My first HRM
Options
sbennett23
Posts: 35 Member
I am so excited. I went out and bought my first heart rate monitor today. It's a Polar F6. I've been wondering if I was logging the correct amount of calories or not and as it turns out I was way off. I burned 400 in 45 minutes, I would usually log in about 250 for that. Now I know why my weight had stalled - I wasn't eating enough because my exercise calories were not being input correclty. I'm excited to start a new week and see what happens!
0
Replies
-
Good Luck I love mine I wear it a lot and have been surprised by the results each time It is a great way to keep track of your calories more accurately! Have fun!0
-
Question can you buy replacement bands for F6 monitors I will probably need one in the future--
Thanks0 -
Question can you buy replacement bands for F6 monitors I will probably need one in the future--
Thanks
I don't know the answer but I would think so. Go to www.polarusa.com and you should be able to find out. If not you may want to email or call their customer service dept. and ask. Good luck!0 -
Thanks I will0
-
Hi! Yea!!! I got my Polar F6 three days ago. I too was amazed at the difference in calories. Good luck with yours. :drinker:
Nickie
Created by MyFitnessPal.com - Easy Calorie Counting0 -
I ordered one last night and can't wait for it to get here! I hope I'm currently underestimating my cals and get to eat more and not the other way around! :bigsmile:0
-
I have an F6 and I love it. The only thing... I got it in December and already the battery has died twice. Lame, because you have to send it in to get the battery replaced and that takes weeks. I don't know if there is something wrong with mine, or if that's just the way it is? Anyone?0
-
could some one explain how the HRM helps to keep track of calories?
Thanks Much!
Fly0 -
I'd like to inform that I found my polar F6 was calculating a little too much.
It seems that your resting heart rate might be quite important in deciding how many calories are burned.
When I got mine, I had set it up. But at somepoint I wore mine for 24 hours ( just to check it out). Then I went on exercising for a few weeks. I thought I was burning more calories because over weight etc, than some others.
I decided to look at my settings again, and it looks like my PolarF6 set the resting heart beat to a lower amount.
ie I had it up at 80's , it was down to 60. (I'm sure the watch changed this on it's own when I had it on for 24 hours).
To test it, I had changed it back up to 90. I ended up exercising, relaxing, and later on ended up checkign it, and it was set to 85.
So I'm assuming that the polar F6 (can't speak for other models).. will pick up the lowest heartrate you have while exercising and set it as your resting rate.
Something to check out.0 -
I'd like to inform that I found my polar F6 was calculating a little too much.
It seems that your resting heart rate might be quite important in deciding how many calories are burned.
When I got mine, I had set it up. But at somepoint I wore mine for 24 hours ( just to check it out). Then I went on exercising for a few weeks. I thought I was burning more calories because over weight etc, than some others.
I decided to look at my settings again, and it looks like my PolarF6 set the resting heart beat to a lower amount.
ie I had it up at 80's , it was down to 60. (I'm sure the watch changed this on it's own when I had it on for 24 hours).
To test it, I had changed it back up to 90. I ended up exercising, relaxing, and later on ended up checkign it, and it was set to 85.
So I'm assuming that the polar F6 (can't speak for other models).. will pick up the lowest heartrate you have while exercising and set it as your resting rate.
Something to check out.
Good to know. I'll check into it. Thanks for the info.0 -
I just used my new polar F6 for the first time :happy:
I want to revisit the resting heart rate issue to see if I understand this. On my polar, it's currently set at 60. Does this mean the polar only counts calories when my HR is above 60? Or does it substract out those calories to prevent double counting them, as they are already counted in one's BMR?
Banks mentioned something in another thread about substracting out 90-140 cal/hr to prevent double counting. If I remember correctly he said MFP does substract those out, but the polar doesn't.
Today I walked for one hour, MFP gave me 326 cal while the polar read 316 cal, but I'm not sure if I should be deducting out the BMR cal's from the Polar measurement.
Can someone clarify this?0 -
could some one explain how the HRM helps to keep track of calories?
Thanks Much!
Fly
They track how many calories you are burning when you work out.
The whole Polar battery thing is why I chose to get the Reebok HRM. It was WAAAAY cheaper and I am able to change the batteries in the watch and the strap by myself. It works like a dream and only cost me $39.000 -
I just used my new polar F6 for the first time :happy:
I want to revisit the resting heart rate issue to see if I understand this. On my polar, it's currently set at 60. Does this mean the polar only counts calories when my HR is above 60? Or does it substract out those calories to prevent double counting them, as they are already counted in one's BMR?
Banks mentioned something in another thread about substracting out 90-140 cal/hr to prevent double counting. If I remember correctly he said MFP does substract those out, but the polar doesn't.
Today I walked for one hour, MFP gave me 326 cal while the polar read 316 cal, but I'm not sure if I should be deducting out the BMR cal's from the Polar measurement.
Can someone clarify this?
You will find that the majority of the people won't bother with the (taking away resting cals).. ie polar said 316, use 316.... 10 calories isnt' going to make a difference.
In regards to the resting HR. I believe mine is/was higher than 60, and I had set it up to something like 90. The next time I looked at it, I believe it went back down to 85 or so.
So my thinking was that the Polar saw a lower HR while in "exercise mode" and changed the resting heart rate to that amount.0 -
Does this mean that the 10 cal difference between the polar & MFP is the amount attributed to the base metabolic rate? I don't care about 10 cal, but I was sure Banks said it should be 90-140cal per hour of exercise, which does make a little difference. I'm so confused.
You will find that the majority of the people won't bother with the (taking away resting cals).. ie polar said 316, use 316.... 10 calories isnt' going to make a difference.0 -
If you know your BMR then just divide it by 24 to find out what your hourly burn is. Mines approx 58 calories an hour. I don't subtract them because I only eat like half of my exercise calories back.0
-
could some one explain how the HRM helps to keep track of calories?
Thanks Much!
Fly
They track how many calories you are burning when you work out.
The whole Polar battery thing is why I chose to get the Reebok HRM. It was WAAAAY cheaper and I am able to change the batteries in the watch and the strap by myself. It works like a dream and only cost me $39.00
thanks Ice!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 401 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 992 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions