Measuring calories burned

trekkiebeth

When I lived in a condo that had a gym, I would use the calories burned that the machine told me because I was able to enter my weight. I usually burned the same or slightly more than what MFP estimated. Now I just have my much cheaper exercise bike. It doesn't take my weight into account, and it's saying I'm burning about 30 calories less than what MFP estimates. The bike is kind of old and for a while I thought the display didn't even work but it was actually that the batteries had leaked acid. Since MFP takes my weight into account, should I go with its estimate for calories burned? Or should I stick to what the bike says?

erickirb

In the absence of a HRM I would always go with the lowest caloric burn.

agartin

Does the bike have a HRM? Can you get your avg heart rate from it?
If so, you can double check with this calculator. http://www.braydenwm.com/calburn.htm

Of course, it won't be completely accurate but you will have a better idea. Otherwise, if it were me, I would go with the lower calorie count since MFP and my machine always seem to be slightly higher counts than my HRM.


This is exactly why I purchased a $40 HRM with a chest strap.

tuckers08

You should use the MFP calorie counter because people of different weights burn different calorie amounts.

trekkiebeth

I can't afford a HRM.