MFP calories for exercise accuracy
jamesha100
Posts: 214 Member
Hi,
The amount of calories that MFP reckons are burnt cycling seems a bit on the high side to me - e.g. 450 for 30 minutes mountain biking. I reckon 200 would be more accurate (although obviously it depends on effort expended, pace etc.).
I went out today and did a reasonably strenuous 90 minutes including 340 metres of climbing but cannot really believe that I burnt more than 1000. I recorded it as 30 minutes and 450 calories.
What do you guys think? - is the only way to get a reasonably accurate measure to get a heart rate monitor?
The amount of calories that MFP reckons are burnt cycling seems a bit on the high side to me - e.g. 450 for 30 minutes mountain biking. I reckon 200 would be more accurate (although obviously it depends on effort expended, pace etc.).
I went out today and did a reasonably strenuous 90 minutes including 340 metres of climbing but cannot really believe that I burnt more than 1000. I recorded it as 30 minutes and 450 calories.
What do you guys think? - is the only way to get a reasonably accurate measure to get a heart rate monitor?
0
Replies
-
Yes MFP does get a little over excited where it comes to calories! I use the data from the Strava app as it's less although the only way to be accurate is to get a monitor. I guess then you can also keep in the fat burning zone too.0
-
they're bollocks frankly - according to my (newleaf calibrated) Garmin 800 coupled with a power meter, they're something like double the actual burn... todays ride for example came out on the HRM as 1142kcals - MFP guessed at over 2200!0
