Elliptical calories burned
tomatoey
Posts: 5,446 Member
I know there are 1000 threads on this topic, but can anyone clarify (again) whether the calorie formulas on machines are completely off?
I've read they can be off by as much as 40% (for the elliptical), and someone here said those formulas are based on the activity of male athletes. I have also read (here, I think) that they're not crazy off, if you do steady state cardio (does that count for women, too?). 9/10 times, the numbers are lower than what MFP has in the database, fwiw.
I don't have a HRM or FitBit or whatever and really don't want to bother with one if possible.
I found this alternate formula:
Calories Burned = [(Age x 0.074) - (Weight x 0.05741) + (Heart Rate during exercise x 0.4472) - 20.4022] x Time / 4.184
(I found it here, judge if you want, no one else had one on the first ten pages of search results - http://www.womenshealthmag.com/fitness/cardio-machines-display-accuracy
For my age (39) and today's weight (136), at 120 bpm (unfortunately, I can't increase speed or resistance right now), I get 270.928 for 40 minutes. Which fyi is the same as the MFP entry for "Race Walking", and substantially less than what I'd get for "Elliptical Trainer" on here. And it's a little less than what I get on the machine.
Is that basically what I might get on a HRM? Is it probably close to right?
I've read they can be off by as much as 40% (for the elliptical), and someone here said those formulas are based on the activity of male athletes. I have also read (here, I think) that they're not crazy off, if you do steady state cardio (does that count for women, too?). 9/10 times, the numbers are lower than what MFP has in the database, fwiw.
I don't have a HRM or FitBit or whatever and really don't want to bother with one if possible.
I found this alternate formula:
Calories Burned = [(Age x 0.074) - (Weight x 0.05741) + (Heart Rate during exercise x 0.4472) - 20.4022] x Time / 4.184
(I found it here, judge if you want, no one else had one on the first ten pages of search results - http://www.womenshealthmag.com/fitness/cardio-machines-display-accuracy
For my age (39) and today's weight (136), at 120 bpm (unfortunately, I can't increase speed or resistance right now), I get 270.928 for 40 minutes. Which fyi is the same as the MFP entry for "Race Walking", and substantially less than what I'd get for "Elliptical Trainer" on here. And it's a little less than what I get on the machine.
Is that basically what I might get on a HRM? Is it probably close to right?
0
Replies
-
Just found this old thread BUT the number I got is the same that MFP gave me - two calories off actually. 498 for 45 minutes on the elliptical (160lbs, 5'7") according to that formula. The machine told me 415. Strange.
Anyone else know anything about this?0 -
I just used this formula on my morning workout today on a stationary bike and it was 63% higher than my Polar HRM. For 20 min my Polar gave me 81 cal and this formula (I think I did it right) gave me 131 cal. I suspect it's closer to 100. I usually lower the number any workout machine gives me by a third and that's been working well. I eat all the calories back.0
-
My Fitbit Flex only counted about half my steps on the elliptical when I wore it in my wrist. I switched to wearing it on my hip and it counts every step!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions