both the garmin 305 and my polar F11(i am not sure how that differs from the F7) have all my info-age, wt, max HR. so i would think they would calculate calories the same way. if your info is the same....if you have both you could experiment and try both one day and see what happens...
i have the garmin, its soo much cooler than a regular HR monitor for outdoor activities.
i dont know if the garming HR monitior belt sycns with indoor machines like treadmills.
I agree with FAIRE*ISLE - when I'm not using the cadence sensor I think that the Forerunner 305 calories are more accurate than Spark People because you get credit for uphills (and presumably less credit for downhills!).
I have the Garmin Forerunner 305 and it does have a calories burned feature. Mine is also consistent with the calories burned biking as figured by Spark People... except for my hill climbs. I think the Garmin is more accurate than Spark People which doesn't seem to take hills into consideration. Spark People, I think, does the calculations based on your weight and mph. However, my mph goes down severely depending on the grade, yet according to SP calculations, I am burning far less calories than when I am riding a flat portion at 19mph. I certainly feel like I have worked far harder on a hill climbing day, but according to SP, my calorie burn goes way down. I can't get calories burned from an indoor work-out either... like RESIPSA99 said, although I can record my heart rate.
Edited by: CAROLYN1ALASKA at: 2/15/2010 (17:50)
“The only way to keep your health is to eat what you don't want, drink what you don't like, and do what you'd rather not.” Mark Twain
I have the Forerunner 305 with the chest strap HRM and cadence sensor. I love it, and have been using some form of the Garmin GPS watches for years. That said, since you're most interested in calories burned, here are some things that you might consider...
For the calories, so far as Garmin told me, they use distance, speed, elevation. Before I added the cadence sensor (and when I'm using my carbon bike which doesn't have a sensor mounted), the calories I get while biking/running outside are very consistent, and consistent with what you find here on Sparkpeople and on other websites.
However, when using the watch with the cadence sensor, the calories go way up, and I don't think it is realistic (hey, I'd like it to be true, but I don't think it is). I emailed the Garmin folks, and they insist that the calories with the cadence sensor will be very accurate, but I'm not convinced.
One very important issue is that, according to what Garmin told me, they don't use the HRM to calculate calories. So, I don't believe that you can get calories burned if you aren't outside/moving as it relies on GPS and you can't get GPS inside, obviously. I haven't tried it inside lately, so maybe this has changed, but if it hasn't and if the Polar works inside, unless you want to know how far/fast you are going in addition to calories burned, you might want to consider sticking with your Polar.
Edited by: RESIPSA99 at: 2/15/2010 (13:10)
Pounds lost: 0.0
Fitness Minutes: (16,922) Posts: 216 2/15/10 9:27 A
I currently use a Polar FT7 that gives me the number of calories burned for each workout. I am confused, I have heard that each one of these units does do some sort of calories burned. Could someone give me a simple explanation. Would I be out of place wearing the Garmin unit and the polar unit?
SparkPeople, SparkCoach, SparkPages, SparkPoints, SparkDiet, SparkAmerica, SparkRecipes, DailySpark, and other marks are trademarks of SparkPeople, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
SPARKPEOPLE is a registered trademark of SparkPeople, Inc. in the United States, European Union, Canada, and Australia. All rights reserved.