Walking w/o stroller burns more calories than with stroller?

filemanager

How come in MFP walking at a "leisurely pace, 2.5mph" burns more calories per hour than pushing a stroller with child? I would think the opposite would be true.

I went on a 2-hour stroller walk yesterday and put in "walking at a leisurely pace" at first, then I found the walking with stroller but it didn't burn as many calories. Is that a glitch or true?

Yes I'm a newbie. ha.

leggup

Walking burns calories because it is weight-bearing exercise- you have to lift your body weight with every step. With a stroller, the additional weight goes down through the wheels. It's the same reason that holding on to the treadmill while walking on it burns fewer calories than not holding on to the machine.

You may offset the difference if you are going up hills/on rough terrain. It's all an estimate, though, and not terribly accurate as it is not accounting for elevation changes or heart rate.

Edited to add: there's also the momentum of the stroller assisting you, reducing your calorie burn.

jimmmer

I would hazard that *if* you walk the same speed doing both activities, then you'll burn more pushing a pram. But I reckon the difference is probably marginal (especially in the context of your overall daily calorie usage...)

When I'm stomping around with the pram, I'm going top speed and feel the hills more than walking without one. That's highly subjective though - perhaps I'm going faster than I normally walk?

At least it's an activity with progressive resistance built in, since they're steadily getting heavier as time goes by...

FitPhillygirl

If you want to burn more calories while walking you need to increase your speed in order to get your heart rate up.

JoRocka

most people walk slower with a stroller.

But if you're walking said baby bucket with purpose- you're probably burning more.

jimmmer

JoRocka wrote: »

most people walk slower with a stroller.

But if you're walking said baby bucket with purpose- you're probably burning more.

There's no sleeping in the pram when I'm driving.... buckle up!

filemanager

haha. makes sense. thanks everyone!

JoRocka

jimmmer wrote: »

JoRocka wrote: »

most people walk slower with a stroller.

But if you're walking said baby bucket with purpose- you're probably burning more.

There's no sleeping in the pram when I'm driving.... buckle up!

heh- yeah- this is why no one lets me baby sit their kids LULZ

WalkingAlong

https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/Activity-Categories/walking

The METS values are close but pushing a stroller does burn more:
pushing a stroller 2.5-3.1mph = 4
walking 2.8-3.2mph = 3.5

METS is the multiplier of BMR that estimates calorie burn.

I don't know what MFP is using if not that, but you're right-- walking 2.5mph burns more than pushing a stroller (no pace listed), in their database. Maybe they have some lower value for pushing slower and that's what they used?

MeanderingMammal

filemanager wrote: »

How come in MFP walking at a "leisurely pace, 2.5mph" burns more calories per hour than pushing a stroller with child? I would think the opposite would be true.

You'd need to know what pace you're doing with the stroller.

In terms of logic, as you're pushing the weight of stroller and inhabitant then you're physically moving more mass, so you should be burning more energy for a comparable pace. Whilst the stroller is supporting a small amount of your own weight, you're moving it forward, so that effect of the support is mitigated.

That said, there are lots of variables around the stroller itself. One that's optimised for moving at pace is lighter and will have larger wheels that reduce the rolling resistance and stiction, so you'll burn less as a result of moving it, but you can get a better pace and go for longer.

hedwardsb

I think it depends on the weight of the inhabitant(s) and the terrain you're covering. When I used to push my oldest 2 children in our hilly neighborhood, I know I was expending a lot more effort than just strolling around myself. They weighed about 80 pounds together, and on more than one occasion, I had to ask my then 4 year old to get out & walk up the last hill because I couldn't make it with them both in the stroller.

veganbettie

I use a HRM and I haven't really noticed a big difference with my calories with pushing my giant 2 year old...I run.

Actually I think I try harder when I don't have my baby to focus on.

sjp_511

britishbroccoli wrote: »

Walking burns calories because it is weight-bearing exercise- you have to lift your body weight with every step. With a stroller, the additional weight goes down through the wheels. It's the same reason that holding on to the treadmill while walking on it burns fewer calories than not holding on to the machine.

You may offset the difference if you are going up hills/on rough terrain. It's all an estimate, though, and not terribly accurate as it is not accounting for elevation changes or heart rate.

Edited to add: there's also the momentum of the stroller assisting you, reducing your calorie burn.

This doesn't make sense. I don't agree with this theory.

sistrsprkl

I walk and run a lot with a (double) stroller and definitely feel like it's more of a workout than without. Either way, I'd log it as either and know that I'm burning more with the stroller.