Zone 2 Heart Rate Calculator
Find your Zone 2 aerobic-base heart rate — the conversational, fat-burning, mitochondria-building zone — plus all five training zones for your age.
Est. max HR 184 bpm · %HRmax
Educational estimate, not medical advice. Formula max-HR can sit ±10–12 bpm from your true max — pair these zones with the "talk test" (full sentences = Zone 2). For precise zones use a lab or field test.
Stay in Zone 2 — automatically
ONDA Life pairs with your HR monitor and tracks time-in-zone and recovery — so your aerobic base actually compounds instead of drifting into Zone 3.
Download ONDA Life on the App Store →Common questions
What is Zone 2 heart rate?
Zone 2 is the aerobic "base" zone — roughly 60–70% of your maximum heart rate, the pace at which you can still hold a conversation. It is where the body preferentially burns fat and builds mitochondrial density, which is why endurance athletes spend the bulk of their training there.
How do I calculate my Zone 2?
Estimate your max HR (this tool uses the Tanaka formula, 208 − 0.7·age, more accurate than the old 220 − age), then take 60–70% of it. If you know your resting heart rate, the Karvonen method — (maxHR − restHR)·intensity + restHR — personalises the range further.
How accurate are formula-based max-HR estimates?
They are population averages with a real spread — individual max HR can sit ±10–12 bpm from any formula. For precise zones, a lab test or an all-out field test beats a formula. For most people, the Tanaka estimate plus the "talk test" (you can speak in full sentences in Zone 2) is close enough.
How much Zone 2 should I do?
A common target is 150–180+ minutes per week, often as 3–4 sessions of 45–60 minutes, kept strictly easy. The discipline is staying IN the zone — most people drift into Zone 3, which blunts the aerobic-base adaptation. A heart-rate monitor (chest strap is most accurate) keeps you honest.
Why use Tanaka instead of 220 minus age?
220 − age is simple but systematically over-estimates max HR in younger adults and under-estimates it in older adults. The Tanaka 2001 formula (208 − 0.7·age), derived from a large meta-analysis, tracks the real age decline better. This tool shows both so you can compare.