Heart Rate Monitor watches - Calorie Counter

CardinalJ

I recently got a heart rate monitor watch and have been using it for the last two weeks or so when I've been exercising, be it weights in the gym, cycling or running.

Last night I was mountain biking for an hour on trails in ticknock in Dublin and it said I burned just under 1000 calories. It seems a lot. I'm 6'4 and 105kg, and have these stats programmed into the watch. My max heart rate was 180 average 145, and I'm 25.

Does anyone know how accurate these kind of figures are?

I'd imagine there's a +/- figure of a certain percent?

Hanley

CardinalJ wrote: »

I recently got a heart rate monitor watch and have been using it for the last two weeks or so when I've been exercising, be it weights in the gym, cycling or running.

Last night I was mountain biking for an hour on trails in ticknock in Dublin and it said I burned just under 1000 calories. It seems a lot. I'm 6'4 and 105kg, and have these stats programmed into the watch. My max heart rate was 180 average 145, and I'm 25.

Does anyone know how accurate these kind of figures are?

I'd imagine there's a +/- figure of a certain percent?

There'll be an element of error, but it's a good guideline.

Keep in mind tho, that's gross kcals. You'd have burned a certain amount in that hour anyway, even if you weren't exercising.

Wear your HRM for an hour of normal day to day activity (say in work, or chilling on the couch) and subtract the kcals burned there from the figure you got while out mountain biking and you'll get net kcals attributable to exercise. Or a rough estimate of it at least.

CardinalJ

Hanley wrote: »

There'll be an element of error, but it's a good guideline.

Keep in mind tho, that's gross kcals. You'd have burned a certain amount in that hour anyway, even if you weren't exercising.

Wear your HRM for an hour of normal day to day activity (say in work, or chilling on the couch) and subtract the kcals burned there from the figure you got while out mountain biking and you'll get net kcals attributable to exercise. Or a rough estimate of it at least.

Good point. I know my avg heart rate is low 60s so it would be hugely different.

You keep burning at a higher rate for a few hours after exercise, but i suppose I'm hardly going to keep the monitor on for a few hours after to fully work out what I've burned. Not that obsessed...... yet.

Hanley

CardinalJ wrote: »

Good point. I know my avg heart rate is low 60s so it would be hugely different.

You keep burning at a higher rate for a few hours after exercise, but i suppose I'm hardly going to keep the monitor on for a few hours after to fully work out what I've burned. Not that obsessed...... yet.

Yah, to an extent... But the importance of it is generally over emphasized. The level of effort and intensity needed to generate a significant kcal burn due to EPOC is ridiculously high and not something most people are capable of sustaining (or repeating frequently in training).

So yah, like ya said, don't sweat the small stuff

AntiVirus

What distance did you cover?

CardinalJ

AntiVirus wrote: »

What distance did you cover?

Not sure, didn't have a trip computer. The distance wouldn't overly concern me, as so much of it was steep uphill to get to the trails to come back down.

http://www.coillteoutdoors.ie/uploads/tx_r3coillterecreationsites/ticknockmtb.pdf

That's the route I took, starting at the forest enterence.