Do you use calories burned on the gym machine or on mfp?

Options
IsleEsme
IsleEsme Posts: 175 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
For cardio I prefer the ellipitical machine at the gym. Normally when I get on it I press "quick start" and go. I've been logging it into mfp and for instance today mfp said I burned 446 calories in 35 minutes. Today at the gym I took the time to enter my weight and time and I was suprised at the end of 35 minutes it said I burned 291 calories, not 446 that mfp says. In that 35 minutes I went almost 4 miles at a level 7, that's a decent pace. So do I log 291 calories burned or 446? I'm concerned because I hope that mfp isn't also inflating the calories burned when I log in other cardio like walking outside or running on our local school track.

I want to keep it honest. I've been doing great about logging in every calorie so I really want my cardio to be acurate as well. Advice?
«1

Replies

  • LeenaRuns
    LeenaRuns Posts: 1,309 Member
    Options
    I tend to go with whatever is lower, just to be safe.
  • gatecityradio
    gatecityradio Posts: 401
    Options
    I usually go with the machine because it's physically there. MFP is usually just a wild guess it seems.
  • hounds726
    hounds726 Posts: 63
    Options
    Honestly, I would invest in a heart rate monitor! It is the best way to know! I find that both the machines and MFP are off considerably. If you would rather not spend the 50-60 dollars, do with the lower amount to be safe :) Happy logging!
  • misscristie
    misscristie Posts: 643 Member
    Options
    Get a heart rate monitor if you can. I find that MFP either grossly inflates or deflates my calories burned for activities. It's never even close. The machines are close, but they're picking my heartrate from my HRM.
  • SueMizZou
    SueMizZou Posts: 146 Member
    Options
    I use the machine calories. MFP seems very high. I'd rather not overeat so I go with the lower number.
  • ARDuBaie
    ARDuBaie Posts: 379 Member
    Options
    If you want a really accurate read of how many calories you are burning, you need to get a heart rate monitor (HRM). I have the same problem because I use a treadmill at home and a LifeFitness treadmill at the gym and they both give me different readings. But the LifeFitness takes into account my weight and the my home one does not. MFP comes out close to my home treadmill. I do believe that when weight is taken into consideration, it is the more accurate one, but to really know what you are burning you need a HRM.
  • staceyseeger
    staceyseeger Posts: 783 Member
    Options
    Get a heart rate monitor if you can. I find that MFP either grossly inflates or deflates my calories burned for activities. It's never even close. The machines are close, but they're picking my heartrate from my HRM.

    ^^^ I agree^^^
  • Cal28
    Cal28 Posts: 514 Member
    Options
    The most accurate way is a HRM. Polar FT4 is widely liked and not too expensive. Otherwise go with whatever is lowest... especially if you're eating the cals back

    I slogged my *kitten* of at RPM/Spinning class for 50 mins today, left soaking wet and had only burned 513kcal on my HRM (just for an idea, but everyone is different which is why your own HRM would be best) xx
  • kristineevans
    kristineevans Posts: 56 Member
    Options
    Mfp tells me that I burn on a 2 hour walk 100 cals more than my heart rate monitor so I would def go with the lowest as even Mfp can read a little high!
  • KarenJanine
    KarenJanine Posts: 3,497 Member
    Options
    I previously tended to think the machines would be more acurate and so was using those figures, but when I got my HRM I discovered the MFP figures were actually a bit closer.

    MFP gives calorie approximations based on gender / height / weight / age etc. whereas the gym machine will just give a number based on an average person, rather than an average person of your age / weight etc.
  • IsleEsme
    IsleEsme Posts: 175 Member
    Options
    Thanks for the advice about he HRM! I'll be investing in one asap! Polar FT4 is the only one mentioned. Anyone else have brands they like?

    Loving this forum :)
  • mazasmusings
    mazasmusings Posts: 74 Member
    Options
    I can't justify the expense of a heart rate monitor, so I usually go with the lower.
  • Strive2BLean
    Strive2BLean Posts: 300 Member
    Options
    Sorry to tell you but I have found both MFP and the gym machines wrong on calorie amounts burned. (They are both inflated). I learned this after purchasing my Polar FT4 heart rate monitor. Now whenever I workout I wear the monitor for a true calories burned. It's worth the investment to purchase one.
  • didianadop
    didianadop Posts: 4
    Options
    I have an exercise plan and just do that. It doesn't matter how many calories it burns.
  • mtaylor1980
    mtaylor1980 Posts: 135 Member
    Options
    I agree with everyone about the HRM. I still have not bought one myself, but it is on the top of my wishlist!!!! In the meantime, I would go with what your machine says, since you put in your stats and all. MFP has been known to over estimate! The 200 something sounds about accurate for the level and time that you did on the elliptical.
  • munchlaxx
    munchlaxx Posts: 102 Member
    Options
    I check my pulse, mentally log it and enter all necessary info here when I get home: http://www.braydenwm.com/calburn.htm

    It's a minor annoyance, since it is an extra step...but at the moment I can't invest in a HRM. :blushing:

    I've already gotten used to the average I burn for 60 mins of Spinning or 4.0 walking...so I can log those in without the extra step. :tongue:
  • TrishaGuy
    TrishaGuy Posts: 63
    Options
    I agree the HRM is the best way to go although on somethings my HRM and MFP are pretty close. If you don't use a HRM go with the lower numbers. I also use Nike+ on my phone for walking and running (it is pretty close to the HRM) so if you can get that app on your phone it is helpful. Good luck and just remember no matter what the numbers say if you are moving you are burning ....keep up the good work :)
  • jdavis193
    jdavis193 Posts: 972 Member
    Options
    For cardio I prefer the ellipitical machine at the gym. Normally when I get on it I press "quick start" and go. I've been logging it into mfp and for instance today mfp said I burned 446 calories in 35 minutes. Today at the gym I took the time to enter my weight and time and I was suprised at the end of 35 minutes it said I burned 291 calories, not 446 that mfp says. In that 35 minutes I went almost 4 miles at a level 7, that's a decent pace. So do I log 291 calories burned or 446? I'm concerned because I hope that mfp isn't also inflating the calories burned when I log in other cardio like walking outside or running on our local school track.

    I want to keep it honest. I've been doing great about logging in every calorie so I really want my cardio to be acurate as well. Advice?


    NOt all of the machines are accurate. I have a HRM. I did the elliptical for 30 mintes yesterday at a 7 intensity and incline was at a 7 and 10 and I burned 342 cals.
  • annieu613
    annieu613 Posts: 143 Member
    Options
    I use my own HRM. I find that both the machines and MFP greatly overestimate how many calories I'm burning.
  • LCFulmer
    LCFulmer Posts: 183 Member
    Options
    I wear my heart rate monitor whenever I'm working out... even when lifting weights. That's the best way captured calories burned.

Categories