HRM - The Good, The Bad and the Ugly?

kateva143
kateva143 Posts: 46 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
So, I've been considering buying a HRM, but I'm not sure of the best ones out there or if they are even worth using? What is everyone's experience?

Replies

  • Mommagoose4
    Mommagoose4 Posts: 132 Member
    I find MFP over estimates most of their activities. I have a PolarFT4 & LOVE IT!
    Soft strap. Accurate. Very nice to have. It keeps me moving to burn lots of calories.
  • kateva143
    kateva143 Posts: 46 Member
    Hmmm ,that seems to be the favored HRM. Do you happen to remember what the average descrepancy was from MFP and the HRM?
  • ALH1981
    ALH1981 Posts: 538 Member
    I find MFP over estimates most of their activities. I have a PolarFT4 & LOVE IT!
    Soft strap. Accurate. Very nice to have. It keeps me moving to burn lots of calories.

    AGREE - however do you use yours in the pool? I want to track swimming calories but it doesnt seem to work?
  • krazyforyou
    krazyforyou Posts: 1,428 Member
    I bought a very reasonable Mio at Acadamy sporting goods. Love it.
  • Ed_81
    Ed_81 Posts: 31 Member
    After doing lots of research I decided on getting a cardiosport combi c2 HRM
    This is a really nice looking watch as well as a really cool hrm.
    It doesn't link to a PC, but since I log my workouts on here I don't need it to.
    What it does do is let you put in your age, weight and height so it's calories burned calculations are accurate. the C2 also tells you in grams or ounces how much fat it thinks you will have burned in an exercise, and how much weight it thinks you will have lost thanks to an exercise.
    It also tracks your bmi too.
    It does everything I wanted it to and I was really lucky to find a brand new one on ebay for less then £12 (bargain of the century since they are normally around £50)
  • SteveTries
    SteveTries Posts: 723 Member
    Just an opinion, but the Heart Rate on that screen doesn't appear to be very large. You may find this to be challenging to read when on the move. If you are doing any zone type training (e.g. trying to remain at a certain heart rate despite changes in terrain etc) you'll be checking the HR very regularly and you'll want it to be instantly readable.

    On my FT4 its takes up half the screen when the mode is on % heart rate (my preference) and I find that to be great.

    Otherwise it looks like a nice device and at £12, well you cannot go wrong really.
  • EchoOfYourPast
    EchoOfYourPast Posts: 459 Member
    I like the Polar FT40...you can swim with it as well.
    San :)
  • Ed_81
    Ed_81 Posts: 31 Member
    Just an opinion, but the Heart Rate on that screen doesn't appear to be very large. You may find this to be challenging to read when on the move. If you are doing any zone type training (e.g. trying to remain at a certain heart rate despite changes in terrain etc) you'll be checking the HR very regularly and you'll want it to be instantly readable.

    On my FT4 its takes up half the screen when the mode is on % heart rate (my preference) and I find that to be great.

    Otherwise it looks like a nice device and at £12, well you cannot go wrong really.

    I've not really had any problems with the size of the display, and there is 2 functions that cover the target heart beat, the first is a manually set one that you can programme in, it then bleeps when you fall outside of the range or go over it (different bleeps I believe)
    The other one is even easier, when you get to the level you want to sustain, all you do is press and hold the light button for 2 seconds, this activates the automatic range set function and again it will let you know if your heart rate changes from the current level.
  • SteveTries
    SteveTries Posts: 723 Member
    The other one is even easier, when you get to the level you want to sustain, all you do is press and hold the light button for 2 seconds, this activates the automatic range set function and again it will let you know if your heart rate changes from the current level.

    THAT sounds great
  • iplayoutside19
    iplayoutside19 Posts: 2,304 Member
    I have a Polar FT7 and I love it. I like the displays I like that I can see lapsed time & actual time. And I like that I can pull up old workouts on it. But you need to understand some limitations.

    I use it for running & biking to track, time, calories, and HR. I do not use it for weight training because it gets in the way and it is not as accurate during those activities.

    I have used it a couple times when swimming. However, when I push off the side the HR Element always moves and messes up the reading so I don't mess with it. It might work better in a fully body swimsuit. Read the instructions regarding water use.

    Another thing to think about when using an HRM is the calories you would have burned anyway had you spent that exercise time sitting on the couch. For instance. My daily calorie goal is 2350. If I run for an hour and my HRM says I burned 1100 calories. I deduct 100 from that total, because theoreticaly I would have burned just under 100 calories had I been reading or watching TV during that hour. Clear as mud right?
  • kateva143
    kateva143 Posts: 46 Member
    Thanks all for the info!

    "Iplay" Thanks so much for your insight, I did buy the FT7 (liked the style better) and I like your idea of deducting the calories from what you would burn doing nothing. I wish that there was a way for it to adjust it for me, but what'd'ya gonna do.
    Thanks again guys =)
  • firecraker05
    firecraker05 Posts: 41 Member
    I haven't been going by MFP's calories burned, but I have been going by what the machine at the gym is telling me. I was just wondering if anyone knows how accurate those are compared to MFP or a HRM. Thanks!
  • Tropical_Turtle
    Tropical_Turtle Posts: 2,236 Member
    My dad just bought me a Polar FT7 and I cant wait to try it
  • MadeOfMagic
    MadeOfMagic Posts: 525 Member
    Hmmm ,that seems to be the favored HRM. Do you happen to remember what the average descrepancy was from MFP and the HRM?

    For me MFP overestimated my calories by as much as 400-500cals per hour of vigorous exercise. I have FT60 and I love it :)
  • rhonniema
    rhonniema Posts: 522 Member
    I haven't been going by MFP's calories burned, but I have been going by what the machine at the gym is telling me. I was just wondering if anyone knows how accurate those are compared to MFP or a HRM. Thanks!
    Those machines aren't very accurate also.
    Compared it to my heart monitor twice. First time it was 100 calories off, second time 200!
  • slepygrl
    slepygrl Posts: 249 Member
    I find MFP over estimates most of their activities. I have a PolarFT4 & LOVE IT!
    Soft strap. Accurate. Very nice to have. It keeps me moving to burn lots of calories.

    ^^ Couldn't agree more!!! ^^^
  • pastryari
    pastryari Posts: 8,646 Member
    I have a PolarFT4. As far as comparing it to MFP, it's really different for everyone. Some people say MFP over-estimates but for most exercises, MFP was under-estimating for me. I love my HRM and use it everytime I work out.
  • mostaverage
    mostaverage Posts: 202 Member
    I find MFP over estimates most of their activities. I have a PolarFT4 & LOVE IT!
    Soft strap. Accurate. Very nice to have. It keeps me moving to burn lots of calories.

    AGREE - however do you use yours in the pool? I want to track swimming calories but it doesnt seem to work?

    The only one that tracks underwater is the Polar RCX5 - a little on the pricey side but it looks to be an awesome bit of kit
  • k8lyn_235
    k8lyn_235 Posts: 507 Member
    i have one from walmart and i love it :)
  • pixelberry
    pixelberry Posts: 167 Member
    I just got the Polar FT60 last week, so far, I'm loving it. MFP has under-estimated and over-estimated my calorie burns on various exercises. I've even been burning more than what my elliptical machine says I have.
  • 9jenn9
    9jenn9 Posts: 309 Member
    In my personal experience, my treadmill, as well as the cardio machines at the gym overestimate calories a LOT. Example: Last Saturday I ran on my treadmill for an hour. The treadmill estimated about 900 calories. My hrm said I burned about 500. Since my hrm is programed with my gender, age, height and current weight I assume it's much more accurate. I consider my hrm one of my top three most important fitness purchases (along with good running shoes and a gym membership).

    Since I often eat back my exercise calories, having a very accurate count of what I burned is important.
  • mistymorgan1985
    mistymorgan1985 Posts: 13
    I have body media...
  • Justkeepswimmin
    Justkeepswimmin Posts: 777 Member
    Hmmm ,that seems to be the favored HRM. Do you happen to remember what the average descrepancy was from MFP and the HRM?

    For me MFP overestimated my calories by as much as 400-500cals per hour of vigorous exercise. I have FT60 and I love it :)

    It varries for individuals. For me MFP was like 30-40% too high, but for my husband its only 10-25% too high. We both have FT40's and love them. Although I'm having to tigthen my strap so much I worry that in six months I wont be able to tighten it enough or keep it UP.

    I LOVE My HRM - and I am starting to feel naked w/o it.
  • shortandfaithful
    shortandfaithful Posts: 83
    I have the polar ft7 and LOVE IT!!!! It even works directly with the machines at my gym. I was suprised at the differences in MFP and the HRM put I already knew MFP was high when I compared it to machine read outs. I did find out that I was way underestimating my bike rides and burn almost double what I thought :)

Categories