Holy overestimate batman!

Options
mleoni092708
mleoni092708 Posts: 629 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
So I got my HRM - polar FT7 - and was very curious to see the calorie burn on the elliptical vs the HRM....

40 minutes, inputting my weight and age in the elliptical
Per elliptical 470 calories burned
Per HRM 315 calories burned

I cannot believe the difference. This whole time I've been counting the 470, it's a miracle I've been losing 2 lbs per week!

Replies

  • shesblossoming
    shesblossoming Posts: 426
    Options
    For thirty minutes, the elliptical was saying 150 after 30 minutes. MFP was saying 900... WTF? HRM said 350. A sigh of relief.
  • melbaby925
    melbaby925 Posts: 613
    Options
    Oooo - that is a big difference! I've read on several different sites that the exercise companies get to say "Burn 1000 in an hour!" because they are optimistic about how much calories we're really burning.

    I got a bodybugg and went through the same kind of thing. It's an eye-opener! At least you figured it out before you started gaining weight and couldn't figure out why.
  • vim_n_vigor
    vim_n_vigor Posts: 4,089 Member
    Options
    All of these are just estimates and have to make assumptions, even the HRM is making assumptions and isn't 100% accurate.
  • juli3b2011
    juli3b2011 Posts: 77 Member
    Options
    I have the same HRM...found out my mfp activity estimates were way overstated, too. I was eating my exercise calories, and in turn was eating way too much. I'm losing now that I'm using the HRM numbers.
  • sjtreely
    sjtreely Posts: 1,014 Member
    Options
    Yep. My experience MFP is just Santa Claus in disguise ... just passing out those calories burned free and easy. My HRM??? Not so much ... it's the Grinch. Live and learn.
  • maura5880
    maura5880 Posts: 346 Member
    Options
    That's funny, my HRM usually says WAY higher than the machine.
  • sjtreely
    sjtreely Posts: 1,014 Member
    Options
    All of these are just estimates and have to make assumptions, even the HRM is making assumptions and isn't 100% accurate.

    True. But if I'm gonna estimate, I'd rather have my estimations lower.
  • Papa_Swearingen
    Papa_Swearingen Posts: 139 Member
    Options
    I always wondered about that too, whether or not the elliptical estimate is right. After lots of research and calculating I found the elliptical to be more accurate than MFP. Its all relative.
  • Jeff92se
    Jeff92se Posts: 3,369 Member
    Options
    For thirty minutes, the elliptical was saying 150 after 30 minutes. MFP was saying 900... WTF? HRM said 350. A sigh of relief.

    Probably depends on how hard you are working but 900 calories at 30 min is darned near impossible unless you are doing a double insanity workout
  • tinacrane
    tinacrane Posts: 134 Member
    Options
    Yeah, I am always on the low end of calories input- but some of my mfp friends are burning like 1000 calories for walking or 900 calories for 40 minutes of a cardio dvd. I just wonder about those numbers...I do have a bowflex treadclimber and can burn like 400 calories in 30 minutes supposedly. Maybe I need a HRM, too. I am just not that familiar with them and their use.
  • mleoni092708
    mleoni092708 Posts: 629 Member
    Options
    MFP is even higher than the machine so I was going with the machine number. So that's like me overestimating my burned calories by 620 per week and I was eating those back because I thought I burned them! I know this whole exercise thing is estimates-just shocked by the difference. I'm going with the HRM number and see what happens over the next few weeks. I've been losing about 2 lbs per week and most days I net my correct calories or go over. I'm stumped on that one.
  • jmruef
    jmruef Posts: 824 Member
    Options
    Heh - every time I see a thread like this it makes me a little wary of getting a HRM! :laugh: I mean, I'm curious, but I've lost my weight using MFP's estimates of calorie burns, my elliptical's estimate, AND I've eaten back my calories. Weirdness... :laugh:
  • agthorn
    agthorn Posts: 1,844 Member
    Options
    For thirty minutes, the elliptical was saying 150 after 30 minutes. MFP was saying 900... WTF? HRM said 350. A sigh of relief.

    Are you sure you entered it correctly? I just looked in the database and it told me 264 for 30 minutes. (If I change my weight to 441 lbs, THEN it tells me 900 calories for 30 minutes...)
  • kellyisloved
    kellyisloved Posts: 441 Member
    Options
    Because I'm always a little nervous that this is the case, I always adjust the calories burned to some lower amount. Someone else had recommended assuming about 75% on a regular basis, and I've always cut it myself, although not that specifically. My bike and mfp might both say around 300 burned, but I won't enter any more than 225 just to be safe. I'd rather undercut it than overestimate and find out I'm not doing as well as I thought. I might still be overdoing it, but I also don't allow myself to eat back all of my burned calories, so I have a little cushion there as well.

    Everyone is different, though. If it works, it works!
  • Kilter
    Kilter Posts: 188 Member
    Options
    My Garmin HRM is substantially lower in calories than MFP which makes me sad. What used to be a 1000 calorie bike ride or run / hour burn is now back in the 800 range.

    I do find that running HARD (for me) on the treadmill my calorie burn is similar on the HRM and the Treadmill, but at lower intensities the treadmill estimates higher.

    S
  • ArroganceInStep
    ArroganceInStep Posts: 6,239 Member
    Options
    Yeah, I am always on the low end of calories input- but some of my mfp friends are burning like 1000 calories for walking or 900 calories for 40 minutes of a cardio dvd. I just wonder about those numbers...I do have a bowflex treadclimber and can burn like 400 calories in 30 minutes supposedly. Maybe I need a HRM, too. I am just not that familiar with them and their use.

    Weight plays into it. I way just under 300, I can burn more calories per hour walking than someone jogging who's 105.
  • Jeff92se
    Jeff92se Posts: 3,369 Member
    Options
    Yeah, I am always on the low end of calories input- but some of my mfp friends are burning like 1000 calories for walking or 900 calories for 40 minutes of a cardio dvd. I just wonder about those numbers...I do have a bowflex treadclimber and can burn like 400 calories in 30 minutes supposedly. Maybe I need a HRM, too. I am just not that familiar with them and their use.

    Weight plays into it. I way just under 300, I can burn more calories per hour walking than someone jogging who's 105.

    I bet that plays a role too. If the HRM is reading some high heart rate, it must be thinking you're working harder? (buring more calories?) I've wondered about that.
  • sjtreely
    sjtreely Posts: 1,014 Member
    Options
    Heh - every time I see a thread like this it makes me a little wary of getting a HRM! :laugh: I mean, I'm curious, but I've lost my weight using MFP's estimates of calorie burns, my elliptical's estimate, AND I've eaten back my calories. Weirdness... :laugh:

    If it ain't broke .... don't fix it!

Categories