question for those who have HR monitors

olga

Member
Hi,
If you have a heart rate monitor that also tells you how many calories you burned, do you mind sharing how much calories you burn on average with some Cathe's workouts? Please :)
Say IMAX, MIC, Cardio kicks? I am just very curious, but can not afford a HR monitor right now ...

Thanks a lot!!!
Olga
 
Sorry I can't help you with your question. I do have a HR Monitor, but unfortuately, it does not tell me how many calories I burn, just my heart rate and time. I am hoping someone can answer your question though, to help us both. Also, if anyone knows, is there anyway to guage how many calories you burn by how long your heart rate is at a certain point? Thanks! : )
 
Loriv,
I posted the same question on the Firm forum and one girl answered. I thought I'd post her answer here for you:
--------------------------
"I'm not real sure how accurate it is (but it's a nice
gauge). Cardio Kicks was around 400 cals, Imax approx 425
(depending on how hard and high I go), haven't done MIC
in a while. Mindi's Slamming sports is 430-450 easy!!! (just
the aerobic part). Firm Strength-325, tough
tape-275-300, vol1 225-250, vol 2 225-250, vol
3-250-300....those are a few, BTW I'm 27 yrs old, weigh
approx 143, and am 5'8" tall (you have to program that
stuff in) and I would consider myself to be an advanced
exerciser. "
----------------------------------
Hope that helps,
Olga
 
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON Jan-20-02 AT 01:33PM (Est)[/font][p]ooops this posted twice...
 
I just received my hr monitor on Fri and used it with Rythmic Step yesterday. I bought the Polar M51 but I didn't put the cal notifier button on, it was off. So I will be using it all week for cathe tapes and will let you know how it goes as far as the cal/fat cal's burned off. I'm keeping track of all that on a chart. :-rollen
Faythe
 
Thanks in advance, Faythe. I will be waiting patiently for your post next week :) Btw, did you buy your HR monitor on-line? If yes, do you mind sharing the link? (I am searching for a good price on Polar M52)...

Thanks!
Olga
 
Olga,
Sure I'll share. After all that research for wks, I don't mind at all. My husband is the research king, so he did most of the work. so if your going for the Polar brand, and want the top of the line, the "s" series, you can pay a little more than you will for the middle of the line (which is all I need) "m" series, on EBay. But for the M51/52 models (mine)-(51's are blue) you don't save on Ebay, perhaps because they are too popular, I don't know. But the S series on EBay you can get btw $150. and $200. depending on who's biding, etc. Make sure the seller is "certified" so you can get it serviced under the warranty if need be. Some don't mention, you have to email them. But I bought the M51 at: TKO Enterprises Inc. link: bodytronics.com
I paid, $134.99 free shipping and a free pedomonitor (for what that's worth.) The co. is in Georgia and I'm in NY & I got it in 2 days, UPS. Very good customer service and packaging.
I'll get in touch via this post by the end of the wk. to let you know how it goes.
Faythe
 
Thanks, Faythe!
The price looks good - the cheapest I found was 130$ I think + shipping. With the shipping it would come to 135 at least, and you also got a pedomonitor! So looks like a very good deal. Did you notice how much the price range varies for different sites - on some I found it for almost 190$ ...
I think I will be getting mine in a month or so - now I still feel guilty for all the Christmas expenses :)

Thanks,
Olga
 
Yes, the prices did vary from dif. sites, but the one I bought it from was the best deal for me. The Pedometer was a cheap one and I alreay have 2, but it's a nice thing to have, if you don't have one. I'll let you know how it goes for me this wk at the end of the wk. I tried it yesterday on the treadmill, but am still learning it.
Faythe
 
Hi. I just received my Polar HR monitor and finally used it today. It's a polar s-210 (http://www.shoplite.com/polar1902450.htm). I picked the s210 mainly because I like to do spinning at home, and it has interval programing.

Today I did PS legs and abs, unfortuately I somehow turned off the recording when I got to calf work. Anyhoo, it said in 29 mins I had burned 353 cals, and was above my target heart rate for 20 min, in the my target HR for 9, and under for 1. Thought it was interesting. I'm 5'4" 133lbs., and consider myself an intermediate to advanced exerciser. My HR avg was 165 and max today was 191. Fun toy!
 
Hi!
Thanks for the link - I thought S-series were much much more expensive - and this price seems so good.
Wow, 353 cals for just half an hour seems great!
Does it also tell you calories from Fat that you
burned?
Could you please post the burned cals if you do some
Cathe's cardio tape? ...
Thanks!
Olga
 
Hi Olga,

No mine does not tell you the % of cals burned from fat, but I figured since it told you how long you were in, above, and below your target heart rate, it gave you a fairly good idea. Like today, most of my time was above my target heart rate, so it I burned cals mostly from sugar/carbs.

I used these sites to help me figure out which one best met my needs. Hope that helps.

http://www.healthchecksystems.com/polarcompare.htm
http://www.fitzones.com/

I'm afraid I don't yet have Cathe's Cardio DVD's....just PS and S&H. I hope to order a few of her cardio's by the end of the month....hopefully someone else will post that info the mean time.
 
Cruz, thanks for the links!
I didn't not know that if you are above your target heart rate, you are burning calories from sugar/carbs... So when do I burn cals from fat (when it is below the target hr?) Any idea where I can read about it?

Thanks!
Olga
 
[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON Jan-23-02 AT 09:12AM (Est)[/font][p]
Hi Olga,
You should be able to find sources online, or even books on heart rate monitors at amazon. I have an article right here from the magazine Fitness RX (premiere)

It says..."Your range is defined as 70-75% of your maximum HR. This is determined by the simple formula: 220-(your age)x.70 and .75 respectively..... So, you will want to keep your hr b/w 130-140 (for the example used) for a solid 45 mins. According to Cathy (sassin), anything much higher will demand too much energy for fat to satisfy, causing the body to switch to muscle glycogen for fuel. Anything lower, and you're not burning fat as effieciently. .....
There are other factors that can distract you from keeping you HR in your range (talking, reading,...) Therefore, Cathy insists you wear a HR monitor or use the HR monitoring handles on equipment, if so equipped. If not, you will have to check your pulse every few minutes. Perceived HR is unacceptable. If you want to burn the most amount of fat for your time, keep your HR in your range. Remember, I'm talking about burning fat, not increasing endurance. Contrary to popular opinion, they are 2 entirely different disciplines. " ( and it goes on for 2 more paragraphs).

The new Energy magazine (jan/feb issue) also has an article on HR monitors right now. Its a 4 page article, but has a small graph:

Zone........ %of Max HR (avg) .....Training Effect
Rest & Recovery.... 30-60...........Little to none
Aerobic Fitness.... 60-80...........Fat burning,aerobic
Anaerobic fitness...80-100.... Speed, power,Peak Fitness



The pulse range that lies b/w your aerobic threshold and about 75 % to 85% of your Max HR is your "aerobic zone", which is your fat-burning zone. In this zone, your body burns mostly fat for fuel, and burns a lot of it, because the intensity level is fairly high.

The top end of you Aerobic Zone is called the "anaerobic Threshold." This thredhold climbs higher as your conditioning improves, from the as low as 70 % of Max HR for sedentary to over 90% of Max HR for Ironman triathletes like Sally Edwards (who has several books on heart rate monitoring). The pulse range b/w your anaerobic threshold and you Max HR is called your "anaerobic zone." The higher you go in this zone, the more your body burns carbohydrates instead of fat for energy.


It's an interesting article that starts out talking about a gal that lost 85 lbs by using a HR monitor, realizing that she had been working too hard, and slowing down helped her to work out longer and burn more total calories.

The article also gives some advice on choosing a HR monitor.

Personally I think they are fun toys, but I don't worry too much about going over my target HR, since ultimately it's still calories we're burning. Hope that helps.

Renee
 
Renee, thanks so much for all the info!!! It definitely helps - - I was very ignorant thinking the higher the heart rate the better, wonder whether I was burning carbs instead of fat because of that ...

Thanks tons!
Olga
 
Olga,
I keep getting email from this co. It's very informative.
http://www.heart-zones.com/
Sign up at that site and you'll keep getting info about the HR monitors.
Oh, I had mentioned if your interested in the S models, try EBay you may get a deal. I thought the M's would be fine for me, so I got it through that co. in Georgia which was the best deal I could find for it. But make sure which one you want and are willing to put the time to learn it. The more fancy, the more there is to learn. Oh, and download the owners manuals at the sites (ie Polar site for Polar HRM) and look at them first. That helped me decide on the M51.
BTW
Yesterday, I jogged on the treadmill before doing weight work, and burned 465 cal's only 35 fat cal's in 10 laps, or 40 minutes. It doesn't seem like a lot of fat cal's but well see by the end of the wk.
 
Thanks for the link, Faythe! 465 is great, I wouldn't worry about fat cals being only 35 as long as total is so good.

Thanks,
Olga
 
Faythe, here I am again bothering you again :)
Did you get a chance to workout to some Cathe
tapes with a heart monitor and notice amount of
calories burned?

Patiently waiting for your reply but no rush :))
Thanks,
Olga
 
Yes, and I'm finally getting use to it, and learning how to use it. I recommend doing the fit test before every workout if you get the M51/2 because each day you could work differently, some days harder and some not. The monitor tells you and one day last wk it told me I could work in the 160/140 zone. I kept going over, but stayed near 160 that day. The next 2 day's it wouldn't work, but I forgot to make sure "exercise" is on the watch, so it gave me my heart rate, but didn't record anything. I was so angry. x(
Then yesterday I think I finally got it down, after reading the whole manual the night before to make sure I'd get it this time.
My rotation for yesterday was BodyMax(step portion only) 30 minutes and Firm-Lower Body Split 70 minutes.
I recorded each one seperate:
Body Max step-Exec. Time 33:56,In Zone 20:55, Limits 169/149,
Ave HR 148, KCal/Fat 280-40%
PS I thought fat was fat cal, it's a percent of fat from cals burned. I didn't realize that til yesterday.
then LBS-Time 1:23, In Zone 21:27, (same limits), Ave HR 132, Kcal/Fat 559 and 50%. :-jumpy LBS is less cardio and more weight work and some floor work, so my heart rate mostly stayed at the lower end, but I can't believe how much cal's burned (which mostly came from carb's I think). But hey, I'm happy I'm finally getting the hang of it. Dont' expect to use it properly on day one. It takes time. that's what happened to me. I'm keeping track of it all in a book and will let you know some more at the end of the wk. I bookmarked this page for then.
Faythe
 
Faythe, thanks a lot!!! :)
Wow, I didn't expect LBS to burn so many calories - I should get it probably :) You did a great job!

Thanks again,
Olga
 

Our Newsletter

Get awesome content delivered straight to your inbox.

Top