The fat burning zone is a specific target heart rate zone which is the optimal place for your body to burn fat effectively and efficiently. Your specific fat burning zone depends on factors such as age and physical condition. Here are some tips and calculations to remember:

Take your heart rate by finding your pulse, either on the side of your neck below your jawbone or on your wrist below the base of your thumb. Count the beats for 15 seconds, then multiply this number by 4 for your 3beats per minute2 (BPM). Use your resting heart rate in the calculations below.

Maximum Heart Rate (MHR)=220-(your age)____
You should never exceed this rate while training.

Target training rate is Maximum heart rate___ x Target %____ Your fitness level determines the percentage of your capacity you should work at.

Heart rate range is Maximum heart rate ___ - resting heart rate ____ Generally, the more fit you are, the wider this range will be.

Example:
Maximum heart rate 220-30 = 190 BPM
Target training rate at 60% 190x.60 = 114 BPM
Heart rate range 190-80 = 110 BPM
Check your heart rate periodically during exercise.

TIPS Warm up for 10 minutes at 40-50% of maximum heart rate. This is the stage were fat is released from body tissue into the bloodstream where it can be burned.

Exercise harder (faster, steeper incline) for 30-40 minutes at 60-80% of MHR (50-60% for beginners). This is the fat burning zone.

Cool down for 10 minutes at 40-50% of MHR.

Michael George
traineo Celebrity Trainer

I am currently focused on losing weight. I've been dieting carefully, working out on a treadmill or elliptical machine daily and doing an ab workout. So far I'm down ~25lbs. I'm excited to have just found traineo.

I'm 31, which makes my max rate 189BPM. When I workout on a treadmill or elliptical machine, I always run the "Hills" interval program, which starts with a ~8 minute warm-up and ends with a ~8 mintue cool-down. The intervals are 1 minute, increasingly steep hills.

I generally run 30-45 minutes at 6.5MPH. When I do so, my heart rate can hit 181 on the steepest inclines. This is higher than the target training rate referenced above.

My question: Is this heart rate too much? I generally feel great after such a run. By the end of a cool-down I'm usually under 140. My resting heart rate is ~64BPM.

(Also, what are your thoughts about the accuracy of the heart rate monitors built into treadmills/elliptical machines?)

Thanks!

Hi Greg

Good question, I too use a treadmill, on this model it has a table with heart/age rates and I am ALWAYS approx. 30 to 40 BMP over my optimum FAT BURNING ZONE.

Should I be doing this or slowing down to the recommended HR? Is this over working out having a not so FAT BURNING effect rather a CARDIO workout? And finally if I am sweating due to exercise isn't this good regardless of the correct way to workout i.e. as opposed to sitting on the sofa with 1/2 dozen empty packets of cheese and onion on the floor.

thanks, M0zez

As far as I know, interval training has two benefits. First: to improve the ability of your body to react to sudden bursts of activity, perfect for any kind of sport which requires such bursts. Second: to improve the overall functioning of the cardiovacular system.

This is opposed to a either a fat burning workout, which is designed to burn calories without leaving you feeling devastated afterwards; or a cardio workout, which is designed to improve the endurance of your cardiovascular system over extended periods of time.

What you will probably find with interval training over time is that when you reach that steepest "hill" on your machine your heart rate will not go as high as 181, as your body will become more efficient at getting oxygen to your muscles, and lactic acid will not build up as much.

I am not a trainer or doctor, blah blah blah

I used to go hard and fast on the elliptical cross trainers at the gym, but found that it doesn't really shift the slight spare tire I have around my waist. But if I watch my heart rate and exercise within my optimal fat burn zone I get noticable results must faster.

A tip I was given is that you should *just* be able to hold a conversation without huffing and puffing. If you can't then you're going too fast. But obvioulsy you need to balance this and not go too slowly either.

wow I am throughly confused, as I have a hard time keeping my 'fat burning' target heart rate. Its low at 112, generally i get as high as 170, and try to keep it around 140 to 150 while I'm on the treadmill or stair machine. even when i put the machine on flat (no incline), i have to walk about 1.2 MPH to get that low of a heart rate, it is very hard to keep it that low.

Is it bad to do 140 heart rate?

I think there might be the factor that i am almost 300 LBS (I lost 15 LBS, since i started :) ), and i think the sheer fact I am carrying around all this wieght make my heart move faster. I feel real good when i keep the workout steady at 140, but I need to lose the weight...

I have a general strong frame, and I dont need any strgnth increase, and I want to wait for toning when i get down to a more trainable weight..

any advice? or thoughts?

Keep that intensity around the 120 mark, the extra weight you are carrying around will contribute to your heart beating faster than normal --> think of it as a good thing, it means you don't have to work quite as hard to get to your target heart rate

Thanks Nick... your giving great advice all over theese forums..

wow nick, you're one heck of "silver lining" finder! LOL Thanks!

Thanks guys ;)

Take heart (yeah its a bad pun). When I started cardio again I had to spend most of my workout focusing on slowing my heart rate. After hitting the gym and working at it I noticed this morning that my HR naturally went into the "Weight Loss" zone.



My feelings on the accuracy basically boils down to consistency. They are probably not medical grade. But using the same type consistently is a good way to have consistent feedback. Personally I would rather use the HR Monitor on the treadmill elliptical than wear a chest belt. But at 364 I have Moobs and that contributes to the chest belts not exactly being comfortable.

To figure out Max HR etc check out http://www.bodyforlife2.com/max_heart_rate.htm for a handy dandy lil calculator.



The number of calories you burn and zones you are in on the machines are based on general algorithms comparing age / weight to your current heart rate.

Best thing to get is a belt or something to put on your arm where you can monitor the heart rate constantly. One thing I'm checking out (but not buying yet as it is a little pricey) is called a bodybugg. See http://my.apexfitness.com/cgi-bin/myapex.cgi/bb_di rect/home.html for more details. I like the thought of using this as my trainer tells me you can pull all the data from the device via a USB into your computer and actually see where your heart rate was throughout the day, and calculate EXACTLY how many calories you burned, and just forget about looking at the machines to guestimate what you burned.

holy run on sentence batman!

I have too have seen better results by keeping within the "fat burn" heartrate, but find it an absolute BORE to have to do such a mellow low-intensity workout for such a long period of time. What I've been doing is spending 15-20 minutes on 3 different machines (eliptical, rowing, stair-climber). I'm definately way above the "fat burn" on each machine, but as I said, I can't stand the boredom. Any thoughts?

so what are we saying is the 'ideal' belt here?

120-150bpm?

more specific?

<140...

it's about 60 - 70% of your max heart rate = 220 - (your age), should be less than 140.

unless your 9 years old

I am sceptical about 220 - age as the formula for Max HR. I have even read how the inventors of the formula are amazed at the sanctity it has achieved.

When I started cardio vascular training a few years ago, I could not run for 10 minutes without getting breathless. After regular training, my aerobic capacity has improved significantly. As per this formula, my Max HR has degenerated because I have aged a few years?

I am 39 years old and exercise regularly. Is my Max HR the same as someone my age who leads a sedentary life?

I have read about other formulas now like VO2Max and Karvonen. I need to get around to determining my Max HR and training zones by one of these methods. Until then I am using perceived rate of exertion.

Anyone know which is the "best" method to determine Max HR?

Hey guys,

In one of the articles posted recently (http://www.traineo.com/article-interval-training) it talks about interval training for fat loss. Interval training is high intensity work, right? So definately past the so called fat loss zone. You get all the benefits of low intensity training plus, the benefit of speeding up your metabolism afterwards which makes you burn more fat overall, right?

Your thoughts...

G

Hello Gavin,

The theory I have read is that interval training is better due to two reasons:
a. It burns more total calories, so even if % fat burned is lower, the total number of fat calories could be higher (smaller % but of a larger total number) than with steady-state-in-fat-burn-zone workouts
b. Like you said, it speeds up metabolism post-workout

I hope it is true. I like it far better and find working in my fat-burn-zone boring.

It seems that if interval training is the superior tool for fat loss when compared "long slow boring cardio" then the only reason someone would perform the later is if they are seriously deconditioned.

Although saying this, a deconditioned individual could still perform intervals working at their own intensity.

So why bother with fat loss zone training?

I also prefer intervals Vrinda.

G

G,

At my gym, the people undergoing rehab are mainly individuals who were intense / interval training addicts. The interval trainers tend to rely on higher impact training for the anerobic intervals. Even the deconditioned, get conditioned over time and will find themselves needing to up intensity to get a real interval workout. The in-zone-steady-staters dont seem to injure themselves. Especially in the 40+ age group. So this could be one factor pro-the-other-side.

I tell myself it is because they may not have paid adequate attention to warm up / stretch / cool down.

V

Oh thank you thank you thank you. I've been looking for information on this for awhile, and then it dawned on me. Check traineo!

I got a heart rate monitor for my birthday and i've been noticing the little scale on the machines where i work out.

Do you think it's better to switch on and off working at a higher heart rate one day, and then to a lower one the next day? Or if my main goal right now is weight loss, should i always work out at the lower heart rate?

So once upon a time I was treadmilling it, and a trainer came up and slowed me down because I was pushing too hard. Turns out I was about 20 beats higher than the optimal fat burning zone and she felt that reason enough to intervene. She felt I should slow down to what amounted to a moderate walk at the recommended HR. I felt pretty good at the elevated heart rate. Damn good in fact.

I happened to run into a guy in the sauna who was a physician and had been a trainer in college and asked him about this heart rate thing, and he said in essence...

When you exercise you burn both fat and muscle. By staying in this "fat burning zone", the ratio of fat to muscle tips to the best possible ratio. If you go over it, the needle shifts a little and you may burn a slightly higher percentage of muscle vs. fat. But depending on your point of view, it was a small price to pay because it was just a few points shift in efficiency and you would also be burning far more calories at the higher intensity anyway. And of course higher intensity exercise has many other benefits apart from burning energy.

He also said that the old heart rate model was - not exactly obsolete - but certainly old school and far from cutting edge. He said it often signified a trainer who took this platitude too much to heart and may know only the most basic and simple ways of looking at things.

He speculated that it was a "gym thing", an attitude nurtured in gym employees partly because of liability concerns. Higher intensity exercise I guess presents more health and injury risks. He said gyms tend to play it safe. At least "officially" preach moderation.

And of course machine makers also promote it because it puts lots of easy to understand numbers right on their control panel, and people like numbers.

I don't necessarily claim this is true. But the couple of trainers I spoke to outside the gym echoed this view, while rainers I have talked to at the gym who work for them have pushed the heart rate thing. That's only about 4 people total in my informal survey, so it's interesting, but not conclusive.

This has been another episode of "Simple Conversations Made Overly Complex". What I try to do in the gym these days is just play.

There's probably a certain amount of accuracy to it. I've noticed over the last few weeks that my weight loss has plataued and once I even gained weight. I couldn't figure it out until I looked at what the charts (and my own knowledge of what I'm doing) really told me.

When I started this about 8 weeks ago, I was losing about 1.3 - 1.5 kilos a week. My exercise was regular, but low intensity and my diet was spot on for the plan I'm on.

The last few weeks I've stayed basically the same, despite a massive upswing in my exercise and moderate relaxation of my diet standards.

It's not just the amount I exercise, but how hard I do it which has changed - I'm really belting it out now. Pumping in high-gear through an hour-long street & trail bike ride, using long, slow powerful strokes in my swimming that absolutely cane my arms.

I don't use heart-rate monitors or spend much time in the gym, just get out on my bike or go to the pool or walk to town.

I couldn't figure out why I wasn't losing. Then I looked in the mirror at my arms, chest, lats & legs. I don't think I've ever seen them looking so good, lots more muscle than I've ever had before. Still got one hell of a spare tire and a double chin, but I'm getting there.

I'm going to swap from using weight as the be-all and end-all and adding measurements into the mix as I'm clearly losing fat and gaining muscle.

And I'm fine with that.

I, too, rather dislike going at my "optimal fat burning rate" (Iwon't tell how low that is, it would give away my age!).. but, I've found for me, if I go faster, I tend to have more hip/knee/foot pain.

So, it feels like I'm not doing anything "serious" at the gym, but I'm doing what I can!

I just discovered "fat burn" mode on the treadmill but I'm not convinced. For me to maintain a hear rate of 126 bpm, I walk at a medium pace and treadmill automatically adjusts the speed and incline to keep me at my target rate.

I barely sweat at all and don't feel like I'm getting much of a workout.

Converesly if I do interval training, I really work up a sweat and feel like I'm on my way to shedding fat.

What's the story?

If my goal is to lose body fat, should I be walking on the treadmill every day as opposed to running and sweating a lot?

126 bpm is 55% of my maximum heart rate.

Thanks for the advice!

note: i am not pro. blah blah blah.

both fat burning zone and cardio will burn fat. the difference is the ratio of fat calories being burned. this means that when you work at lower heart rates you're body will burn less overall calories but within the calories the ratio of fat calories (burning pure fat) to other calories is much higher.

however, if you workout at higher intensities you are burning more calories from everywhere (food energy, etc.) and the ratio of fat calories to other calories is less.

does that mean if you were to do the same exercise at both styles for the same amount of time that working within the fat burning zone will yield better results? absolutely not.

the breakdown looks like this (not actual numbers):
-------------------------------------------------

FAT BURNING ZONE: 30 minutes
fat calories burned: 250
other calories burned: 100
TOTAL: 350 calories
Percentage of calories from fat: 71%
-------------------------------------------------

CARDIO BURNING ZONE: 30 minutes
fat calories burned: 325
other calories burned: 175
TOTAL: 500 calories
Percentage of calories from fat: 65%
-------------------------------------------------


So, are you burning a higher percentage of fat in the fat burning zone? YES. Does this mean you are burning more total fat in the fat burning zone? NO.

You will always burn more fat in the cardio zone. ALWAYS. However, out of total calories expended the ratio of fat calories expended will always be higher in the fat burning zone.

The reason why the fat burning zone was created was for people that could not maintain an exercise at a higher intensity for 30-60 minutes. Many out of shape people find it nearly impossible or very painful.

Think about this... who is in better shape? That jogger that runs 5 miles everyday? Or those people that just take walks for the same amount of time? Obviously, the jogger will be in better shape.

It's up to you to decide your intensity. Let us not even cover all of the EXTRA benefits of training in the cardio zone. They would far, far, far outnumber the benefits of training in the fat burning zone.

As for peoples heart rates being all over the map. It takes about 3 weeks training your heart to beat consistently.

And a final note. Do you want to track your progress doing cardio?

Never, ever, ever go by distance alone (forget the 4 laps, or 2 miles, etc.). What you want to do is keep your heart rate steady for X amount of time. Make a note on the DISTANCE. That is the key. 3 weeks later do the same exercise on the same exact settings, at the same exact heart rate. If you have improved you will see that you should have gone farther (DISTANCE) in the same amount of time at the same target heart rate. This is because your cardiovascular system is becoming more effective and in better shape when your body is being pushed to the limit.

I hope this sheds some light on the situation. I love to make things more confusing! Yay!!!

Scott, I found your post extremely helpful and it makes sense to me. I'm going to switch to cardio training. Thanks for the info.

Ugh, I hate the whole fat burning zone. People get so hung up on the percentage and not the total calories burned 9as Scott illustrated so nicely). I tell my clients if they want to burn the highest % of fat, don't get out of bed! If they want to burn more fat overall - move it!
If you do what you've always done, you'll always be where you are.

Ditto for myself.

In my own experience I can train myself to go long time periods (long being a relative term) within a narrow BPM range and a medium to high intensity. For me personally I have seen my best gains through interval training. The constant push and retreat throughout a workout not only keeps it from getting boring it feels like a more intense workout.

Those are my 2 bits anyways.

JAU