Calories burned. HRM vs MFP

SirBeechBum
SirBeechBum Posts: 28
in Fitness and Exercise
I’m pretty sure I know the answer to this but I thought I would confirm with the more experienced here on the MFP site.

So I just got a Polar FT7 HRM and used it for the first time today. At the end of my 62 minute walk, it informed me that my average heart rate was 130 and that I burned 677 calories. According to MFP, I only burned 468 calories. I’m guessing I should use the HRM numbers?

Replies

  • Hood25
    Hood25 Posts: 201 Member
    Wow! Usually my Polar FT4 is a lot lower than MFP. I would go with the Polar though. Your average HR may have made you burn more. As long as you have all the correct information computed in your watch and your strap has been cleaned recently I would go with it.
  • SirBeechBum
    SirBeechBum Posts: 28
    Wow! Usually my Polar FT4 is a lot lower than MFP. I would go with the Polar though. Your average HR may have made you burn more. As long as you have all the correct information computed in your watch and your strap has been cleaned recently I would go with it.

    Yeah, I am intentionally walking at a VERY brisk pace specifically to elevate my heart rate. I hope to start mixing in a little jogging now that I can more accurately measure my heart rate and calories burned…
    Thanks for your reply!
  • EvEboEvie
    EvEboEvie Posts: 115 Member
    I trust my HRM.

Categories