Garmin or MFP more accurate

mittencat77

Wondering if anyone has insight about this. I have mfp and my garmin synced up. But my garmin always says I am burning considerably more the mfp. Wondering what to trust. Thx!

NorthCascades

For what???

koalathebear

Is this for timed activities? If you have it synced properly, MFP should just be taking a direct feed from Garmin Connect so the amounts should be the same. Gym equipment is a different matter - the elliptical at the gym always says I do 80-100 more calories than my Garmin does :P I go with the Garmin ...

mittencat77

koalathebear wrote: »

Is this for timed activities? If you have it synced properly, MFP should just be taking a direct feed from Garmin Connect so the amounts should be the same. Gym equipment is a different matter - the elliptical at the gym always says I do 80-100 more calories than my Garmin does :P I go with the Garmin ...

Timed activity. I have them synced but something is always off...by quite a bit. Garmin always says I burn more then what MFP says.

mittencat77

NorthCascades wrote: »

For what???

Usually my kickboxing circuit but also walking, elliptical, bike....pretty much everything.

Danp

MFP, Garmin, FitBit. All of them are just estimates based on averages based on best guesses, but they're useful as a starting point from which you can hone in on the right numbers for you

Pick one, doesn't matter which and follow it for 4 weeks. Then check your results against the predicted rate of weight loss and depending on how much above or below your prediction the results are adjust accordingly.

NorthCascades

mittencat77 wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

For what???

Usually my kickboxing circuit but also walking, elliptical, bike....pretty much everything.

For walking and cycling, go with the Garmin. I'd think for elliptical too but I don't really know.

heybales

mittencat77 wrote: »

koalathebear wrote: »

Is this for timed activities? If you have it synced properly, MFP should just be taking a direct feed from Garmin Connect so the amounts should be the same. Gym equipment is a different matter - the elliptical at the gym always says I do 80-100 more calories than my Garmin does :P I go with the Garmin ...

Timed activity. I have them synced but something is always off...by quite a bit. Garmin always says I burn more then what MFP says.

In what sense are you comparing - are you like starting an MFP database entry to see what you'd get for that workout and then cancelling it because the Garmin was synced over?

Or you mean you always get positive Garmin Adjustment to your daily calories?

I know you said timed activities, but many are confused by what the sync info is representing it's always good to confirm someone does know.

cheryldumais

Personally I lean to MFP as more accurate but I'm just doing steps.

slbbw

For activities, particularly running, I find the Garmin pretty accurate actually. I also think it is usually less for me than what the MFP data base would say. Occasionally on my long run days it gives me a ton of extra calories, but in general the garmin is at least consistent. Since it logs automatically the convenience is paramount and if my loss was not where it should be I would just manually adjust my calorie limit up or down to match the data

mgodniak2106

I use garmin and its synced with MFP which means all my burned calories get transfered from my garmin to MFP. I think garmin is also more accurate than MFP because it estimates your burned calories based on your heart rate during exercise, while MFP has a generic calories assigned to an exercise.

ketsuban25

mgodniak2106 wrote: »

I use garmin and its synced with MFP which means all my burned calories get transfered from my garmin to MFP. I think garmin is also more accurate than MFP because it estimates your burned calories based on your heart rate during exercise, while MFP has a generic calories assigned to an exercise.

Unfortunately it would seem calculating calories burnt from heart rate alone is not accurate. It can be quite far off. For example, if you have a cold or you're extra stressed about something, those two things wouldn't necessarily = higher calorie burn, but your fitness tracker might interpret it as such while you're exercising.

heybales

Very true - for walking and running especially which have been used in research studies for ages - the calculations for getting calorie burn with mass and pace are easy and accurate.

Those would be better than HR.

Garmin does try to incorporate that - but also uses HR in case hills are involved which throws off impact calculated step distances.

mgodniak2106

I agree with @ketsuban25 and @heybales and really no fitness tracker can give you a 100% accuracy however, I think it's still more accurate than the generic MFP database

mittencat77

Thanks everyone. I appreciate this. I am only 4’11 so MFP gives me 1200 calories a day which can be pretty easily blown....but my garmin always says I can have more so I want to believe it. I will keep tracking and see what happens.

Psychgrrl

At the end of each day, Garmin MyConnect and MFP match. I only add my exercise through my garmin and food through MFP. I have a Vivoactive 3. I always found my Vivoactive 2 overestimated my calorie from from plain 'ol steps (timed exercise was consistent and seemed accurate based on rate of loss and maintenance). However, the Vivoactive 3 gives me far fewer step calories than the Vivoactive 2. The Vivoactive 3 step calories burned matches my calculations by hand when I had the Vivoactive 2 (which seemed correct based on maintenance or rate of loss).

You're being really careful with your "calories out," be sure you're being as diligent with your "calories in." A food scale for all solid foods (including pre-packaged things like frozen dinners, and self-packaged things like eggs) is really recommended for the highest level of accuracy.

yirara

mittencat77 wrote: »

Thanks everyone. I appreciate this. I am only 4’11 so MFP gives me 1200 calories a day which can be pretty easily blown....but my garmin always says I can have more so I want to believe it. I will keep tracking and see what happens.

This might also be because you chose a too big calorie deficit. If you chose a slower weekly goal you will likely get more calories to eat. Great, isn't it?

Lillymoo01

yirara wrote: »

mittencat77 wrote: »

Thanks everyone. I appreciate this. I am only 4’11 so MFP gives me 1200 calories a day which can be pretty easily blown....but my garmin always says I can have more so I want to believe it. I will keep tracking and see what happens.

This might also be because you chose a too big calorie deficit. If you chose a slower weekly goal you will likely get more calories to eat. Great, isn't it?

At 4'11 I doubt a less aggressive goal would make much difference. I am that height and it didn't matter whether I put 2 pounds or 1/2 pound loss a week, I still got that magic 1200 calories.