calorie difference???

shellsy0424

Just wondering if anyone else is noticing that the calories that is says you burn doing a certain cardio exercise on MPP is quite different frrom what the machine at the gym says??? Just wondering because I am finding it quite off for some things and others it is pretty close. I went on the eliptical trainer today for 15 minutes and MFP said I burned about 224 calories, but the machine said I burned 126. I went on the treadmill and walked at 3.5 so I thought that one would be accurate because it showed what speed I was walking but it was not jiving with what the log says on here either. Which one is more accurate???

alexveksler

I do quite a bit of elliptical training 5 days per week. I am using Precor model. I noticed that if you select custom settings you would be pretty close.

My settings:
Duration: 60 min
Resistance level 17
Incline level 17
Weight entered: 220
Exercise setting: 6
Cals per minute: 14.5
Steps per minute: 95
Total distance: 5.2(miles?)

Upon completion it shows I burned 840 calories. My settings here showing I should burn 880. Bottom line, pretty close.

megsmom2

MFP's numbers are always a lot higher than the ones on the machine I use at the gym. They really seem too high to me, so I log the ones on the machine.

esphixiet

I think a lot of people use heart monitors so they can more-accurately track actual calories burned. I wish I had the cash for one myself.

beckylawrence70

I'd go with the machine on that one, 226? I doubt it, you really need a HRM.

Chipmaniac

Just wondering if anyone else is noticing that the calories that is says you burn doing a certain cardio exercise on MPP is quite different frrom what the machine at the gym says??? Just wondering because I am finding it quite off for some things and others it is pretty close. I went on the eliptical trainer today for 15 minutes and MFP said I burned about 224 calories, but the machine said I burned 126. I went on the treadmill and walked at 3.5 so I thought that one would be accurate because it showed what speed I was walking but it was not jiving with what the log says on here either. Which one is more accurate???

Always enter in your weight on cardio machines at the gym. If you don't it assumes an average weight like 150, which can cause a calorie calculation that is off plus or minus depending on your weight. Some machines will specifically ask for your weight but sometimes it has to be manually entered, for example Precor treadmills. I've thought about doing a separate post about the ins and outs of various calorie estimations but haven't gotten around to it.

Just to confirm your observation, I always find the MFP estimates to be overstated compared to the machines, thus I use the machine readouts instead.

glittermouse

I keep hearing that HRM is the way to go.

Tami113

I know they can be expensive for anyone on a budget, trust me as a newly wed college student i know. But i was and still serious about weight loss so hubby and i decided that a HRM for my birthday was a good idea. I bought the polar ft4 on amazon for $65. It has been an amazing addition to my weight loss journey.

Bottom line there will always be descrepencies. I still underestimate calories burned by 20-75 dependinb on the exercise and how hard i think i worked. Polar has the best ratings for accuracy.

I would go with whatever says the least amount of calories burned, whether it is the machin or MFP.

Chipmaniac

I'd go with the machine on that one, 226? I doubt it, you really need a HRM.

Most of the time, the machine is going to be more accurate, assuming you enter your weight, then your heart rate monitor. The machine knows precisely how much energy it takes to do the work it's experiencing. Your HRM is a broad estimate based on your heart rate. A fit person's heart rate will be lower for the same energy expenditure due to a stronger heart, lungs and circulatory system.

shellsy0424

thanks everyone, I will go by the machine until I get a HR monitor.

kdeaux1959

the proper procedure is to use the machine estimate... sometimes, this may not be the most accurate either. There are a lot of factors that MFP cannot conside. I do a lot of treadmill walking in my cardio routine... MFP addresses WALKING and has the MPH as a guide.... However there are other factors such as current weight, age, etc to consider... Also the biggest difference is the INCLINE... Of course all these variables cannot be factored in so it is better to use the machine estimate... Even that is just an ESTIMATE because there are other factors as well.. I am sure Heart Rate Monitors properly used would give a more accurate picture still. Too many factors. I have said many times, this is NOT an exact science... I read somewhere where we cannot totally treat weight loss as a "caloric checkbook" because many variables such as metabolism differs from person to person. Also who is to say you ate a 6 oz steak rather thn a 6.5 oz steak at that restaurant last night? I for one don't go around with a cup and scale and measure everything to exact specifications... This site DOES however give us a pretty good estimate as to what we are doing and if we are close, we should be doing ok. It is a WHOLE lot better than leaving everything to chance. :bigsmile:

fitmom_pam1976

I use my HRM....BUT I see that the cals on the HRM are the same as the ones on the machine. The good thing about having the HRM is i do not have to calculate all the cals (Since I do circuit training) it could get difficult. Also for the aerobic classes it is great!!!