600 calories doing that according to my HRM (which is lower than the arc trainer says I have burned).
  • Di3012
    Di3012 Posts: 2,247 Member
    I just bought a Polar F7 the other day and used it for the first time yesterday. I read the directions, made sure to wet the chest strap, double checked all my information was correct. I did circuits (alternating treadmill and weights) for 1 hr and 20 mins and my HRM said I burned 855 calories. I feel like this is very high, but it was the first time I did this work out so maybe my body was just "shocked" into burning more calories because it wasn't my normal cardio workout? I'm 5'6, 166, and 26 years old. Any idea if there was something I did wrong, or do you think this could be correct?

    80 minutes of exercise such as you undertook for that amount of calories sounds correct to me.

    Providing you input your weight, sex, height etc in all correctly, I would enjoy that burn lol.
  • Nana_Booboo
    Nana_Booboo Posts: 501 Member
    Sounds right to me.
  • ezramedic
    ezramedic Posts: 119
    I would say correct.
    I'm 27, 5"7 and 174lb and I burn between 800 and 900 cals in an hour at the gym, doing cardio.
  • 2012x
    2012x Posts: 149 Member
    sounds good & correct.
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    I agree that it's likely pretty close to reality. What was your average and max heart rates?
  • AirCircleI
    AirCircleI Posts: 334 Member
    What was your highest and average heart rate for that workout? My heart rate goes pretty high when I run, so I personally would probably burn that much if I was running constantly.

    I got my polar FT7 yesterday and wore it on my cycle ride home, which is 30 mins, and I burned 300 calories. I think that is probably right for me, as my heart rate goes high when doing cardio. This is a little bit higher than what MFP was estimating for me. Just to be sure, I've starting take off 50 calories from what I log per 30-45 min workout. So instead of logging 300, I logged 250. Just to be on the safe side.
  • ljbennett1
    ljbennett1 Posts: 10 Member
    Great! Thank you so much everyone! I will for sure enjoy knowing I burned that many calories!
  • dcmat
    dcmat Posts: 1,723 Member
    I have a polar FT7, so would say it sounds about right.

    I would use it a few more times to see if you get similar readings
  • minnesota_deere
    minnesota_deere Posts: 232 Member
    I just bought a Polar F7 the other day and used it for the first time yesterday. I read the directions, made sure to wet the chest strap, double checked all my information was correct. I did circuits (alternating treadmill and weights) for 1 hr and 20 mins and my HRM said I burned 855 calories. I feel like this is very high, but it was the first time I did this work out so maybe my body was just "shocked" into burning more calories because it wasn't my normal cardio workout? I'm 5'6, 166, and 26 years old. Any idea if there was something I did wrong, or do you think this could be correct?
    that tells me your not working out hard enough or there is a lot of standing around between sets, if you are working out at your high zone you should be burning 1200 calories or more in that time frame. yes if your average heart rate was about 125, 855 calories sounds about right.
  • ljbennett1
    ljbennett1 Posts: 10 Member
    I think my max heart rate was around 190 (yikes, I know) and low was around 120 or so (during warm up and cool down)? Average was around 165 I believe. I would need to double check those numbers once I get home.
  • karenlesley47
    karenlesley47 Posts: 36 Member
    I just bought a Polar F7 the other day and used it for the first time yesterday. I read the directions, made sure to wet the chest strap, double checked all my information was correct. I did circuits (alternating treadmill and weights) for 1 hr and 20 mins and my HRM said I burned 855 calories. I feel like this is very high, but it was the first time I did this work out so maybe my body was just "shocked" into burning more calories because it wasn't my normal cardio workout? I'm 5'6, 166, and 26 years old. Any idea if there was something I did wrong, or do you think this could be correct?
    [/quote

    Same version as mine & calories sound about right, if you go into the data files it will also tell you how much of that was spent actually fat burning :flowerforyou: ]

    14473573.png
  • hope516
    hope516 Posts: 1,133 Member
    It sounds pretty accurate to me. That works out to a little less than 11 cals per minute, which most people can burn just jumping rope...great burn :flowerforyou:
  • ljbennett1
    ljbennett1 Posts: 10 Member
    Thanks all! I appreciate the feedback :smile:
  • AirCircleI
    AirCircleI Posts: 334 Member
    I think my max heart rate was around 190 (yikes, I know) and low was around 120 or so (during warm up and cool down)? Average was around 165 I believe. I would need to double check those numbers once I get home.

    I just put your details in this calculator: http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/heart-rate-based-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx

    Which came up with 876 for 80 minutes based on an averge of 165, your age and weight. So that all sounds right. I can get up to 190 (and even up to 195) when running. I've got a friend who works realyl hard and is very fit but struggled to get above 150, so count yourself lucky!
  • kasicrawford
    kasicrawford Posts: 33
    Mine also goes to 190 doing cardio! I had to up my HR in the settings to 195. It was set at 185 and I was going over that so it told me I burned more than I was. That is just my understanding of how it works...???
  • adidrea
    adidrea Posts: 275 Member
    I have a Polar FT7 also and that calorie burn sounds about right for your size.

    When exercising I usually adjust my HRM reading by subtracting the calories I would have burned in that time frame if I had sat on the couch and done nothing. Usually it's about 80 cal/hour ....that way I get calories burned purely due to exercise. But the fact that you already log on the lower and "safe" side is probably enough of an adjustment :)
  • Dave198lbs
    Dave198lbs Posts: 8,810 Member
    I would say correct.
    I'm 27, 5"7 and 174lb and I burn between 800 and 900 cals in an hour at the gym, doing cardio.

    is that with a HRM? seems high for 60 minutes unless it was really super intense
  • butlersoft
    butlersoft Posts: 219 Member
    It depends on your workrate but yes - as everybody else has said - it sounds about right....

    My resting heart rate is around 70 ... and when I hit the treadmill at 10-11kph my heartrate will hit around 145. Short bursts of 13-14kph (sprint for somebody of my size at 255Ib) takes me to around 155.

    I have a Polar F60 and usually work out in the gym until I've done a good 1,000 calorie burn (which takes anything from just over an hour to an hour and a half). The more cardio I do, the quicker I'll burn the calories (alternating treadmill / cross trainer and wave) ... whereas weights / strengthening typically won't raise the heart rate to the same levels / for the same periods of time and will thus take me longer....

    The most common way to record you "max heartrate" is substract your age from 220.

    At 40 years of age, I'd therefore calculate 220-40 = 180bpm

    When I'm working at 144 on the treadill - I'm "zoning" at 80% (144/180)*100 and this is typically my average zone on a workout when I take sprints and weights into account.
  • hbrittingham
    hbrittingham Posts: 2,518 Member
    I just bought a Polar F7 the other day and used it for the first time yesterday. I read the directions, made sure to wet the chest strap, double checked all my information was correct. I did circuits (alternating treadmill and weights) for 1 hr and 20 mins and my HRM said I burned 855 calories. I feel like this is very high, but it was the first time I did this work out so maybe my body was just "shocked" into burning more calories because it wasn't my normal cardio workout? I'm 5'6, 166, and 26 years old. Any idea if there was something I did wrong, or do you think this could be correct?
    that tells me your not working out hard enough or there is a lot of standing around between sets, if you are working out at your high zone you should be burning 1200 calories or more in that time frame. yes if your average heart rate was about 125, 855 calories sounds about right.

    I have to disagree with your assessment that she's can't be working out that hard or is standing around. In 40 minutes of cardio, I burn approximately 400-450 calories. During that time, my heart rate is running anywhere between 155 and 185 depending on the intensity, so it probably averages 170 or so. She is burning almost 900 calories which is on average for what I am burning. The only big differences between her and me is that I am 45 years old and weigh 159.
  • dad106
    dad106 Posts: 4,868 Member
    Just want to point out that HRM's are not meant for strength training and are meant for steady state cardio only(even then they are only 80% accurate at estimating calories... with strength training, it's even less.)

    I'd take that number with a grain of salt if I were you.
  • Dave198lbs
    Dave198lbs Posts: 8,810 Member
    Just want to point out that HRM's are not meant for strength training and are meant for steady state cardio only(even then they are only 80% accurate at estimating calories... with strength training, it's even less.)

    I'd take that number with a grain of salt if I were you.

    hmmmm...I have never heard that HRM is for steady state cardio only. I do HIIT and other things and use my HRM. where did you get this info? thanks
  • ShannonMpls
    ShannonMpls Posts: 1,936 Member
    Just want to point out that HRM's are not meant for strength training and are meant for steady state cardio only(even then they are only 80% accurate at estimating calories... with strength training, it's even less.)

    I'd take that number with a grain of salt if I were you.

    hmmmm...I have never heard that HRM is for steady state cardio only. I do HIIT and other things and use my HRM. where did you get this info? thanks

    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

    This is why "eating exercise calories" seems inherently flawed to me. MFP's estimates are often ludicrous, and HRMs are not always accurate. I wear mine during every workout (and I love it!) but I certainly wouldn't base my calorie intake on what my HRM says, especially for circuit training or intervals.
  • AmoreCouture
    AmoreCouture Posts: 255 Member
    It sounds right to me. An 80 minute workout will usually burn around 800+ calories as long as it's keeping your heart rate up high. Which strength training and running will definitely do.
  • Dave198lbs
    Dave198lbs Posts: 8,810 Member
    Just want to point out that HRM's are not meant for strength training and are meant for steady state cardio only(even then they are only 80% accurate at estimating calories... with strength training, it's even less.)

    I'd take that number with a grain of salt if I were you.

    hmmmm...I have never heard that HRM is for steady state cardio only. I do HIIT and other things and use my HRM. where did you get this info? thanks

    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

    This is why "eating exercise calories" seems inherently flawed to me. MFP's estimates are often ludicrous, and HRMs are not always accurate. I wear mine during every workout (and I love it!) but I certainly wouldn't base my calorie intake on what my HRM says, especially for circuit training or intervals.

    thanks Shannon...and I agree re the exercise calorie eating. I do increase my calories on days I work out but I rarely eat all of my estimated calories in case the number isn't accurate.
  • ShannonMpls
    ShannonMpls Posts: 1,936 Member
    thanks Shannon...and I agree re the exercise calorie eating. I do increase my calories on days I work out but I rarely eat all of my estimated calories in case the number isn't accurate.

    No problem - and I do the same. Typically, I set a fairly small deficit (about 500 cals a day) and eat a bit more when I work out and (100-200 calories extra). I still lose around two pounds a week on average.
  • Prefessa
    Prefessa Posts: 90
    Guys:

    I could be totally off base here...but! Anyone ever think of subtracting base calories from workout calories??

    OK...so yor HRM says you burned 900 cals for 90 minutes of exercise....does that INCLUDE the 200 odd calories you would have burned if you watched TV in Bed for the duration?? or is that number above an beyond? Remeber TDEE is the sum of all caloreies burned while exercising, at work, at rest, and while sleeping. This is why the Biggest Looser contestants wear the Bodybug Armband all day long to get a true energy balance, not an estimated one.

    OK so your TDEE is say 2400 for the day...that means if you did NO EXERCISE you would burn ~100-200cals/hr. So if your workout burns 900 calories, you are effectively counting your base calories twice for the duration. Am I correct?? A HRM is not like the BodyBug, you wear it when you train...theoretically you could wear it all day, but it may be fristrationg because the chest strap needs to be damp to pick up your heartbeat, so if your not sweating you will miss data.

    With a HRM it may pay to do an assessment of calories burned while awake and sedentary as well as calories burned while sleeping to get an accurate assesment of the BMR. or what you would burn in 24hrs if you just goofed off and slept.

    I way toying around with the idea myself of getting the FT4....i would have no problem with a better device like the bodybugg, but
    i don't like the idea of plunking down big bucks and still paying a fee to download the data.
  • cNhobbes
    cNhobbes Posts: 235 Member
    i'm 5'7" and 130lbs. i've found that when i'm working hard i burn about 100 cla per 10 minutes. i think that sounds accurate for you.
  • jrich1
    jrich1 Posts: 2,408 Member
    I have a Ft7.. sounds right to me.
  • 970Mikaela1
    970Mikaela1 Posts: 2,013 Member
    Guys:

    I could be totally off base here...but! Anyone ever think of subtracting base calories from workout calories??

    OK...so yor HRM says you burned 900 cals for 90 minutes of exercise....does that INCLUDE the 200 odd calories you would have burned if you watched TV in Bed for the duration?? or is that number above an beyond? Remeber TDEE is the sum of all caloreies burned while exercising, at work, at rest, and while sleeping. This is why the Biggest Looser contestants wear the Bodybug Armband all day long to get a true energy balance, not an estimated one.

    OK so your TDEE is say 2400 for the day...that means if you did NO EXERCISE you would burn ~100-200cals/hr. So if your workout burns 900 calories, you are effectively counting your base calories twice for the duration. Am I correct?? A HRM is not like the BodyBug, you wear it when you train...theoretically you could wear it all day, but it may be fristrationg because the chest strap needs to be damp to pick up your heartbeat, so if your not sweating you will miss data.

    With a HRM it may pay to do an assessment of calories burned while awake and sedentary as well as calories burned while sleeping to get an accurate assesment of the BMR. or what you would burn in 24hrs if you just goofed off and slept.

    I way toying around with the idea myself of getting the FT4....i would have no problem with a better device like the bodybugg, but
    i don't like the idea of plunking down big bucks and still paying a fee to download the data.



    I took my bmr divided it by 24 (as in 24 hours per day) and subtract the hourly bmr ( i know its a pretty rough idea) for each hour spent exercising. And i do this for every workout. My HRM tells me in a 2 hour fast paced walk i burn about 1100 calories and then i take of around 200 to get a closer count.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories