Timex Doesn't Think Their HRMs are Wrong! Sign the list!

Options
beeblebrox82
beeblebrox82 Posts: 578 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I've been having a discussion with Timex concerning their HRMs gross over-estimation of caloric burn.
I finally stamped my feet hard enough to get a little more detailed response and the long and the short of it is: they think there is something wrong with my watch, not a systemic issue with all their HRMs. :mad: I've seen too many posts on this forum with the same gripes; I'm convinced that this is a platform wide issue at Timex.


Please, if you've had concerns with your Timex HRM's calorie outputs please post here and add your name to the list. Maybe we can get them to see there's a larger issue.

If you can post what you've done to ensure you've set it correctly, and how you determined it was not correct. Let's try to wake these guys up!!

1. Timex T5J031 - Weight and Max HR setup is correct, output reads ~1/3 higher on runs than any other available calculator.
2.
3.
4.

Replies

  • monikki39
    monikki39 Posts: 6 Member
    Options
    I've been having a discussion with Timex concerning their HRMs gross over-estimation of caloric burn.
    I finally stamped my feet hard enough to get a little more detailed response and the long and the short of it is: they think there is something wrong with my watch, not a systemic issue with all their HRMs. :mad: I've seen too many posts on this forum with the same gripes; I'm convinced that this is a platform wide issue at Timex.


    Please, if you've had concerns with your Timex HRM's calorie outputs please post here and add your name to the list. Maybe we can get them to see there's a larger issue.

    If you can post what you've done to ensure you've set it correctly, and how you determined it was not correct. Let's try to wake these guys up!!

    1. Timex T5J031 - Weight and Max HR setup is correct, output reads ~1/3 higher on runs than any other available calculator.
    2. Timex T5J031 - Weight and Max HR setup is correct, output reads about 200 calories or about 1/3 high than other calculators.
    3.
    4.

    I am having the same problem! I just got this HRM and one of the main reasons I wanted it was for the calorie counting. I am so upset because I know it is way too high. I do think the HR is right, but there is no way the calorie counting is right. I am comparing it to machines at the gym (which I know are off, but this is WAY off) and compared to a group of others doing the exact same classes and there counts are not the same, but at least somewhat similar, while mine is EXTREMELY high!
  • Phrak
    Phrak Posts: 353 Member
    Options
    Even the best HRM can be close to 30% off on calorie readings. They do not factor in which muscles are being used.
  • msmithevv
    msmithevv Posts: 58 Member
    Options
    I had one and it said I was burning more than twice what my old one did. I took it back so I don't know the model number. The one I had did not let me set gender which makes a real difference in what you burn. I would get a new HRM.
  • annieheavrin
    annieheavrin Posts: 47
    Options
    My Timex HRM monitor seems to be fairly correct. It always is less than what the machines are showing. It is higher than what MFP calculates BUT MFP cannot factor in your heart rate, age, height, weight, etc. I love my Timex and it seems fairly accurate. But, as some other person posted, no HRM is going to be 100% correct...they are all going to be somewhat off. But, I feel that compared to websites I have researched for how hard I work, mine seems to be within a 50-100 calorie radius.
  • misssiri
    misssiri Posts: 335 Member
    Options
    I had a Timex and I switched to a a Polar. It was way too high.
  • dad106
    dad106 Posts: 4,868 Member
    Options
    Timex is absolute crap.. I had one that I used for a day before I returned because of how high the calorie count was.

    Problem is they don't take enough info nor use Vo2max... which is needed if you want a pretty accurate calorie estimation.

Categories