| Diet Forums : Fitness (Library) | Report Violation · Tag It! |
| Calorie burner on excerise machines vs. Calorie count calculator |  skinnylea |
|
 |
|
|
| #1 |  melkor |
Jul 20 2008 02:51 |
|
Mostly, CC is - except uphill walking is the one thing the database seems to have trouble calculating correctly. Your typical gym machine will overestimate your calorie expenditure by 25-33% if it is calibrated for your age, height and weight, and the stats are even worse if you don't enter any of those. CC depends on you assessing your exertion level correctly though, and if you're off with that you will also get the wrong result. A heart rate monitor will be more accurate, but it's really only worth the investment if you're doing significant cardio on a regular basis. |
||
| #2 | skinnylea |
Jul 20 2008 02:54 |
|
Thanks for the response! How do i use a heart rate monitor if i purchase one? |
||
| #3 | alle0299 |
Jul 20 2008 03:05 |
|
The HR monitors come all set up for calculating calories. All you'll have to do is enter your height, weight and age; then it does the rest for you as you wear it. Try googling or looking at a Polar F6 (I have it and love it!) |
||
| #4 | melkor |
Jul 20 2008 03:05 |
|
Well, they mostly come with instructions on how to calibrate them correctly, and they're pretty simple - like these from Polar - you just put on the chest strap, push the start button, and off you go. The models without the chest strap are incredibly useless - you need to stop what you're doing, put your fingers on the right contact spots, and stand still for 15-30 seconds to get an accurate reading. Hardly the way to get a productive workout ;) There are other brands than Polar out there, I bought a PulseSonic one for example - and I wound up really regretting that; the Polar ones are best. |
||
| #5 |  jobelize |
Jul 20 2008 09:04 |
|
I do the treadmill 3 x a week as well and I use 2 lb weights as well while I walk at 3.6 but the machine doesn't calculate the extra as it doesn't know i am working my arms with weights as well. I use the cc calculation and figure the extra is a bonus in workout calories. It works for my benefit and the extra can't hurt right ... the same as doing sit ups while holding weights...no calculation just a bonus. |
||
| #6 | djkitten |
Jul 21 2008 04:40 |
|
I was shocked at the difference between what I thought I was burning (as per the machine) and how much I actually am now that I have a HRM. For instance I just did about 25 mins on an elliptical type one my heart rate machine read 230 cals burned, the machine read 350. That's just nuts! |
||
| #7 | amayou82 |
Jul 21 2008 17:20 |
|
I see a lot of ppl reccomend the F6, what about the F4 whats the difference other than price??????? Me being the cheaper person I checked on walmart for heart rate monitors and found one for about 40 bucks http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=7942201 I would just be using it to calcuate my calories burned during work outs, since I just found out the darn things at the gym are off by such a great percentage. |
||
| #8 | cellophane_star |
Jul 21 2008 18:45 |
|
I bought Polar's F4 HRM and I love it. I'd like to add that even though my HRM is compatible with the machines at my gym, the reading on the machine is usually 100 calories higher than the reading on my watch. I trust the watch reading because it takes into account my height, weight, age & sex instead of just height & weight. |
||
| #9 | amandababy27 |
Jul 21 2008 21:08 |
|
Polar F6 or f4... or body bugg? |
||
| #10 | karozel |
Jul 21 2008 21:32 |
|
I for one use the numbers from my treadmill. I have looked on line at multiple places that mostly estimate the calorie burn a bit lower, but my HRM (a Timex) routinely estimates higher than my treadmill and it is fully programmed with my height, weight, age, sex, and max heart rate. I figure it's in the middle so I use it. I also realize that even if it's a bit high, I have myself set to sedentary and it would probably be more accurate to have myself at light activity... stairs at work, lots of walking about, etc. This way I am more motivated to do my workouts and get to log the burned calories. |
||
| #11 | melkor |
Jul 21 2008 22:19 |
|
Big difference between the F4 and F6 is that the F4 lacks the OwnZone fitness test, and it doesn't have a coded chest strap - so using the F4 you risk picking up your neighbour's signal if you work out in a group setting. If you aren't in the gym much or don't do group rides, that last bit isn't a concern. And you can do the fitness test manually using the Rockport Walk Test - it's just a lot more convenient using the OwnZone test. I haven't tried one myself, but the Timex HRM's are supposedly astoundingly bad. I know that my PulseSonic one is pretty terrible and I'd caution anyone against buying one - next time I'll just hit up eBay for an F11 like 2beittybitty told me to ;) |
||
| #12 | cellophane_star |
Jul 21 2008 22:42 |
| The F4 does not pick up other people's signals. At least that's what the guy who sold it to me told me. | ||
| #13 | melkor |
Jul 21 2008 23:02 |
|
Odd - that's not what the Polar website says about the F4 and the F6 - if you look at the feature description the F4 doesn't have the OwnCode coded transmission feature. Dunno though, you'd have to read your manual to see for sure. |
||
| #14 | daddyjaxx |
Jul 21 2008 23:12 |
|
You cannot just enter your statistics into any of these devices and expect it to be correct either. It may be more accurate than the machines, but they have to be calibrated with a metabolism test first before they are accurate. |
||
| #15 | cellophane_star |
Jul 21 2008 23:12 |
| I'll look it up when I go home because that was one of the "selling points" the guy told me when I bought it! It's my first HRM so I believed him :) | ||
| #16 | lostjadis |
Jul 21 2008 23:19 |
| I believe the F4 does not have a backlight and the F6 does. | ||
| #17 | djkitten |
Jul 22 2008 16:13 |
|
I have the f4 and it has an auto light than comes on when its dark. |
||
