Treadmill Incline

Tblackdogs

Hi everyone. Question here about logging exercise. I mostly walk and sometimes jog. Sometimes outside and sometimes on my treadmill. I have never distinguished between the two when logging. I just put in 60 minutes of walking 4 mph (which is what I usually do!). I'm starting to train for a hiking/backpacking trip and so I'm planning on increasing the incline on my treadmill. This certainly is harder than walking when it's flat so I'm assuming that it burns more calories. Any way to account for this on MFP. I don't usually eat back my exercise calories but I'm interested in an estimate on how much more I'm burning when walking on an incline. Any suggestions?

L_Master

You can find calculator's online, but it's this but it's significant. I've seen it pegged at between 9-12% increase per 1% grade. A 10% incline burns roughly double the same calories per mile that a flat surface does.

singingflutelady

Just make sure you aren't holding on

Tblackdogs

I don't hold on! But I also don't walk at a 10% incline! Thanks guys!

Anusha76

My incline is at the max 13. Speed is at 3.5. I don't hold and walk for abt 10 mts. Burns 100 calories.

kristinegift

I'm not sure it makes THAT much of a caloric difference. When I run on a treadmill at 0-1% incline or run outside with hills and wind resistance, I'm still burning basically the same amount of calories. The other day I ran a hill that was 7.6% grade and that mile burned 109 calories. Two days later, I ran with my GPS watch on (GPS turned off of course, measuring by cadence only) on the treadmill and burned 106 calories per mile. So I wouldn't sweat it. If anything, you're just upping your daily deficit by an extra few dozen calories by increasing the incline.

Azdak

Depending on the incline, it can be a significant increase. If you can input your weight into the treadmill, then the calories burned on the treadmill (if it's a commercial model or known brand name) should be pretty accurate--as accurate as any other option. If not, it should be possible to find a calculator on line that allows speed and elevation input (TBH I have never looked at MFP exercise logging in detail, so I don't know if they have separate speed/incline inputs).

jasamjak67

I use a Polar FT60 Heart Rate Monitor for calorie burn zone training (fat burn, cardio and maximum) for accurate results. I just got off the Treadmill and did this in 30 minutes...

Treadmill
Minute 0-2 – speed 3.0 – incline 2.0%
Minute 2-4 – speed 3.0 – incline 4.0%
Minute 4-6 – speed 3.0 – incline 6.0%
Minute 6–8 – speed 3.0 – incline 8.0%
Minute 8-10 – speed 3.0 – incline 10.0%
Minute 10-12 – speed 3.0 – incline 2.0%
Minute 12-14 – speed 3.0 – incline 4.0%
Minute 14-16 – speed 3.0 – incline 6.0%
Minute 16–18 – speed 3.0 – incline 8.0%
Minute 18-20 – speed 3.0 – incline 10.0%
Minute 20-22 – speed 3.0 – incline 2.0%
Minute 22-24 – speed 3.0 – incline 4.0%
Minute 24-26 – speed 3.0 – incline 6.0%
Minute 26–28 – speed 3.0 – incline 8.0%
Minute 28-30 – speed 3.0 – incline 10.0%

L_Master

kristinegift wrote: »

The other day I ran a hill that was 7.6% grade and that mile burned 109 calories.

No, you didn't. Unless you weigh like 80lbs. Assuming something like 130lbs you're burning at least 140 calories going a mile up 7.6% grade.

kristinegift wrote: »

I'm not sure it makes THAT much of a caloric difference. When I run on a treadmill at 0-1% incline or run outside with hills and wind resistance, I'm still burning basically the same amount of calories.

This I wouldn't doubt. If you're running outside the net elevation change is generally zero, unless someone picks you up at the top of a hill. While it costs a few more calories to run a hilly route than a flat one, the difference isn't that much.

Unless you're running well below 7 minute pace, the wind resistance does not make much difference at all.

Tblackdogs wrote: »

I don't hold on! But I also don't walk at a 10% incline! Thanks guys!

What incline do you walk? If you're doing say, 4%, you're probably getting an extra 20-40 calories per mile depending on how heavy you are.

Tblackdogs

I don't do this regularly but I'm planning to. I would say an average of 4% sounds about right!

robertw486

Tblackdogs wrote: »

I don't do this regularly but I'm planning to. I would say an average of 4% sounds about right!

There are some online calculators that show calories and include incline, but really the ones I've seen seem outdated even for the standard walking calculations. The only studies I've seen seem to indicate that for humans the calorie change is small until the angles get reasonably steep. But no matter how small, it will be a difference. Though I've never spent much time on treadmills, I suspect that at higher speeds it would also have a similar user experience as changing the ramp angle on the ellipticals. I know for me, sometimes feeling those engaged muscle groups change is a strange feeling, and if nothing else works more areas of your legs.

ephiemarie

I don't know how to account for the additional calories on MFP, but in my experience you definitely burn more calories when you increase the treadmill incline. Today I ran 3 miles on my treadmill at 4% incline and later ran 3 mostly flat miles outdoors at a faster pace and burned nearly the same amount of calories for each run.

I recently trained for and completed a big hike in the Grand Canyon, and I'd recommend doing some knee/ankle stability work and some workouts (squats, lunges, whatever) wearing a weighted backpack. Just my 2 cents. Have fun!

Azdak

This really simple. Incline increases workload, increased workload increases aerobic intensity (oxygen uptake), increased aerobic intensity means more calories burned.

That's it. Established scientific fact. No debate. Easy to calculate with good accuracy. (On a treadmill with consistent workloads)

To give you an idea of the difference. Compared to walking on level ground:

3.0 mph/4% incline: increases calorie burn by 50%
3.0 mph/6% incline: increases calorie burn by 75%
3.0 mph/8% incline: increases calorie burn by 100%
3.0 mph/10% incline: increases calorie burn by 125%

You get the idea.

jvehock

I agree with those stating the difference can be significant. Here is an example you can use for comparison ... I weigh 145 and walked 30 minutes at 3.0mph with a 6.0% incline and burned 253 calories according to my treadmill. The MFP exercise db claims I should only burn 109 calories using the same age, time, and speed but no incline.

Jruzer

I use this calculator, which seems reasonable for me. I started walking at a 15% incline when I was training for a backpacking trip a few years ago.

http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/walking-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx

L_Master

Azdak wrote: »

This really simple. Incline increases workload, increased workload increases aerobic intensity (oxygen uptake), increased aerobic intensity means more calories burned.

That's it. Established scientific fact. No debate. Easy to calculate with good accuracy. (On a treadmill with consistent workloads)

To give you an idea of the difference. Compared to walking on level ground:

3.0 mph/4% incline: increases calorie burn by 50%
3.0 mph/6% incline: increases calorie burn by 75%
3.0 mph/8% incline: increases calorie burn by 100%
3.0 mph/10% incline: increases calorie burn by 125%

You get the idea.

@Azdak - Whats annoying is that nowhere can I find good values for downhill. All kinds of good stuff about uphill energy cost, but little about downhill. I've found one where they look at cost of running and walking, but it focused on extreme grades of -10% or more, but nothing clear for a caloric perspective.

I've got a guess but it would be cool to see exact figures for say a steady 10% up 3 miles and 10% down for 3 miles.

robertw486

@L_Master

Most of the stuff I've looked into seems to indicate that downhill creates a lot wider range of motion variables than uphill. For that reason, energy consumption ranges are quite a bit wider. The below link should have charts for both walking and running.

jap.physiology.org/content/93/3/1039

L_Master wrote: »

No, you didn't. Unless you weigh like 80lbs. Assuming something like 130lbs you're burning at least 140 calories going a mile up 7.6% grade.

This is where the details matter. Net vs gross and such toss things way off, as well as what standards people are accepting for level ground calorie burn. The accepted I've seen for walking seem in line with what @Azdak posted, but running changes things some.

cheriesanta

If you go to the gym, the treadmill will tell you cal/hour with the incline. YOu can manually enter the amount depending on time in the MFP. If your home one doesn't have it, go to a gym for a day (get a preview pass) and do a workout and write down the info. My gym has treadmills that ask weight, age etc. I think the calories are a bit exaggerated, but like you, I do not eat my exercise calories (though sometimes I drink them!)