HRM and calories

SparkPoints: (29,273)
Fitness Minutes: (62,305)
Posts: 1,231
12/30/12 4:02 P

re: "An example of my workout today was a ripped class (strength and cardio) it showed 548 and the bodypump (strength to music) was at 360ish. I'll give more info when I get home to where my watch is with the data emoticon"

I don't think your numbers sound crazy high, especially considering the weight on your tracker. They may even be a little low these are one hour workouts. But as mentioned, heart rate monitors are not really designed for strength training type activities, so it is hard to say about accuracy. But 548 calories for an hour for someone that weighs around 200 pounds--that doesn't sound too high to me. It sounds a lot more realistic than some of the 1000+ calorie burn estimates that I've seen people post. How does it compare to the Spark database listings for your stats? In my case, my heart rate monitor burn is almost always lower than the database calorie burn estimates. I am not saying that is true for everyone, they are estimates, but I figure it is a more conservative estimate to log for me. A vigorous one hour aerobic workout usually burns 300-400 and something for me, with my current stats weighing around 140 give or take (depending on the day).

June Minutes: 1,911

0 500 1000 1500

2000

SparkPoints: (906)
Fitness Minutes: (1,185)
Posts: 10
12/30/12 12:43 P

Bummer on the strength! I was hoping as Bodypump is a choreographed full body bar workout it might be right. Either way, it's a lot of fun!

Edited by: TO-BE-AMAZING at: 12/30/2012 (12:43)

current weight: 201.9

211 189.5 168 146.5

125

Posts: 51,793
12/29/12 6:27 P

I agree with the previous poster. A HRM is only going to give you an accurate estimate during cardio exercise.

Coach Jen

SparkPoints: (51,572)
Fitness Minutes: (22,226)
Posts: 2,111
12/29/12 4:09 P

HRM's are reasonably accurate for only cardio activities, and will give erroneous predictions for strength training. The best accuracy is obtained for well-studied exercises such as running, biking, walking...

Body Fat %: 25.0

30 27 24 21

18

SparkPoints: (906)
Fitness Minutes: (1,185)
Posts: 10
12/29/12 4:05 P

An example of my workout today was a ripped class (strength and cardio) it showed 548 and the bodypump (strength to music) was at 360ish. I'll give more info when I get home to where my watch is with the data

current weight: 201.9

211 189.5 168 146.5

125

SparkPoints: (31,245)
Fitness Minutes: (29,748)
Posts: 818
12/29/12 3:13 P

I also have a Polar HRM and I believe them to be very accurate. Presently, I am using the chest band in conjunction with the Polar aerobic machines at my fitness center. The band allows my heart rate to be measured on the machine. Frequently, the grips alone on the machines don't register my heart rate. I think, my heart rate tells the machine how hard I'm working and it would it calculate the calories burned accordingly. It would also consider the weight I've entered, the speed, etc.

If you are using the wrist device also, you would have entered your weight, etc. and the heart rate monitor would be working to calculate your calories according to your intensity.

Edited by: BERTA6978 at: 12/29/2012 (15:18)

current weight: 125.0

131 128.75 126.5 124.25

122

SparkPoints: (71,223)
Fitness Minutes: (31,326)
Posts: 5,042
12/29/12 2:51 P

Yes, examples please!

current weight: 110.0

160 147.5 135 122.5

110

Posts: 51,793
12/29/12 2:21 P

Can you give an example of an activity you're doing and what kind of calories burned numbers it's giving you?

Coach Jen

SparkPoints: (906)
Fitness Minutes: (1,185)
Posts: 10
12/29/12 12:44 P

How accurate do you think the calories burned are with the Polar HRM with chest strap? For fitness I've been manually entering the info. It seems like an awful lot....

Thanks!

current weight: 201.9

211 189.5 168 146.5

125