MAP MY RUN

twohourshower37
twohourshower37 Posts: 37 Member
edited November 25 in Fitness and Exercise
Does anyone here know if the calories burned that the map my run calculates are accurate?

Replies

  • runshellersrun123
    runshellersrun123 Posts: 21 Member
    I would assume not, because it tells me I burn 200 calories/mile. I'm 168 lbs and running at approximately 10:15 mile pace.
  • Train4Foodz
    Train4Foodz Posts: 4,298 Member
    edited October 2015
    There is no possible way for it to be 100% accurate.
    It doesn't link to any form of HRM in order to gather any of those finer details. It simply uses the most accurate equation to find the estimate for your entered stats.

    If you enter your stats correctly, the estimated 'burn' should be somewhere close.

    Mine is usually within a couple of hundred calories to the burn my HRM gives me (this is based on a 1800 Calorie total burn). :)
  • rankinsect
    rankinsect Posts: 2,238 Member
    Pretty sure it is attempting to calculate gross calorie burn, not net calorie burn. It gives me a little shy of 700 calories burned for 3.6 miles of moderate paced walking. Given my weight, it's not far off from other calculators in terms of gross calories burned - i.e. it factors in all my body's energy usage over the 90 minutes of walking, not just the extra calories expended because I walked rather than sat on my butt. My net calorie burn is likely to be closer to 470.
  • antennachick
    antennachick Posts: 464 Member
    That seams way off...I would probably play around with it and make sure you dont eat back those calories!
  • SpecialKH
    SpecialKH Posts: 70 Member
    It's way off. I found the 100 calorie/mile estimate closer than the app. I know I burn approx. 2000 calories on non-active days and 2300 average on active days (i.e. no exercise vs. a 30 minute jog). I can't quite do a 10 minute mile but that approximately is much closer.
  • twohourshower37
    twohourshower37 Posts: 37 Member
    Thanks everybody, yeah I mean if I run 2 miles in 20 minutes it'll usually tell me I've burned close to 600, maybe I'll just cut it in half and go with that?
  • dtsbrown
    dtsbrown Posts: 41 Member
    I find it to be fairly accurate depending on the activity. Running and cycling tend to be fairly on track but when I rock climb I think it way over estimates calories. I do make sure that my stats for height and weight are out in properly as well.
  • italysharon
    italysharon Posts: 195 Member
    Maybe you do not have the correct settings for your body? Mine seems pretty accurate.

    For example: I am 5'5 and 140ish pounds. Yesterday I ran 1.7 miles at a pace of 8.42 (it took me 14m53s to run it) and it said that I burned 200 calories.

    I ran 5 miles a few days ago at a 8.26pace and it showed that I burned 588 calories. (42 minutes of running).

    2 miles in 20 minutes burning 600 calories I would think that you have to be a pretty large male.
  • twohourshower37
    twohourshower37 Posts: 37 Member
    italysharon wrote: »
    Maybe you do not have the correct settings for your body? Mine seems pretty accurate.

    For example: I am 5'5 and 140ish pounds. Yesterday I ran 1.7 miles at a pace of 8.42 (it took me 14m53s to run it) and it said that I burned 200 calories.

    I ran 5 miles a few days ago at a 8.26pace and it showed that I burned 588 calories. (42 minutes of running).

    2 miles in 20 minutes burning 600 calories I would think that you have to be a pretty large male.

    I just noticed in the settings it still had my weight at 247, and now I'm 208, maybe that was a factor
This discussion has been closed.

Categories