1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

HRM info - does this sound right?

Discussion in 'Training, Fitness and Health' started by andyfromotley, 10 Jun 2008.

  1. andyfromotley

    andyfromotley New Member

    Location:
    Otley, west yorks
    Hi,
    I have dug out my very old (and virtually unused) HRM , a Polar M52.
    On the info i put in it M 42 6' 97kilos avg fitness it came up with a low intensity zone of 116 - 140 for me.

    So i rode home from work staying in that zone. 23 miles it took about 2.00 hrs (it was into a head wind and i had to go slower to stay in the zone) hrs.
    The HRM say that;
    1. i was in zone for 1.29
    2. avg hr 127
    3. 1476 k/cals (seem a LOT?) 45% Fat (i have no idea what this means)
    My question is does this ound about right? Anything leaping out as being incorrect.

    I am asking as i beleive the HRM could be a really useful tool for me if only i can work out how to use it and the data properly. It does seem very complicated!!!

    Thanks in advance andy.
     
  2. Smeggers

    Smeggers New Member

    I'm a bit younger, a bit taller and a bit heavier than you.....

    ... but i beleive your stats as mine are similar on my (newish) Polar F5.

    If ive done an hour in the "zone" then i feel ive done a proper workout.
     
  3. fossyant

    fossyant Ride It Like You Stole It!

    Location:
    South Manchester
    Hmm, zones are very personal - you need to work out what's hard or not etc.

    My 'training zone' is above 160, and did 2 hours at above that on sunday, in a 2h 25m ride - was rather hard though.

    Ideally you need to find out what your max is, then work back - theoretical max doesn't apply as everyone is different. A good way to find out what your max is, find a long but steep hill and go climb it, but keep the pace as high as you can until you can't go anymore. The 220 minus age is pretty rubbish as your max can be above or below this.
     
  4. Stig-OT-Dump

    Stig-OT-Dump Über Member

    To be honest, although I calculated all my zones using the Kalvonen formula - and found it to be fairly close, I then refined all my zones by using perceived effort and what I could maintain.

    I know that my lactate threshold has risen, and the improvement in speed for long slow runs at low maintained heart rate has been really encouraging.

    I could benefit from more racing (running) to push my performance at higher heart rates.

    And for the record, my max heart rate is nowhere near as predicted while my HRM showed me as dead for several periods when I last tried recording my resting HR. It really is personal.
     
  5. Absinthe Minded

    Absinthe Minded Veteran

    Andy, I've got an F6 and I burn about 1350 calories (I'll look up the exact figure for you later), on my 27 mile commute into work. Usually takes me about 1:45, so it looks like you're not too far off.
     
  6. yenrod

    yenrod Guest

    You say you had to slow down on the ride maybe your details are inorrect !
     
  7. domtyler

    domtyler Über Member

    In answer to your question, there is nothing there that looks obviously way off.
     
  8. OP
    OP
    andyfromotley

    andyfromotley New Member

    Location:
    Otley, west yorks
    i had it set to a low zone which is better for 'weight management'!

    Thanks everyone, gosh thats a whole lot of calories i'm burning! Now just need to ensure that i'm not putting 5000 in!

    Andy