RunKeeper inconsistent results?

2»

Replies

  • _Waffle_
    _Waffle_ Posts: 13,049 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    Your distance is so short that the level of error inherent in using phone based GPS is exacerbated.

    26 calories off isn't a huge deviation but yeah, mostly this.
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,838 Member
    wahoowad wrote: »
    After editing are you talking about the elevation being updated or the calorie burn being updated?

    Both as calorie calculation is also based on elevation. If elevation is less extreme calories go down.
  • W_Stewart
    W_Stewart Posts: 237 Member
    Are you doing this for each activity?
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,838 Member
    Actually, this app has something really nice: custom interval workouts in the free version. At Start you seenyour workout. Click in that field, chose One-offs and at the bottom is a Create Workout button.
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,838 Member
    edited April 2015
    Well, I use a different app now which sends data to RK and the elevation looks realistic. But it's a paid app for iOS only. ISmoothRun. But yeah I first did that for each activity. But I love my stats and like them to resemble reality.
  • carliekitty
    carliekitty Posts: 303 Member
    I would add my own calories per .36 x weight per mile walk for net calorie burned. If you run then it's .63xweight per mile for net calories burned.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    _Waffle_ wrote: »
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    Your distance is so short that the level of error inherent in using phone based GPS is exacerbated.

    26 calories off isn't a huge deviation but yeah, mostly this.

    Hel I send my Garmin data to Runkeeper, Endomondo, Strava and MFP and in an hour long workout can get a couple of hundred calorie deviation in outcomes. 26 cals is lost in the noise.

  • _Waffle_
    _Waffle_ Posts: 13,049 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    _Waffle_ wrote: »
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    Your distance is so short that the level of error inherent in using phone based GPS is exacerbated.

    26 calories off isn't a huge deviation but yeah, mostly this.

    Hel I send my Garmin data to Runkeeper, Endomondo, Strava and MFP and in an hour long workout can get a couple of hundred calorie deviation in outcomes. 26 cals is lost in the noise.
    I use CopyMySports to send my Garmin data to Runkeeper and Strava. I hate it when I run say 6 miles and on Runkeeper it says 5.99 miles. Every. Single. Time. :laugh:
  • WakkoW
    WakkoW Posts: 567 Member
    I run with both the Runkeeper and a Garmin with heart-rate monitor and foot pod. More often than not, the distances work out to be the same within .05 of a mile. As far as calorie burn, I think the biggest difference was about 50 calories on a 12 mile run.

    Many of the trails I run on are marked every .25 miles. In addition, I run on a track a couple of times a week. All I can say is that both the Garmin and Runkeeper appear to be accurate and consistent with one another.
  • W_Stewart
    W_Stewart Posts: 237 Member
    yirara,

    I edited another track with your solution and this one did not update the calories. The one earlier did. I wonder if there is a reason that some change and some don't? Is this solution better at adjusting when there is more elevation change? This last walk I tracked didn't have much elevation change. But it was still significantly different than what MFP showed for the same duration.
  • W_Stewart
    W_Stewart Posts: 237 Member
    Another test which resulted in very different elevation values. All I did was go for a short walk up and back on my fairly level street, but did it twice and recorded the walk each time.

    Track 1 shows 31 feet of elevation and estimated lower calories. The 'solution' did not reduce the calories.
    KL9Akqz.png


    Track 2 shows 127' of elevation and estimated higher calories. But the 'solution' edited dropped the calories down to 51.
    YZ43MHq.png

    So...I guess I agree with the 'solution' they report as it seemed to readjust the inaccurately high reading of #2 and brought the calories more in line.

    And I checked with MFP which reports 47 calories for the same walk which is close (this was a short walk though). I guess I just need to decide whether to edit all my Runkeeper tracks, or plug the walk durations into MFP and go with MFP values. I would prefer Runkeeper as it (seemingly) will help me factor in my hilly elevation into my calorie burn, but I guess I'll always doubt what it reports...
  • W_Stewart
    W_Stewart Posts: 237 Member
    Another annoyance is that all walks come over from Runkeeper to MFP as a "3.0 MPH" walk even when my average speed for a walk is at or above 3.5 mph.
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,838 Member
    no idea to be honest. I didn't link any accounts. I take my own estimate and enter that manually.

Categories