Biking gives me too many calories I think.

fbuschur

OK - I have started riding my bike to work, which is just over 11 miles, so 22 miles round trip. My average pace is about 13-14 MPH, but if I log it as that MFP gives me a ridiculous amount of calories back. I just don't believe that I am burning that much.

For example, today I rode 95 minutes and MFP says that I burned 898 calories. I just don't feel like I have expended that much effort. I switched today to logging it as leisure cycling under 10 mph, for which MFP gives me 440.

I am wondering if the difference is in the bike? I ride a new Trek road bike, not top of the line but nice and fast and light with the thin road tires. Are the listings in the exercise log for a mountain bike? Has anyone else wondered about this?

I've been in a nasty plateau and am wondering if I should be eating my exercise calories back, so I may put my heart rate monitor on and try that a time or two (although that too seems to be sorta generous) but I thought I would put the question out there in the meantime! I would be grateful for any (kind) responses and advice.

Flyntiggr

If you have a HRM, why aren't you using it? The calories burned listed in MFP are kinda all over the map depending on the exercise. That being said, 1.25 hours of mountain biking for me yielded over 1100 calories burned...

subzerolv

The calories MFP calculates is way over estimated. I would rely on a good HRM, or a smart phone app that uses gps. I like mapmyride, or Strava.

JayAlexander

you could change you activity level and not log the biking as exercise

agthorn

Good rule of thumb is to measure biking by miles instead of time (because intensities, terrain, etc varies). Most people on the average bike (read - not a super efficient, super light road bike) will burn about 40 calories per mile biked. So 22 miles round-trip would work out to about 880 calories - which is not that far off from your estimate. If you rode 22 miles in 95 minutes, that really does calculate out to about 14.5mph.

CountryDevil

The calories MFP calculates is way over estimated. I would rely on a good HRM, or a smart phone app that uses gps. I like mapmyride, or Strava.

^^^ This

But keep in mind, that some people do actually burn more calories than others. My last ride was just shy or 2 hours and I burned 2062 calories. This was using a Bluetooth HRM that was linked up to my phone and all data collected by SportsTrackLive. My heart rate is used in the calculations as well.

Terrain, elevation, speed and other factors all play a role in the amount of calories you burn.

http://www.sportstracklive.com/track/detail/CountryDevil/Cycling/326390

zornig

you could change you activity level and not log the biking as exercise

I agree with this completely. Rather than logging your exercise, if you know you're riding 5 x per week, then you should multiply your BMR by 1.55. That is your maintenance level of calories. To lose weight, reduce that by 25-30%. And then every 4th day or so, eat closer to your maintenance level (maybe at only a 10% deficit). I guarantee that will get you out of a plateau.

fbuschur

Flynntiggr- I don't have a great answer for your question other than that with 3 kids under 7, I am lucky to leave my house ALMOST on time with my shoes on, not to mention things like a Heart Rate Monitor. I need to locate it.

agthorn - stupid question, but can I log miles rather than "time" on MFP? It just seems to give me the otion for time not distance (sorry I am a newbie - I am sure that is a stupid question)

I only go into the office twice a week(and often run out of time and have to drive - sigh) so I don't want to do a sweeping activity change.

fbuschur

unfortunately, no smartphone, no gps... not in the budget at the moment.

CountryDevil

unfortunately, no smartphone, no gps... not in the budget at the moment.

But even a good HRM will do just fine and give you a more accurate calorie count.

fbuschur

I haven't used my HRM for a while (about 6 months) but at the time I felt like the calorie count was fairly inflated for it to, like 20-30% I'd estimate. Maybe I am just paranoid, or maybe I shouldn't have bought a $30 HRM on amazon.

agthorn

agthorn - stupid question, but can I log miles rather than "time" on MFP? It just seems to give me the otion for time not distance (sorry I am a newbie - I am sure that is a stupid question)

Sorry (not a stupid question). You do have to log time on MFP, but you can change the number of calories it gives you manually. So you can enter your actual time, but then enter the number of calories based on your mileage (miles x 40).

Garrett1234

I use SportyPal on my phone to measure my bike rides, and it comes up with pretty similar results to Myfitnesspal. It takes time and speed and my weight into account.

chazspk

Good rule of thumb is to measure biking by miles instead of time (because intensities, terrain, etc varies). Most people on the average bike (read - not a super efficient, super light road bike) will burn about 40 calories per mile biked. So 22 miles round-trip would work out to about 880 calories - which is not that far off from your estimate. If you rode 22 miles in 95 minutes, that really does calculate out to about 14.5mph.

Agree i think your 880 is about right... only eat have back maybe and see...:ohwell:

Nikkie_too

I haven't used my HRM for a while (about 6 months) but at the time I felt like the calorie count was fairly inflated for it to, like 20-30% I'd estimate. Maybe I am just paranoid, or maybe I shouldn't have bought a $30 HRM on amazon.

We might have the same inexpensive HRM... mine seems terribly generous too. It gave me 440 calories for a 3.3 mph, 20 min walk. I'm pretty heavy but.... really...

fbuschur

I bet we do, Monique. I like it, I just don't believe what it tells me, when it comes to calories, and it sorta makes a lot of noise. I usually only use it at spin.