A wrist watch with heart rate AND calories burned?
08-29-08, 07:27 AM
#1
Elder
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: South FLorida
Posts: 102
Bikes: 09 Langster
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
A wrist watch with heart rate AND calories burned?
Is this possible? Am I Crazy? I'm starting to think it would be hard for a watch to know how many calories you're burning on a bicycle... I mean, I don't think step counters work for distance traveled on bikes... Has anyone researched this? It would be nice to know how much I'm burning and my heartrate on the same screen... If this doesn't exist does anyone know of anything else similar? maybe not in wrist watch form, something on the handlebars? I guess I'm more concerned with getting a good estimate of the calories I've burned, I've seen threads on this matter but it's all heresey.. 40 calories/hour is standard? whose standard? at what speed? I'd rather rely on technology than what grandma says has worked for her... thanks.
08-29-08, 09:30 AM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Lakeside Resort in Central KY
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I've got a polar F6 and it has the data that you need. It might also be available in some of the cheaper models by Polar but I liked the reviews on this one. The calorie count is about 30% lower than on gym machines where you enter the same data: age, weight, etc.
I tend to believe this one a little more as 1,000 kcal/hr on an elliptical machine seems a bit high. The polar comes in at about 700 or so for the same workout. The only real way to know is to get a much more accurate lab test.
I use the calories burned vs my intake and chart it against weight loss and the results show a fair amount of accuracy. Some people actually vary the weight input to show less calories burned for a given workout so you can "tune" the watch that way.
I tend to believe this one a little more as 1,000 kcal/hr on an elliptical machine seems a bit high. The polar comes in at about 700 or so for the same workout. The only real way to know is to get a much more accurate lab test.
I use the calories burned vs my intake and chart it against weight loss and the results show a fair amount of accuracy. Some people actually vary the weight input to show less calories burned for a given workout so you can "tune" the watch that way.
08-30-08, 11:47 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kent, WA
Posts: 315
Bikes: '07 Specialized Tarmac Pro
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I have a Suunto T3 and it shows both calories burned and heart rate also. I thought most HR monitors had this feature?
09-01-08, 06:02 PM
#5
cab horn
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,353
Bikes: 1987 Bianchi Campione
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 26 Times
in
19 Posts
Calories burned is a completely and utterly useless feature. No simple watch can tell you how many calories you're burning.
09-02-08, 07:56 AM
#6
pan y agua
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 31,303
Bikes: Willier Zero 7; Merlin Extralight; Calfee Dragonfly tandem, Calfee Adventure tandem; Cervelo P2; Motebecane Ti Fly 29er; Motebecanne Phantom Cross; Schwinn Paramount Track bike
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1447 Post(s)
Liked 727 Times
in
372 Posts
In my experience calories burned calculations on HRMs are highly inaccurate. My Sigma HRM always read substantially higher than my Powertap, often approaching 100% high.
While there is some margin of error in Powertap data, given the varience in efficiency of converting calories to KJ of energy, it's accurate with about 5%.
The huge varience between Powertap data, and HRMS tells me the HRM data is so far off as be basically worthless.
While there is some margin of error in Powertap data, given the varience in efficiency of converting calories to KJ of energy, it's accurate with about 5%.
The huge varience between Powertap data, and HRMS tells me the HRM data is so far off as be basically worthless.
__________________
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
You could fall off a cliff and die.
You could get lost and die.
You could hit a tree and die.
OR YOU COULD STAY HOME AND FALL OFF THE COUCH AND DIE.
09-02-08, 09:43 AM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Morro Bay, CA
Posts: 346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Calories burned is simply someone's best guess based on the available data. Since the variables are way too hard to quantify specifically, all you're getting is an approximation. It's not that the data is useless... it's just that the actual number is only a vague description of the calories burned. You should never compare the results of different machines to think that one is more accurate or a better form of excercise.
09-08-08, 09:52 AM
#8
Elder
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: South FLorida
Posts: 102
Bikes: 09 Langster
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
What is the calories burned formula? is it distance multiplied by heart-rate over time? Maybe I don't even need a watch to tell me this if it's something I can just compute quickly to get a ball park estimate
