combine data from heart rate monitor and power meter

[skizzolar]

Hi everyone, I'm about to invest in a power meter and a heart rate monitor, my overall objective is to track my calories more accurately (at the moment I only have a smartwatch).
I keep reading as if these two devices are in sort of conflict, which is one is better, and so on.
My question is quite simple, is there any app that can combine the data of both and give you a "unified" view? I guess that if you combine your heart rate, your speed, the slope, BMR, rpm, power output and whatever then you can have a more accurate estimate of the calories you have burned rather than relying on just one of these factors.
Any opinion/advice?
Thanks

 

[JayKosta]

My thoughts ...

1. Tracking overall calories for a session is useful in 2 ways - how many overall, and how many per hour.
2. Calories are just a way of measuring how much work has been done.
3. If you're using exercise for weight control, then calories get confusing because you NEED to take in extra calories to be able to do much in the way of exercise.
4. If you want to measure your 'fitness', then correlating watts & heart rate would be better than calories & heart rate.
5. What would be good on a 'power meter' device is a session measure of total watt/hours, and the length of the session.

I use an elliptical trainer and do use calories as a measure of how much 'work' I do in a session. I also check my HR to see how it changes and peaks during a session.

 

[skizzolar]

I decied to let go of the power meter, it's outside my objectives that are purely to have the most accurate calories tracking.
I'm focusing on the Garmin Edge series for the set of accessories, so the question becomes: do I just need the heart rate monitor or adding the speed and cadence sensor would greatly improve the quality of measurement?
I'm asking because clearly the alternative is a standalone heart monitor that does not require an expensive bike computer.

 

[ReiSa]

Hi everyone, I'm about to invest in a power meter and a heart rate monitor, my overall objective is to track my calories more accurately (at the moment I only have a smartwatch).
I keep reading as if these two devices are in sort of conflict, which is one is better, and so on.
My question is quite simple, is there any app that can combine the data of both and give you a "unified" view? I guess that if you combine your heart rate, your speed, the slope, BMR, rpm, power output and whatever then you can have a more accurate estimate of the calories you have burned rather than relying on just one of these factors.
Any opinion/advice?
Thanks


I decied to let go of the power meter, it's outside my objectives that are purely to have the most accurate calories tracking.
I'm focusing on the Garmin Edge series for the set of accessories, so the question becomes: do I just need the heart rate monitor or adding the speed and cadence sensor would greatly improve the quality of measurement?
I'm asking because clearly the alternative is a standalone heart monitor at nearby running store that does not require an expensive bike computer.

I'd say just go with heart monitor, I don't see how's measuring speed would do anything for tracking calories. It's an okay feature but I wouldn't specifically look for it. Same goes for cadence sensor, doubt it's going to add anything to calculations being much more precise, at best with speed/candence data vs without you're looking maybe at like ~1-2% difference in accuracy of data, at least that's what I was told.

 

[King Boonen]

I decied to let go of the power meter, it's outside my objectives that are purely to have the most accurate calories tracking.
I'm focusing on the Garmin Edge series for the set of accessories, so the question becomes: do I just need the heart rate monitor or adding the speed and cadence sensor would greatly improve the quality of measurement?
I'm asking because clearly the alternative is a standalone heart monitor that does not require an expensive bike computer.

Technically, a power meter is going to be the most accurate way to track calories burned on the bike.

 

[skizzolar]

I've started using the Polar H10. What I don't get is why the calculated calories differ so much between apps when the recorded heart rate is the same.
Both the Polar and my "old" Samsung Watch 4 record more or less the same hearth rate, e.g. yesterday I had 80 minutes of indoor cycling, Samsung Watch recorded an average of 94 bpm, H10 of 92.
Polar flow reports a total of 300 calories, Samsung Health of 475
I've checked a dozen websites for "heart rate based calories calculator" and with the given parameters they all reported the Samsung amount (me being a 42yo male of around 61kg).
Now I perfectly understand that heart rate is an imperfect measure, but given that the recorded bpm is the same among devices then it's the underlying formula that makes the difference. Curiously the amount reported by Polar matches the output from the websites if I set myself as a woman.
Which estimate is to be trusted?

 

[JayKosta]

To accurately calculate calories from HR it is necessary to know the amount of blood flow per beat - so the actual amount of O2 can be determined. Perhaps that blood flow amount can be estimated if the app includes a value for 'resting HR' and also for 'max achievable HR'.
Just using age, weight, and gender will give a very rough estimate - and it is unclear if the estimate is based on typical 'athletes' or 'couch potatoes'.