Runners Forum - Kick Runners banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,018 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This sounds too obvious or stupid, but I have to ask.<br>
My HRM calculates a calorie consumption based on my weight and HR. Are these the only factors that go into calculating it? I mean, am I using much more calories during an easy 1-hr run compared to 1hr of hard, sweat-splashing interval on a trainer? Yes, a hard trainer workout is challenging to me because I am new to it and my HR doesn't go up as high because I think the limiter is the leg strength. But I am working much harder - shouldn't I be consuming more calories?? Another example is swimming. If HR is the only factor, carloie consumed during 1-hr swimming is much much less than that of running. Yet, a need for replenishing after swimming seems to be as much, if not more, than after running. Kristen's post makes me wonder how much calories I need to take to keep a good balance. I think I have been eating way too much compared to what I consume.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,134 Posts
Hmmmm I never go by what my HRM says...the elliptical at the gym, IMO, way over-estimates consumption...rather-burnage
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,134 Posts
Oh, and I got a resting metabolic rate test...it's like 40-50$...and it tells you what you burn for being a couch potato...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,435 Posts
I go by my HRM because it is going to be more accurate than the treadmill, elliptical, stationary bike, or my GPS, IMO. I just wish it could tell me if I am burning more fat or carbs!! LOL I know how that works, but there is no way to know exactly how much.<br><br>
DH and I often have discussions about this. My GPS knows my weight and how fast and how far I've run (it assumes I'm running unless I put it on biking), but it doesn't know what kind of shape I'm in. My HRM knows my HR, weight, and time exercised. I think it would be more accurate based on your HR, but I'm not exactly sure how it works.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,018 Posts
The heart rate monitor is the most accurate most of us have, because it takes heart rate into account, as well as age, gender, weight... it will be more accurate than calculators. It is still an estimate, though.<br><br>
Actual Calorie burn is based on that and on Oxygen uptake - which isn't really realistic to measure for every activity.<br><br>
Also, as you get used to an activity, the relationship between heart rate and RPE will be more related -- when something is new, it's going to feel harder because even though your heart/lungs are in the shape the muscles receiving the oxygen need to get used to it to receive and extract the Oxygen more efficiently.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
798 Posts
I wonder the same thing about my HRM. Sometimes I'll get back from a ride, and it will tell me that I burned over 2000 calories in just over two hours. I wonder how accurate that is. Not that it really matters that much - the geek in me wants to know, however.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top