Calories Burned - Garmin vs. machines

betha418

I am very curious as to people's opinions on whether a fitness tracker is more accurate for calorie burn or the calories stated on cardio machines. I have a Garmin with a heart rate monitor and I always set my watch to "cardio workout" when I begin my workout. Sometimes there is almost a 100 calorie difference or more in my calories burned if I add up what the machines "tell me" vs. my fitness device. I am on a weight-loss plan right now so every calorie burned is important to me. I am losing weight so I know it is not that important, but it could be the difference in whether or not I have more to eat with dinner or a snack, etc.. Please share your thoughts.

stanmann571

They're both inaccurate.

At the end of the day, as long as you are consistent(pick the same wrong answer every time) you'll see consistent results.

Azdak

When it comes to calorie tracking, a 100 calorie difference is essentially the same number.

However that doesn't mean that either one is accurate. The standard dogma in MFP is that if you are eating back, only use 1/2 of any total. That's probably a good strategy.

NorthCascades

I did a test last night and found that my Garmin overestimates my calorie burn when it's going by HR.

spiriteagle99

Does either know what your current weight is? If not, it isn't accurate. My TM thinks I weight 200+ pounds, so gives wildly inflated numbers. My watch knows how many hills I do, but doesn't know my weight, so it isn't all that accurate either. I use MFP's number, although it is a bit low (since it doesn't take into account hills or HR) since I'd rather undercount than overcount.