Treadmill with incline burns more calories?
Options
Replies
-
^ You're a guy. All things being equal, your burns will be much higher than hers.
Which is why I was sure to point out that it was my personal rule of thumb and that other people will be different.
That said, I wouldn't say men have "much higher" calorie burns than women just as a result of being men...it's more likely due to the fact that men weigh more and have more muscle mass, which I also accounted for in saying that overall burns hinge primarily on your weight and fitness level:
Furthermore, it would seem a bit of a stretch to term the difference as 'huge'
... A study done by researchers at Syracuse found that men burned about 105 kilocalories/mile on average running a mile in 9 minutes and 30 seconds, and about 52 calories when walking the same mile in 19 minutes. For the women in the study, that burn was 91 and 43 calories, respectively.
Source: http://running.competitor.com/2015/03/training/many-calories-running-burn_123951#cDMuEjx2Zmlmelxv.990 -
I am "5.5
50 years old
145lbs
walking 3.5 to 3.8 mph for 60 minutes gives me around 350 calories burned according to my HRM and my treadmill a little bit under that
When i do it on an incline of 6 which i do most day i will get close to 500 calories with my HRM and 425 with the treadmill.
So its wild lol
btw this is GROSS calories not NET
Interesting part is when i calculate the data over 90 days, so what i lost and burned the number of my HRM is off about 13% ( so higher)
Over the NET calories.
0 -
juggernaut1974 wrote: »MonkeyMel21 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »Does it burn more calories? Yes
Are those numbers accurate? Probably not. Exercise machines - even those you input your stats into - tend to vastly overestimate calories burned.
This
I'd halve the burn
And remember that if you hold on it doesn't count
Do you think walking at 3mph for 60 minutes would really only burn 140 calories? Or are you talking only about the added incline burning 500 cal? I'm just curious, I think I always over estimate my calorie burn on treadmills
As the others have said - a lot hinges on your overall weight and fitness level
But that said, a good rule of thumb that I've always used is about 100 cal/mile of running and about 50 cal/mile of walking or biking. So an hour of walking a 3 mph (ie 3 miles) using the rule of thumb would be about 150 cal for me.
Again, that's worked for me...others may be different.
I'm 23 5'9 145 lbs and walk on the treadmill daily at 10% incline some days an hour some days an hour and a half at 3 mph I don't hold on to the rail I hold a book or ipad in my hands, so I'd be burning 100 calories?0 -
As an old lady with balance issues, I sometimes hold on. If I need to take a drink, mop my brow, or turn my head to check the clock, I hold on. I try not to make a habit of it, but holding on is better than falling off.0
-
mrsaniamanning wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »MonkeyMel21 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »Does it burn more calories? Yes
Are those numbers accurate? Probably not. Exercise machines - even those you input your stats into - tend to vastly overestimate calories burned.
This
I'd halve the burn
And remember that if you hold on it doesn't count
Do you think walking at 3mph for 60 minutes would really only burn 140 calories? Or are you talking only about the added incline burning 500 cal? I'm just curious, I think I always over estimate my calorie burn on treadmills
As the others have said - a lot hinges on your overall weight and fitness level
But that said, a good rule of thumb that I've always used is about 100 cal/mile of running and about 50 cal/mile of walking or biking. So an hour of walking a 3 mph (ie 3 miles) using the rule of thumb would be about 150 cal for me.
Again, that's worked for me...others may be different.
I'm 23 5'9 145 lbs and walk on the treadmill daily at 10% incline some days an hour some days an hour and a half at 3 mph I don't hold on to the rail I hold a book or ipad in my hands, so I'd be burning 100 calories?
Ultimately - you'll have to use trial and error to come up with your own actual burns.
Using MY rule of thumb (which may or may not really be applicable to your situation) - more like 150-250 calories in 60-90 minutes (based on ~ 50 calories per mile)0 -
I have been told that walking at some incline is actually easier on the body, than walking without. The burn is higher and if it gives less chance of injury it is a win, win for me. I burn about 90 calories per 20 minute mile at an incline of 3.0
-
As a severely sight impaired person i hold on to the rail. My jaunty booty says it does count.0
-
I heard that 10000 steps burns 500 calories0
-
juggernaut1974 wrote: »Does it burn more calories? Yes
Are those numbers accurate? Probably not. Exercise machines - even those you input your stats into - tend to vastly overestimate calories burned.
This
I'd halve the burn
And remember that if you hold on it doesn't count
Yeah I see all those people walking at like 18% while holding the rail for dear life and I'm shaking my head.
This!
It makes me crazy to see the people holding on. "That's not how this works, that's not how any of this works".
Some of us do have balance or joint issues, you know. When I was younger and healthy, I could easily go without the rail. Now, it can really be a serious problem even at a slow speed due to balance issues from residual effects of a chronic condition that is not visible to the casual observer. Yes, I see the sidelong looks I get, but it's not worth injuring myself to save my pride. I still get a workout, I still burn calories, and it takes a lot more determination to keep going when you are dealing with daily pain and other things than when you aren't.0 -
pstegman888 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »Does it burn more calories? Yes
Are those numbers accurate? Probably not. Exercise machines - even those you input your stats into - tend to vastly overestimate calories burned.
This
I'd halve the burn
And remember that if you hold on it doesn't count
Yeah I see all those people walking at like 18% while holding the rail for dear life and I'm shaking my head.
This!
It makes me crazy to see the people holding on. "That's not how this works, that's not how any of this works".
Some of us do have balance or joint issues, you know. When I was younger and healthy, I could easily go without the rail. Now, it can really be a serious problem even at a slow speed due to balance issues from residual effects of a chronic condition that is not visible to the casual observer. Yes, I see the sidelong looks I get, but it's not worth injuring myself to save my pride. I still get a workout, I still burn calories, and it takes a lot more determination to keep going when you are dealing with daily pain and other things than when you aren't.
The point is that you would probably burn more calories at a lower incline without holding the rail. Unless you can't walk at all without holding it, obviously.0 -
I found this calculator to be fairly helpful. It even gives references for the formulas it uses. Incline can significantly increase the calorie burn, but only if you don't hold on! This calculator agrees almost exactly with the treadmill I use, so much so that I think the treadmill may use the same equations.
http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/walking-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx0 -
I found this calculator to be fairly helpful. It even gives references for the formulas it uses. Incline can significantly increase the calorie burn, but only if you don't hold on! This calculator agrees almost exactly with the treadmill I use, so much so that I think the treadmill may use the same equations.
http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/walking-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx
That's the calculator I used
but a lot of people on said it's inaccurate =/ 0 -
mrsaniamanning wrote: »I found this calculator to be fairly helpful. It even gives references for the formulas it uses. Incline can significantly increase the calorie burn, but only if you don't hold on! This calculator agrees almost exactly with the treadmill I use, so much so that I think the treadmill may use the same equations.
http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/walking-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx
That's the calculator I used but a lot of people on said it's inaccurate =/
It explains:
"Note: This calculator provides gross calorie burn estimates. If you want to convert the estimate to net calorie burn, memorize the number and click here. If you want to learn more about net and gross calorie burn, read the Net Versus Gross Calorie Burn article."
Net is what most people will want.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »mrsaniamanning wrote: »I found this calculator to be fairly helpful. It even gives references for the formulas it uses. Incline can significantly increase the calorie burn, but only if you don't hold on! This calculator agrees almost exactly with the treadmill I use, so much so that I think the treadmill may use the same equations.
http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/walking-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx
That's the calculator I used but a lot of people on said it's inaccurate =/
It explains:
"Note: This calculator provides gross calorie burn estimates. If you want to convert the estimate to net calorie burn, memorize the number and click here. If you want to learn more about net and gross calorie burn, read the Net Versus Gross Calorie Burn article."
Net is what most people will want.
My net is about 470 according to that, is that accurate? Should I use 400 or 200?0 -
mrsaniamanning wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »mrsaniamanning wrote: »I found this calculator to be fairly helpful. It even gives references for the formulas it uses. Incline can significantly increase the calorie burn, but only if you don't hold on! This calculator agrees almost exactly with the treadmill I use, so much so that I think the treadmill may use the same equations.
http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/walking-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx
That's the calculator I used but a lot of people on said it's inaccurate =/
It explains:
"Note: This calculator provides gross calorie burn estimates. If you want to convert the estimate to net calorie burn, memorize the number and click here. If you want to learn more about net and gross calorie burn, read the Net Versus Gross Calorie Burn article."
Net is what most people will want.
My net is about 470 according to that, is that accurate? Should I use 400 or 200?
I got 445 with your numbers, but either way 400 makes sense, because of the incline. It sounds high to me because it's more than I would burn running, but that doesn't mean it's wrong (and 10% is a good incline!). Like segacs said, the best thing to do is be consistent and then check results and adjust if necessary.0 -
I hold the rail. I don't hold myself up or put any of my weight into holding on but I tend to get dizzy if I don't. Hasn't made a difference at all but I underestimate what online calculators tell me I burn by about 50 calories for each mile I walk, which is less than half of what my treadmill tells me. I use 60 cals for a 3mph 3% incline and 100 cals for a 3.7mph on an 8% incline. Seems to be working well for me. I'm moving my legs and breathing hard, regardless of holding the rails so it's burning something.
0 -
daniwilford wrote: »As an old lady with balance issues, I sometimes hold on. If I need to take a drink, mop my brow, or turn my head to check the clock, I hold on. I try not to make a habit of it, but holding on is better than falling off.
This! I am also an old lady with balance issues and nerve damage in my left leg. I have to rest one hand on the rail to keep from falling off. Even at 0 incline and a slow speed I need to keep one hand on the rail.
I fell off once and it wasn't pretty. Ouch!0 -
I found this calculator to be fairly helpful. It even gives references for the formulas it uses. Incline can significantly increase the calorie burn, but only if you don't hold on! This calculator agrees almost exactly with the treadmill I use, so much so that I think the treadmill may use the same equations.
http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/walking-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx
That calculator is not far off with my numbers.
But OP it are all estimates.
If you take my numbers which are a bit higher is because of my heart condition. It works harder than normal
So i burn a bit more.
for others maybe slower etc etc
It is all about picking an average and work with it. Compare the data you get over months.
That is how i worked it out.
when you have a device that gives you high estimates and a calculator online a very low go towards the lower end.
Best is btw for steady cardio to work with a HRM ( that is what i do) Still an estimate but the most accurate you can get.
When you walk on a treadmill that have the options of putting in your data ( age, weight, gender) use it!
It all helps but keep in mind all estimates...all of it.
0 -
-
daniwilford wrote: »As an old lady with balance issues, I sometimes hold on. If I need to take a drink, mop my brow, or turn my head to check the clock, I hold on. I try not to make a habit of it, but holding on is better than falling off.
These are all very valid reasons to hold on. My main issue is with the people who crank up the incline then hold on and lean back. It seems entirely counterproductive. I also hold on to take a drink or mop my brow.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 960 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions