I mentioned recently that I finally picked up a heart rate monitor. I didn't get anything super fancy. I went with the Polar F4, for under 100 dollars. (Not that the color matters, I but I picked up the one in red berry.) The way it works is there's a strap that you put around the most upper part of your rib cage, and a watch that you wear on your wrist. When activated, the watch is used like a stopwatch and communicates with the band around your chest. From the time you press start to the time you press stop, it gives you a summary of your total minutes, the number of those minutes that you're in the fat burning/cardio zone, your average heart rate, your high heart rate and your total calories burned.
I've been wearing it almost every day to gather data for random activities. Of course I've been keeping track of my stats in Excel to get an idea of how may calories different activities burn (I highlighted a few of my recurring activities):
It's not included in that chart, but for a comparison, I also recorded my stats for 1 hour of working - where I was sitting for a full 60 minutes. Doing basically nothing except using my hands and brain at the computer, I burned just over 100 calories. I thought that was interesting because I can see how much more I burn by actually doing an activity compared to if I did nothing.
After reviewing this data, what surprised me most is that bike riding is actually a cardio activity. I really never thought of biking as exercise, much less cardio, so I was shocked by how many calories it burn. What also surprised me is that just getting from my apartment to Grand Central Terminal every morning burns approx 200 calories and my average heart rate is usually in the cardio zone!
Another good thing I noticed is that when I wear it to the gym, any of the cardio machines (treadmills/elipticals/cross trainer/arc trainer, etc) actually somehow know that you're wearing a HRM and display your heart rate right on the machine (without having to hold onto their heart rate sensors). I have found the HR number on the machine matches the HR number on the watch +/- 2 beats per min. But I noticed that the calories burned that display on the machine are always significantly higher (about 25%-35%) than the calories burned on the heart rate monitor. I don't understand the reasoning for this since my age and weight entered in both machines are the same. And I'm not sure which is more accurate - the heart rate monitor or the cardio machine.
All that being said, this is a pretty low end heart rate monitor but it's perfect for my needs and I'm happy with it. Of course, if you're looking for something fancier, there are tons more to choose from.
Posts
12 comments:
I love spreadsheets and graphs...seriously. I've been wanting a HRM for so long and this is one that I've been considering. Thanks for the thorough review!
Geez, Sheryl, of COURSE it matters what color it is. I am planning on asking for a Polar HRM for Christmas, so I appreciate the review.
I have wondered if it was worth getting one. My trainer said the machines are off on calories burned by about a third (just like you found), so the monitor is more accurate. Thanks for the review. Will be asking for one now.
Good review. Also good to know that while I'm sitting at the computer which seems like more and more these days, I'm likely burning some calories too. Sigh.
Great review -- I love my Polar! I would say go with the HRM over the machines, in terms of accuracy. The thing, I think, with the machines is that they don't actually take heart rate into consideration in the calorie count, even though they're capable of displaying it. They just assume a certain level of exhertion based on what settings you plug into the machine. At least that's what it seems like to me? For me my HRM calories are always HIGHER by about a third, but it's because my heart rate stays around 180 for a lot of it, which is more than the machine assumes I'm doing.
I have the R200 Polar and I love it! I use the interval timers when run/walk for C25K sessions and also all my aerobic videos. I highly suggest using one, it helps to see what you are burning while sweating your hiney off!
Oh...and like you have worn it for a whole day at work just to see what my normal caloric burn was!
First, love your blog, second, thanks so much about posting about your heart rate monitor. I've been thinking about getting one and this just cements that. You're lovely!
I've had a Polar F6 for years and love it! I wear it for every single workout to make sure I'm working hard enough. The sound mechanism broke while it was under warranty, and they sent me a brand new one with no problems! The band does transmit to machines (and other HRMs in the vicinity), so in a gym, the HRM on your watch or machine could actually be a read from someone else's heart.
I want one so bad! I always get confused though, like you said, about whichheart rate is right- the heart rate monitor or the one on the cardio machine?
Great blog, keep up the good work. This is a big inspiration as i am making my own blog http://quickeasyrapidweightloss.blogspot.com/
I've always wanted one and wondered if it was worth the money! Thanks for the review.
I just picked up my new bike last night. I hadn't been on one in almost 20 years. I tell you, not only is it a cardio exercise but I really felt the core being worked as I was struggling to keep my balance--I have bad balence anyway and a shoulder injury, and it was a bit of a test.
Post a Comment