Calories Burned... Heart rate monitor vs online calculator?

Question

I recently purchased a Polar Heart Rate Monitor for about $100. I inputted my age, weight, height, and gender.

I just finished trail biking 12 miles in 1 hour and it said I burned 598 calories (it only calculates using heart rate not based on the activity I am doing.) However, when i use an online calculator, it says that I should have burned 985 calories for 60 minutes of trail biking based on my age and weight. So, I was just wondering if anyone could tell me which calorie burning measurment would be more accurate.

Answer 1

the heart rate moniters more acurate as its measureing the effort and energuy that you personally use, while online calculaters are using an aveage of what a few people have used and at the intensaty that they were using. and not thats you were using... say they took measurments of people who were biking mainly up hill which would require more effort and force to keep going.. while yours wasnt as up hill as theres. and .. so there are many diffrent variables that would make and online calculater give you diffrent results to a heart rate moniter

Answer 2

The heart rate monitor will be more accurate.

No doubt about it.

~M~

Answer 3

It doesn't matter what activity you are doing, only the intensity at which you are doing it.  Your monitor is more accurate, although not 100% accurate.  The online calculators are mere estimates, and most of them tell you that.  

Answer 4

i cant train without my HRM, if i followed the calories the machines or internet calculators say ive burned then id probably be chunky right now:)  heart rate monitors are personalized method of seeing how many calories you've burned. You are obviously much fitter than the "average" person, the machines and online calculators are talking about the average people at your age and weight.. You will have to work a lot harded to burn more, well done keep up the good work.