How Many Calories do you burn??
Replies
-
So somebody who knows more about physiology explain this to me. If Josee, Victoria and I are all running 10 miles at an 8mm why do they burn more calories? Because they are younger? I would think I would have a higher burn because I am heavier. What am I missing here?
[/quote]
I am pretty sure that HR plays a part of this. I also think that even when wearing the HRM it is still an estimate.
[/quote]
There are many reasons why one runner is more efficient than another - accuracy of reporting, age, level of conditioning, altitude, terrain, topography, body mass, weather, and nutrition just off the top of my head.
If you have good data (or even consistent data) you can see how calorie counts vary over the course of a single run. These are my Garmin 620 calorie expenditures* - 81, 111, 120, 118, 109. The pace for the 81 calorie mile was 10:30 while the other miles were 1015, 1013, 1014, and 1027. Overall, I burned 539 calories at an average pace of 10:20
Seven days ago I ran the exact same route with an average pace of 1024 but needed 604 calories (12% more) and my calorie estimates were 112, 127, 130, 122, and 113.
Same person, same route, same weather, etc., etc. and there's a 12% variance extrapolate that out to another person running and it's only expected that calorie counts could be very different or could be very similar.
" I also think that even when wearing the HRM it is still an estimate."
Yes, they're all estimates. The data from my 620 is, as best I can tell, ±10% accurate and, with $80 of software and a tweak to the 620, 610, or 910, you can get to about 5%±. Regardless, they're all estimates - the best indicator is when you step on the scale.0 -
I didn't read the whole thread, so I am sorry if this has already been covered, but this article explains it all perfectly for me:
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2010/11/how-calorie-measurement-works-on-garmin.html
Comparing heart rates is a completely pointless exercise. We all have very individual max heart rates. Generally, it takes about 75 minutes for me to burn 1000 calories. Less, if I am hitting it hard. But in the end, this going to such an individualistic measurement that just doesn't mean anything from person to person.0 -
It would take me 12 miles to burn 1000 calories. It doesn't even matter how fast I go really or slow. I average around 85 calories a mile usually. I used to burn so much more per mile. I am 32 years old, 5'10" 137 lbs.0
-
I didn't read the whole thread, so I am sorry if this has already been covered, but this article explains it all perfectly for me:
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2010/11/how-calorie-measurement-works-on-garmin.html
Comparing heart rates is a completely pointless exercise. We all have very individual max heart rates. Generally, it takes about 75 minutes for me to burn 1000 calories. Less, if I am hitting it hard. But in the end, this going to such an individualistic measurement that just doesn't mean anything from person to person.
Thank you for citing rainmaker.
He discusses the FirstBeat white papers (they get deep, quickly) and my statement of 5% is wrong - per the text that Rainmaker highlights, even with FirstBeat Athlete, it's 7 to 10% ± inaccurate. I have over a year of FBA data though I've never done an historical comparison of Garmin values vs FBA values. My impression is that they usually vary by about 5%. Yesterday's 8.3 mile LR was 1058 from the Garmin and 1108 from FBA.
The total calories burned is not all that important to me (even though I use FBA over Garmin…go figure) but there is more valuable data in FBA than just a more accurate calorie estimate.0 -
33 yo, 6'1", 200 lbs.
I did an easy 7 miles last Friday. 10 minute miles. Average HR of 139. 1,085 calories burned including a 10 minutes total of walking during warm up and cool down.
The Saturday before that I did 7 miles at about a 10:45 pace. Average HR of 131. 1,026 calories burned.
So I guess it's somewhere around 7 miles for me.0 -
The only time I burned more than a 1000 calories was when I got lost while hiking, and what was supposed to be 5 miles turned into 16! (And I had a heavy load on my back, which accounted for all the extra calorie burn).
If if makes you feel better, I ran a half-marathon and did not burn 1000. I burned about 900. I'd probably have to hit mile 15 to burn 1000. (I am very short, and only weigh 104 lbs. I burn NOTHING, LOL!)0 -
I'm 5'5" and weigh between 120 - 126 generally - and for me, I burn about 65 calories a mile, running between 7.00 pace and 8.30 pace. The pace doesn't seem to make any difference. It sucks.
The Half marathon I did recently, while wearing my 310xt with hrm, said 820 calories. Average HR 165, max 180. Pace 7.24. I can tell you I ate WAY over that amount for dinner the night before.....
Now I really am depressed!0 -
I kind of feel like a giant.
32 F/ 174-179 pounds / 5'11"
My average heart rate on my long runs is between 140-150, my racing average HR for my HM pace is between 155-160. If I get up to 165 I can't last for much more than 2 or 3 minutes at that rate. My resting HR is between 56-59 bpm.
To burn 1,000 calories I would need to run on average 9 miles at roughly a 10:30 pace which is my marathon training pace.0 -
I burn somewhere around 110 calories per mile according to my fitbit and my pace is usually around a 10-11 minute mile. I'm 168ish right now and 310
-
I use this formula: http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning?page=single
I'm about 140 lbs, so I burn about 88 Cals/mile and would need to run 11.34 miles (usually at a 9:30-9:45 pace) to burn 1,000 Cals. Too bad running that long makes me want to eat double that amount :laugh:0 -
65 minutes, 7 miles, 9:15 avg pace = 907 cal. I am 53 yrs, 5'8 and 165 lbs.
Per garmin.0 -
6 miles gets me 1,000 calories
Age 69; pace 11:15; 6'1" 205 pounds.0 -
it seems to be around 10 miles for 1000 calories. 140 lbs female.0
-
Yet another set of data.
Same person, same distance. Humidity higher, course as flat as it can be, and a "gentle" breeze. However, I am very low on sleep and have been running about a 25% calorie deficit for three days (not by design).
Pace/Cals/BPM (by mile)
1 - 10:23/120/146
2 - 10:58/142/160
3 - 10:17/136/165
4 - 10:32/143/168
5 - 10:29/146/1720
