Is my treadmill wrong?

xshortiex

I walk on my treadmill at 4.0mph for about 50min every day, and my treadmill tells me I burn around 500cals doing that. However, when I log this into MFP, MFP tells me I only burned around 245cals. Is my treadmill wrong?

EDIT: Wow, thanks everyone!
As a college kid, I don't have the money for an HRM at the moment but I'll definitely invest in one.

momtokgo

What the treadmill tells you sounds really really high.

kwin91

I hear that both MFP and treadmills are off by a big percentage. most people who reply to this will say to get an HRM.
I use this site for my calories burned

http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/cbc

xshortiex

@momtokgo: That's what I thought, too, that's why I posted this here.

81Katz

Invest in a heart rate monitor. MFP grossly OVER-estimates calorie burn(s) -- my opinion and I don't think treadmills or other machines are that much more accurate.

I have a Polar FT4 heart rate monitor. Simple to use, works great!

dawson55510

How much do you weight if you dont mind me asking?

Edit- looked at you profile 105lbs your probably buring closer to 250kcal than 500kcal im 230lbs atm and probably would only burn about 400kcal in 50mins

hamiltonba

I read that the treadmill calorie burn is based on a 150 lb person. If you weigh less than that, you will be burning a lot less calories than what the treadmill is giving you. But, to be more accurate, a monitor is necessary.

MorganLeighRN

Your treadmill sounds really high. The one that I run on at the gym says that if I run for 60 minutes at 5.5-6 I burn around 700-750 calories and it pretty much matches MFP. Try walking on another treadmill and see what it says.

ashlinmarie

I walk on my treadmill at 4.0mph for about 50min every day, and my treadmill tells me I burn around 500cals doing that. However, when I log this into MFP, MFP tells me I only burned around 245cals. Is my treadmill wrong?

More likely than not, both are very wrong. If you are concerned with getting a more accurate calorie reading, I would suggest investing in a heart rate monitor with the chest strap. I got my polar ft4 for $80 (have heard of some getting it for closer to $60) and it gives me a more accurate burn. There are other models out there and that is just what I use (I'm not promoting that brand out or anything, just a suggestion), but I would definitely consider investing in one.

But yeah, that 500 is pretty high. I usually burn 600 when I run 50 minutes outside and my burns on a treadmill are always way lower for me (higher on the machine, but lower according to my hrm). Everyone's body burns calories differently.

MinnieInMaine

I would guess that the MFP # is a lot closer to the truth. Put it this way - I'm about 6" taller than you and about 60 pounds heavier (and therefore would burn more) and if I'm lucky I'll burn 400 calories for a 50 minute walk at 4mph.

ModoVincere

I've always heard that walking a mile burns approx. 100 kCals. 50 mins at 4 mph would be about 3.5 miles....so I'd estimate around 350 kCals for that.

BrianSharpe

Sounds like they're both off. What incline do you have your treadmill set at?

xshortiex

Sounds like they're both off. What incline do you have your treadmill set at?

I'm not sure, actually, but it's not that much of an incline. It's not like I'm walking up a hill the whole time.

msmith2020

this might help you. My experience with the Treadmill vs mpf vs HRM

Here is my first day using my HRM and what I burned: This is based on me, my height, my weight, my age and MY consistent heart rate:

355 Calories (sry my photobucket isn't working otherwise I would have photos)


Here is what my treadmill says I burned:

236 calories (again I would have photo's if my photobucket was working)


As you can see its substantially higher. The HRM is a better tool to use when calculating your calories burned. Even doing this activtiy and then using mfp "basic" database to log it, it would have been even lower.

I on the other hand, don't think your treadmill is to high. Last night I walked at 3 mph for about 20 mins, ran 4mph for 30mins and ran 5 mph at 5min. my HRM says I burned 715 calories. I believe it. My treadmill says I burned like 325...

I wouldn't trust your treadmill in the long run, but I do think its more actuate stating you burned 500 than mph saying 200(something) If you are walking at 4mph for 60 min straight you DEFINITELY burned at least 500 calories. Depending on your weight of course..

Hope this helps..

xshortiex

Wow, thanks everyone!
As a college kid, I don't have the money for an HRM at the moment but I'll definitely invest in one.

ladyark

I have the FT4 heart rate monitor with chest strap myself. I just walked on the treadmill at 3.5 mph for 60 minutes and my calorie burn was 422. the treadmill had it counted as 381. Havent input it in MFP yet to see what number that will show but, for me i will go by the number on my HRM

ndbex

I got the chest strap HRM and I go by what it tells me. My resting heart rate is a bit higher than the average person's. I burn about 500 doing 30 mins on the elliptical and since it's telling me my peaks and valleys for my heart rate, I've found it to be very accurate. MFP will say I burned at least half that.

ladyark

I walk on my treadmill at 4.0mph for about 50min every day, and my treadmill tells me I burn around 500cals doing that. However, when I log this into MFP, MFP tells me I only burned around 245cals. Is my treadmill wrong?

EDIT: Wow, thanks everyone!
As a college kid, I don't have the money for an HRM at the moment but I'll definitely invest in one.

I invested in a HRM ( Polar FT4) and i normally will do an hour at 3.5. My HRM says i burned 422 calories in that time. The treadmill said 381. So you just may have done 500 plus.