Estimating calorie burn

RUNucbar

I have an app telling me my calorie burn but how far can I trust it?

The app in question is WAHOOfitness and I have told it my age, height and weight. I then synced it to. Chest-strap heart rate monitor and off I went. because it knows my BMI, age and what my heart is doing, can I trust what it is telling me in terms of calorie burn or should I take the results with a pinch of salt? If so, how much leeway should I give it? (there was no option for body fat percentage which I know is a bit better than BMI but that is the setup option it gave me.)

TavistockToad

give an example of what you're doing and the calorie burn its giving...

RUNucbar

I jogged on a treadmill for 56 minutes and 4 seconds, burning 642 calories. I am 140lbs and 5 foot 2. I was only going a little faster than walking speed really (6km/h) so it just seems too high.

TavistockToad

Running calories can be worked out using the following formula:

Weight in lbs x 0.63 x distance in miles

RUNucbar

TavistockToad wrote: »

Running calories can be worked out using the following formula:

Weight in lbs x 0.63 x distance in miles

Ahhhhh I didn't take note of the distance! I shall next time! Is there a formula for other things like cycling or rowing?

sijomial

Heart rate isn't really that good for calorie estimations unless you happen to have an average, or close to average, exercise heart rate.
If you are unfit or just happen to have a high HR when exercising it can exaggerate terribly.
It can be improved if you can calibrate your settings according to your actual Max HR or VO2 max for example.

The example you gave does seem very high for a not heavy person covering a short distance. The formula that TT gave you will give you a better idea.

marrrisa

In my personal opinion.. I would think it too high. Just based on the fact that on average, you burn about 100 calories per mile (rough estimate, obviously it can range from 70-150+ depending on body type)

I have a chest strap heart rate monitor, and it will take me about 1hr 20mins of heavy weight lifting to reach that kind of calorie burn, but I am 5'2 and 115, so I also wouldn't burn calories as quickly as you!

So I'd say use it as a guide, but take it with a grain of salt (I usually try to estimate that I burned within 70-100 calories of what my monitor is telling me)

sijomial

marrrisa wrote: »

In my personal opinion.. I would think it too high. Just based on the fact that on average, you burn about 100 calories per mile (rough estimate, obviously it can range from 70-150+ depending on body type)

I have a chest strap heart rate monitor, and it will take me about 1hr 20mins of heavy weight lifting to reach that kind of calorie burn, but I am 5'2 and 115, so I also wouldn't burn calories as quickly as you!

So I'd say use it as a guide, but take it with a grain of salt (I usually try to estimate that I burned within 70-100 calories of what my monitor is telling me)

@marrrisa
The bold is an example of a misuse of tools!
You can't use HR for estimating calorie burn for heavy lifting - the calorie burn doesn't relate to your HR during lifting, it's not an aerobic exercise.

sijomial

emmaling142 wrote: »

TavistockToad wrote: »

Running calories can be worked out using the following formula:

Weight in lbs x 0.63 x distance in miles

Ahhhhh I didn't take note of the distance! I shall next time! Is there a formula for other things like cycling or rowing?

Rowing - Concept2 has a calorie estimator on their website.
Cycling would be best to use power output (commonly watts) to base your calorie burn on.

marrrisa

sijomial wrote: »

marrrisa wrote: »

In my personal opinion.. I would think it too high. Just based on the fact that on average, you burn about 100 calories per mile (rough estimate, obviously it can range from 70-150+ depending on body type)

I have a chest strap heart rate monitor, and it will take me about 1hr 20mins of heavy weight lifting to reach that kind of calorie burn, but I am 5'2 and 115, so I also wouldn't burn calories as quickly as you!

So I'd say use it as a guide, but take it with a grain of salt (I usually try to estimate that I burned within 70-100 calories of what my monitor is telling me)

@marrrisa
The bold is an example of a misuse of tools!
You can't use HR for estimating calorie burn for heavy lifting - the calorie burn doesn't relate to your HR during lifting, it's not an aerobic exercise.

No, I agree, that's why I just try to use it as a guide! My heart really gets pounding when I'm doing supersets. I use my heart rate monitor for actually checking my heart rate (you know, making sure I'm working hard!) I don't care much about the calorie burn, so that's why I'm not too set on the exact number for it.

nutmegoreo

emmaling142 wrote: »

TavistockToad wrote: »

Running calories can be worked out using the following formula:

Weight in lbs x 0.63 x distance in miles

Ahhhhh I didn't take note of the distance! I shall next time! Is there a formula for other things like cycling or rowing?

If you were going 6km/hr for the whole 56 minutes, then you were just under 6K for distance.

RUNucbar

nutmegoreo wrote: »

emmaling142 wrote: »

TavistockToad wrote: »

Running calories can be worked out using the following formula:

Weight in lbs x 0.63 x distance in miles

Ahhhhh I didn't take note of the distance! I shall next time! Is there a formula for other things like cycling or rowing?

If you were going 6km/hr for the whole 56 minutes, then you were just under 6K for distance.

I was up and down a bit, dropped a little to get my breath back then sped up again a few times sp its probably not as far. But I shall remember for next time to actually look at it

DevilsFan1

Cycling at 16-20 mph is about 40 cal/mile. Walking is around 0.61 X distance in miles X weight in lbs. Walking up to 4 mph is about half that.

Assuming 5 miles of jogging, at 140lbs you burned about 430 calories.

DevilsFan1

Sorry, I just saw your speed (6 km/h). That's just under 300 calories.