Machine vs. MFP

Options
juliee274
juliee274 Posts: 124 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I have found there is a big difference between what my stationary bike says is calories burned and what MFP says. My bike has 10 different programs of varying intensity (all with hills of some level) and, in 30 minutes, I can usually bike approx. 10 miles.

My bike says this workout usually averages around 230 calories; however, MFP says a "moderate" stationary bike workout is 425 calories and a "light" stationary bike workout is 334 calories. 100-200 calories is quite a difference....a SNACK! :smile:

I suppose I should use the bike's reading to be on the safe side, but it does seem low. I don't have a heart rate monitor or fitness tracker (on no plans to purchase) so I don't know another way to gauge how much I am burning.

Any thoughts from anyone else who may have had this issue??

Replies

  • cmeade20
    cmeade20 Posts: 1,238 Member
    Options
    The monitor on machines are notoriously innaccurate, but I've heard MFP is way off too. My suggestion- invest in a heart rate monitor
  • 2hmom
    2hmom Posts: 241 Member
    Options
    Yes,I agree. My hrm is a lot lower,I just don't eat all my exercise calories. I can't figure out how to change the mfp reading for that.
  • vemaddox
    vemaddox Posts: 133 Member
    Options
    I would say stay low only as a precaution...I know my treadmil says something different than MFP. I try to use the lower one only cause i dont want to shoot myself in the foot on calories later
  • thekarens
    thekarens Posts: 254 Member
    Options
    Get a HRM. Can't speak for your equipment, but I know for me MFP is WAAAY off and the machines at the gym are a little off.
  • Flixie00
    Flixie00 Posts: 1,195 Member
    Options
    Yep, as the other posters have said, neither are reliable. If you can use a HRM, get one, but if like me you cannot (blood pressure meds lower my heart rate and give an artificial reading) work on the basis that you burn 200 cals per 30 mins worked using gym machines.
  • Mindmovesbody
    Mindmovesbody Posts: 399 Member
    Options
    If you have no intention of buying a heart rate monitor, I would say your safest bet is to go with the machine. I have a few machines at home and they are really quite accurate. Only off by 10-20 calories usually. MFP is definitely way off. I would err on the side of the machines and eat back at least those calories.
  • Willbenchforcupcakes
    Willbenchforcupcakes Posts: 4,955 Member
    Options
    My personal experience with the stationary bikes is that I burn a lot more than what the bike says, and just a little less than what mfp says. If you have no plans to purchase a hrm, go with the lower number.
  • juliee274
    juliee274 Posts: 124 Member
    Options
    Thanks for the info everyone! Right now, a HRM is out of my budget AND, like the earlier poster, I am currently on HBP meds which I understand can skew a HRM reading anyway. I think I will go with the machine....better to burn more than overeat! :smile:
  • Girlwithnoname77
    Girlwithnoname77 Posts: 108 Member
    Options
    :smooched: I'm so disappointed as I have been blissfully enjoying MFPs inflated calories burned. WAAAAAA

Categories