Crazy calorie burns for P90X? Can this be right?

Options
NateDad
NateDad Posts: 55
in Fitness and Exercise
I've been using my HRM during P90X for a couple weeks now, and from what I've read on here, I'm burning a lot more calories than average.... or my HRM is reporting high. I have a brand new Polar FT4. I'm 6'1", 174 pounds, 34 years old, and before P90X I was nearly completely sedentary... my exercise mainly consisted of carrying around a 20 pound baby, and a 0.7 mile walk between the train station and work (desk job).

For example, last night I did legs and back and ab ripper X, and my HRM said 1085 calories burnt. My average heart rate was 137, max was 173, and time in zone 1:06:03. I push pretty hard in these exercises, and the pull ups always get my heart rate up there (I'm sure that's where I hit 173).

But... really, 1085?

For comparison, doing C25K Week 2 Run 1 the other day (walking @4mph, running @6mph, 1% grade on the treadmill), I burned 385 calories in 30 minutes, according to my HRM. (average HR 137, max 165, Time in zone: 18:23)

Does this sound right to anyone else?

-Nate
«1

Replies

  • neverstray
    neverstray Posts: 3,845 Member
    Options
    No. P90X, in their own literature, mainly in the nutrition information, they discuss that on average, you will burn 600 calories on each exercise. However, it varies quite a bit. The Plyo and Kenpo and the biggest burners I think with most people reporting numbers around 600 - 800 calories. Some of the other exercises burn more around 300 - 400.

    Have you tested your HRM to make sure it's accurate?

    Then again, maybe you're just a baddass.
  • Cwilliams8676
    Cwilliams8676 Posts: 300 Member
    Options
    Maybe turbo jam says it burs 1000 per hr
  • NateDad
    NateDad Posts: 55
    Options
    Last time I did Plyometrics it was 820, Kenpo X 720. Badass, or badly out of shape? :)
  • GonnaBeAFitMom
    GonnaBeAFitMom Posts: 34 Member
    Options
    Last time I did Plyometrics it was 820, Kenpo X 720. Badass, or badly out of shape? :)

    Can't it be both? ;)
  • aweightymatter
    aweightymatter Posts: 222
    Options
    IMHO that sounds a bit high... I'm decently in shape but not super woman or anything, and on average for legs and back I got a burn according to my HRM of around 400 or 500 an hour. I'm 5'6" and fairly sturdy -- can't tell from your pic but I doubt I'm "tiny" or anything compared to you. :)

    As the program progressed and I got in better shape, the burns decreased even more -- by the end I was only rating like 275 per hour for things like shoulders and arms. I never bothered with Kenpo (ran instead), but I always got the highest burns from the Plyo video, but again, those were similar to a running session over the same time period -- maybe 600 or 700 calories, nothing too outlandish.

    I found the program helpful to get back into strength work though and to get a bit of a cutting effect. It's definitely great and you should stick with it -- just maybe don't eat back all the calories your HRM says you burned.
  • dadoffo
    dadoffo Posts: 422 Member
    Options
    Last time I did Plyometrics it was 820, Kenpo X 720. Badass, or badly out of shape? :)

    The Kempo was kinda high. Last time I did Plyo it was 701 and for Kempo 490.
  • kendra0224
    kendra0224 Posts: 35
    Options
    I just got an FT4 and have had no issues with it calculating calories incorrectly. If you want to check the calories burned you can go to this link http://www.braydenwm.com/calburn.htm and put the info in. It is what I did when I was using a pyle HRM that calculated way off. Doing P90X for an hour is a lot of work, so I would say that it is more than likely correct. That is an awesome burn though!
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    HRM's are not accurate for calories burned for any activity other than cardio. This is because the calculation embedded in the watch assumes a certain oxygen uptake and bases intensity on your HR, to see where you are relative to your max oxygen uptake (V02Max). But the reason your HR elevates due to strength training is different then that of cardio which makes that portion of the equation wrong, typically will over shoot your actual burn).

    It may be a little more accurate if you pause between sets for the duration you are not actually doing any exercise, but even then it may be way off.
  • bobbybdoe
    bobbybdoe Posts: 472 Member
    Options
    Plyometrics burns the most out of all the DVDs, but all the DVDs have a generally high calorie burn. I'm usually anywhere from 300-800 whenever I do P90X and the same goes for when I'm doing Insanity.
  • kendra0224
    kendra0224 Posts: 35
    Options
    IMHO that sounds a bit high... I'm decently in shape but not super woman or anything, and on average for legs and back I got a burn according to my HRM of around 400 or 500 an hour. I'm smaller than you naturally but not tiny or anything :)

    As the program progressed and I got in better shape, the burns decreased even more -- by the end I was only rating like 275 per hour for things like shoulders and arms.

    I found the program helpful to get back into strength work though and to get a bit of a cutting effect. It's definitely great and you should stick with it -- just maybe don't eat back all the calories your HRM says you burned.

    I agree. Leave a pretty large deficit to make room for error.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    Last time I did Plyometrics it was 820, Kenpo X 720. Badass, or badly out of shape? :)

    There is no way you would have burned more then during Plyo,
  • dcgonz
    dcgonz Posts: 174 Member
    Options
    Last time I did Plyometrics it was 820, Kenpo X 720. Badass, or badly out of shape? :)

    This looks about right for these two workouts. To me your strength work out was a little high, to burn over 1000 calories you must have been really working those pull-ups! :laugh:
    If you are out of shape, you will burn more calories because you are working harder. As you progress through the progam building your endurance & strength you will see your calorie burn decrease

    Diana
  • ladybug1620
    ladybug1620 Posts: 1,136 Member
    Options
    It does sound high, but it makes sense. You spent over an hour in your fat burning zone with the P90X and only 18 minutes in the zone with C25K, meaning you would burn way more calories doing an hour of P90X than an hour of C25K. If you do the math it pretty much evens out. Great job :)
  • aweightymatter
    aweightymatter Posts: 222
    Options
    HRM's are not accurate for calories burned for any activity other than cardio. This is because the calculation embedded in the watch assumes a certain oxygen uptake and bases intensity on your HR, to see where you are relative to your max oxygen uptake (V02Max). But the reason your HR elevates due to strength training is different then that of cardio which makes that portion of the equation wrong, typically will over shoot your actual burn).

    It may be a little more accurate if you pause between sets for the duration you are not actually doing any exercise, but even then it may be way off.

    This is interesting, and from what I've read, true... I wonder how that relates to a program like P90x though which is somewhere in the middle. It's not your typical strength training where you do slow or steady reps -- but it's not exactly cardio where you're flailing around.
  • dcgonz
    dcgonz Posts: 174 Member
    Options
    HRM's are not accurate for calories burned for any activity other than cardio. This is because the calculation embedded in the watch assumes a certain oxygen uptake and bases intensity on your HR, to see where you are relative to your max oxygen uptake (V02Max). But the reason your HR elevates due to strength training is different then that of cardio which makes that portion of the equation wrong, typically will over shoot your actual burn).

    It may be a little more accurate if you pause between sets for the duration you are not actually doing any exercise, but even then it may be way off.

    Very interesting! I did not know that, thanks for the info!

    Diana
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    HRM's are not accurate for calories burned for any activity other than cardio. This is because the calculation embedded in the watch assumes a certain oxygen uptake and bases intensity on your HR, to see where you are relative to your max oxygen uptake (V02Max). But the reason your HR elevates due to strength training is different then that of cardio which makes that portion of the equation wrong, typically will over shoot your actual burn).

    It may be a little more accurate if you pause between sets for the duration you are not actually doing any exercise, but even then it may be way off.

    This is interesting, and from what I've read, true... I wonder how that relates to a program like P90x though which is somewhere in the middle. It's not your typical strength training where you do slow or steady reps -- but it's not exactly cardio where you're flailing around.

    It would still be off, but closer then traditional strength training. When doing pull-up and the like your HR spikes for a completely different reasons then with cardio, so it would still be off.
  • fasttrack27
    fasttrack27 Posts: 324
    Options
    sounds high to me. I'm not too far from your age/weight, but have been working out a little longer. I have a Polar FT40. When my average HR is in the 130's like that, I'd show maybe half that amount of calories burned. I get to that 1000/hr range when I average 160bmp with a long hard run. At least for me, the 130'ish average is a nice midpoint workout. Feels like I'm working but not too crazy hard. Once I get to 150 and up, the effort and calorie burn really seems to jump way high. But thats just me....
  • jram70
    jram70 Posts: 91 Member
    Options
    The highest I saw on P90X with my heart monitor was on Legs & Back Day about the 2nd or 3rd week in and I burned 985. I was really busting it so I say it is possible. What I did is went with what my monitor said, even if it was low, that way I am consistent in recording and any overs/unders should balance out.
  • alj322003
    alj322003 Posts: 11 Member
    Options
    doing the math while running you burned around 12 calories per minute doing px90 you burned around 16 per minute heart rate was higher during px90 so sound reasonable to me
  • gafrausto
    gafrausto Posts: 24 Member
    Options
    FT4 may just be defective or needs to be reset...not sure if resetting is possible on all HRMs.

Categories