Elliptical MPH for me?

999tigger

Mr_Knight wrote: »

999tigger wrote: »

Fitter you become then you adapt as you becoem more efficient= burn less.

No, that's backwards. The fitter you are, the *more* you can burn, quicker.

The idea that fitter people burn less is nonsense that comes from abuse of HRM numbers.

You can become more efficient at the activity you are doing by being a better runner, rower etc, which will mean you can manage the same distance with less effort all things being equal. I doubt the variation is large, but its still there.

Ofc you have the potential to burn more by being able to go further or faster, but thats different and I had already pointed that aspect out. Intensity and duration are by far the biggest immediately controllable factors in the size of a calorie burn, so it makes sense to adjust those upwards to counteract the less work you have to do as you lose weight. That is if you want to burn the same number or more calories.

If the OP is limited by 30 minutes, then he should just push so he is making an effort during the whole time and that will maximise his calorie burn. That opens the further debate about hiit v steady state but you cna do that another day.

MeanderingMammal

tomatoey wrote: »

JaneiR36 wrote: »

As you get fitter, your heart rate may not be as high for the same work output. Unless your doctor has asked you to though, I don't believe you have to limit yourself to a certain heart rate. I'd rather be concerned about meeting goals like how long I want to be on the elliptical, and setting the difficulty level to what I can do in that time. I actually bought a mini elliptical to use at home and have found it helpful since I use it in as short of increments as I want

Get a Fitbit if you want it. Do any exercise you want. Just move!

Question - have forgotten what I knew about this, and have seen different things on it here. Will a fit person doing the same workload they did when they were less fit, but the same weight, burn fewer calories?

No. Calorie expenditure is a function of the mass moved through space. Fitter people have a more efficient CV system so a single stroke of the heart will pump more oxygen through the system; increased stroke volume.

So an HRM will indicate a lower calorie expenditure, due to a lower heart rate, for the same level of energy expended.

MeanderingMammal

999tigger wrote: »

You can become more efficient at the activity you are doing by being a better runner, rower etc, which will mean you can manage the same distance with less effort all things being equal. I doubt the variation is large, but its still there.

Improvements as a result of mechanical efficiency are negligible compared to the benefits from improved CV fitness leading to an ability to do more work in a given time.

MelodyandBarbells

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

tomatoey wrote: »

JaneiR36 wrote: »

As you get fitter, your heart rate may not be as high for the same work output. Unless your doctor has asked you to though, I don't believe you have to limit yourself to a certain heart rate. I'd rather be concerned about meeting goals like how long I want to be on the elliptical, and setting the difficulty level to what I can do in that time. I actually bought a mini elliptical to use at home and have found it helpful since I use it in as short of increments as I want

Get a Fitbit if you want it. Do any exercise you want. Just move!

Question - have forgotten what I knew about this, and have seen different things on it here. Will a fit person doing the same workload they did when they were less fit, but the same weight, burn fewer calories?

No. Calorie expenditure is a function of the mass moved through space. Fitter people have a more efficient CV system so a single stroke of the heart will pump more oxygen through the system; increased stroke volume.

So an HRM will indicate a lower calorie expenditure, due to a lower heart rate, for the same level of energy expended.

So to be clear, no matter how efficiently your body runs, at the same workout, intensity and duration, you'll burn the same amount of calories as another person of the same gender doing the same workout on the same level, intensity and duration, even though they might have a near death experience completing it?

Some machines do provide a power output in watts, right? It seems as though if you had this number, you could get a really accurate picture of your calories burned if it all has to do with work done. I'm thinking Machines should be really accurate at estimating calories burned, not as inaccurate as they're notorious for being!

999tigger

JaneiR36 wrote: »

[

Some machines do provide a power output in watts, right? It seems as though if you had this number, you could get a really accurate picture of your calories burned if it all has to do with work done. I'm thinking Machines should be really accurate at estimating calories burned, not as inaccurate as they're notorious for being!

Yes some bikes and the rower come to mind. People love just to dismiss all machines, even the half the people dismissing them dont even use them. There are still some variations though, especually for the amount burned just sliding up and down.

MeanderingMammal

JaneiR36 wrote: »

Some machines do provide a power output in watts, right? It seems as though if you had this number, you could get a really accurate picture of your calories burned if it all has to do with work done. I'm thinking Machines should be really accurate at estimating calories burned, not as inaccurate as they're notorious for being!

Yes. Although you're then into the realms of calibration of the machine and the maintenance condition, both of which will affect their estimation.

Certainly they have the potential to be a lot more accurate than HR based etimations.