[poiuyt]

Guys,

what heart rate range do you target when performing cardio?

I try to stay between 70 - 80% for 20min with total cardio time =30min.

[mkettlewell15]

I try to stay in the 60-70 range

[compulut]

I think your target range should be dependant upon your ultimate goal. There is a theoretical point at which the fat burning should be maximized, if that is your goal. Going beyond that range runs the risk of forcing the body to enter 'fight or flight' whereby the body seems to shift, and run the risk of entering a catabolic state, which is bad, of course, for maintaining muscle mass. For cardio-vascular health, the range should be targeted differently.

[poiuyt]

Ok so what is the optimal range for fat burning?

[lil_big_junior]

i'd say about 80% ^^^

[Thomas_Rivera]

For hiit training you want to aim for the 90 range since you'd be doing sprints.

[lil_big_junior]

^^^that is true...+1 thomas

i prefer keeping it consistant all the way through on typical cardio exercises during cuts, like ski-ing machs & steppers & i try to keep it at 80%...

i can't do HIIT, i'm a bit to big for that sort of intensity, lol

[mabo]

The optimal intensity for fat burning is known as your lipox max; the point where your body utilizes the most fat. At intensities beyond this your body uses an increasing amount of carbs and slightly lower fat.

For most people this is around 50-60% of your VO2max, which correlates reasonably closely with your heart rate. Note that using HR/HRmax does not accurately reflect what percentage of your maximum heart rate you're working at.

Instead, it's better to use the following formula:
Resting HR/(HRmax - restingHR)

The problem with the commonly used method is that it assumes you can work at heart rates lower than resting.

[compulut]

Originally Posted by mabo

The optimal intensity for fat burning is known as your lipox max; the point where your body utilizes the most fat. At intensities beyond this your body uses an increasing amount of carbs and slightly lower fat.

For most people this is around 50-60% of your VO2max, which correlates reasonably closely with your heart rate. Note that using HR/HRmax does not accurately reflect what percentage of your maximum heart rate you're working at.

Instead, it's better to use the following formula:
Resting HR/(HRmax - restingHR)

The problem with the commonly used method is that it assumes you can work at heart rates lower than resting.

At the risk of disagreeing with my esteemed brothers LBJ & TR, I'm inclined to agree that a lower sustained heartrate is better for maximized fat burning (with the possible exception of HITT, provided that the low intensity portion of the exercise, is closer to this percentage).

However, I find that there must be a problem with the formula. Let's assume (since the math is easy) that your Resting HR = 100, and your max is 150. (BTW - how does anybody really know what their max is, without actually going beyond their max, which would require dying)

The second equation (assuming a healthier individual with a resting HR of 50, and a max of 200) would yield as undesireable result.

This equation, then, would yield 2.

100/(150-100)
100/50
2

50/(200-50)
50/150
.33

Unless I'm reading it wrong, that would be pretty much the same result as finding your max.

[mabo]

Whoops, sorry I typed it up quickly while I was on lunch and left something out. You're right that equation makes no sense.

It should read:

(HR - Resting HR) / (HRmax - Resting HR)

For max just use your age predicted max (220-age), or do an all-out effort and see what it climbs to.

So, for a 20yr old person doing cardio at a HR of 150 and resting HR of 100:

(150-100) / (200-100) = 50%

Instead of 75% (150/200) when using the standard formula.

Using the standard formula, this person is working at 50% when they're resting.

[lil_big_junior]

Originally Posted by compulut

At the risk of disagreeing with my esteemed brothers LBJ & TR, I'm inclined to agree that a lower sustained heartrate is better for maximized fat burning (with the possible exception of HITT, provided that the low intensity portion of the exercise, is closer to this percentage).

However, I find that there must be a problem with the formula. Let's assume (since the math is easy) that your Resting HR = 100, and your max is 150. (BTW - how does anybody really know what their max is, without actually going beyond their max, which would require dying)

The second equation (assuming a healthier individual with a resting HR of 50, and a max of 200) would yield as undesireable result.

This equation, then, would yield 2.

100/(150-100)
100/50
2

50/(200-50)
50/150
.33

Unless I'm reading it wrong, that would be pretty much the same result as finding your max.

ok bro, that was a great post
i can't argue with that cos it makes alot of sense