Which do you guys think is more accurate, the calorie counter on the exercise bike, or the calorie counter in my hear rate monitor?

They give vastly different readings, with the HRM always being much higher.

Neither is more accurate. They both are based on generalized equations that don't take into account your genetics, metabolism, body fat, etc. Pick one and stick with it. The important thing is not knowing exactly how many calories you burned, but how many your measurement stick says so you can make changes. I.e. regardless if one says 300 or the other says 500, whichever you pick, if you do 305 or 505 the next time then you are probably burning more calories and progressing.

Jeremy

Which do you guys think is more accurate, the calorie counter on the exercise bike, or the calorie counter in my hear rate monitor?

They give vastly different readings, with the HRM always being much higher.

What I did - just as an example, is estimate how many caloies I'm burning while running 1 mile. Since I am quite fit and 155lb I figure I'm going to be on the low range of 80-120kcal, so probably 80-90kcal.

Almost independent of my speed, my HR monitor give me 85-95kcal/mile (obviosly for lower speed this is more time. I do put in age, activity level, weight, height etc.. and also let it estimate maxHR and resting HR.

Therefore I trust it when I get on a bike or something else as comaprison.

I don't trust it for lifting. I tried it and get readings of <100kcal for a high-intensity 45 minutes of lifting. This is primarity because I don't get my HR up very high in a short space of time and a 2 minute rest puts it back in the mid 60's range (3 minutes and I can easily get it into the mid 50's). As soon as I get below 80-90, it seems to dramatically slow the calorie count.

Anyway, thought that might help estimate, or decide if one is really 'off'.

EDIT: I don't know what you consider 'way different' but I figure if I can estimate within 10-15% that's definitely accurate.

EDIT: I don't know what you consider 'way different' but I figure if I can estimate within 10-15% that's definitely accurate.

I was doing the recumbent exercise bike yesterday at about 65 - 70% of my max heart rate. I don't remember the time when I noticed this, but about 20 minutes in, the bike said something like 250cal burned and my monitor said more like 375.

My monitor said I burned nearly 750cal in 45 minutes of work. I dont think that's anywhere near correct...is it?

I completely agree with JeremyLikness. He's right on. Just pick one and try to increase your calories on that measuring stick each time. I don't see the need to know exactly how many real calories you burn. After you finish cardio, you'll continue to burn more calories than normal for several more hours, you don't know how many calories are lost there, do you? So the exact number is not important. But the increasing number on the bike or monitor is helpful, I think.

My monitor said I burned nearly 750cal in 45 minutes of work. I dont think that's anywhere near correct...is it?

That doesn't sound right. Maybe simply use the average HR as a guide, or pick one. The problem with not using the HR monitor is you won't be able to comapre when you do something else.

So perhaps just use the monitor, but realize it might be over-estimating by quite a bit.

I wonder if there is something on the monitor that is not set correctly? - MaxHR or soemthing like that.

I wonder if there is something on the monitor that is not set correctly? - MaxHR or soemthing like that.

It's a Polar, I just input my height (66 inches), weight (195 pounds), age (27) and sex (M). That's all it asks for.

It's a Polar, I just input my height (66 inches), weight (195 pounds), age (27) and sex (M). That's all it asks for.

I have a polar and I have to set my MaxHR and some VO2Max-like number. Does it have a fitness test? Your stats are not unusual, and it should have reasonable defaults, so I'm surprised. Perhaps you have an unusually high maxHR so the monitor thinks you are busting a gut when you are at 75% or something. Are you at 190bpm during your exercise? I presume not, since you mention 75% MaxHR which I assume you got from 220-age, so around 144. 144 for 25 minutes should not give you 375 kcal unless you are 300lb or something (or your max HR is set to 160, or VO2Max set too high). Were you definitely looking at current kcal, not accumulated?

I know these are silly questions, but something is definitely amis.

If you can't figure it out and it's annoying enough, I’d consider taking it back as faulty. Who knows, did you check the HR readings are correct? – if the calories are so far off, then I would be concerned what else is not right. I have not experienced reading that ‘off’ with any HR monitor.

Are you at 190bpm during your exercise? I presume not, since you mention 75% MaxHR which I assume you got from 220-age, so around 144. 144 for 25 minutes should not give you 375 kcal unless you are 300lb or something (or your max HR is set to 160, or VO2Max set too high).


I work between 140 and 153 bpm for at least 45 minutes, 4 times per week.