"Mountain Biking" calorie count

So Runkeeper tells me a 13.38 mile, 2 hour mountain bike ride is good for 849 calories. Myfitnesspal says 1400 for "mountain/bmx biking". MFP also has leisure cycling, under 10mph, which would give me 650 calories.

This is a much bigger range than I'm used to between these sites. Running, walking, hiking, road biking, the difference is usually 10% or so and I always use the low number.

Mountain biking is strenuous, though it's usually 1/2 climbing and 1/2 descending. Anyone have any input?

Thanks,

Adam

Replies

  • Mokey41
    Mokey41 Posts: 5,769 Member
    Best bet would be to invest in a heart rate monitor and know for sure if you eat exercise calories back,
  • Elainejk21
    Elainejk21 Posts: 121 Member
    I've mountain biked and consider it to be similar in endurance/effort to spinning. I think 849 calories for 2 hours sounds about right depending on your height/weight, especially if you're completely exhausted by the time you're finished!
  • neverstray
    neverstray Posts: 3,845 Member
    It's all over the map because it doesn't know the kind of effort you put in. How would it? The hils could be 5% inclines and 30%+ inclines the entire time. There are so many variables. I would say next time, wear an HRM and see what it says. I would enter the 849.

    It amazes me how bike riding is so much less of a calorie burn than other things.
  • adam1885282
    adam1885282 Posts: 135 Member
    Thanks all. The middle number seems fair considering how I feel after the ride. I'm surprised by it because my 34 minute run this morning got me 400 something. Cycling is too damn efficient!

    Adam
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    What I CAN tell you is that MFP WAY overestimates for cycling for me. I don't mountain bike though - I ride on paved hilly trails in a local park. I use my HRM for that but MFP is WAY higher...like nearly double sometimes. For running and walking, MFP is low compared to my HRM.

    So, I would be very wary of MFPs numbers for cycling.
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    I'm surprised by it because my 34 minute run this morning got me 400 something. Cycling is too damn efficient!

    Adam

    Agreed! I bike twice as long as I run to get a comparable burn.
  • neverstray
    neverstray Posts: 3,845 Member
    What I CAN tell you is that MFP WAY overestimates for cycling for me. I don't mountain bike though - I ride on paved hilly trails in a local park. I use my HRM for that but MFP is WAY higher...like nearly double sometimes. For running and walking, MFP is low compared to my HRM.

    So, I would be very wary of MFPs numbers for cycling.

    This is one area where I agree. Most of the calorie burns MFP estimates are in the ballpark. But, bike riding just seems to be way off.
  • moto67e
    moto67e Posts: 20 Member
    I wear a HRM when I mountain bike. On the 11 mile loop that I do, I burn between 900 and 1100 depending on how hard I push. I usually do it in less than a hour and the faster I go the less burn I get, because it's over faster. But it's not exactly a easy loop, there are lots of uphills and downhills which makes it like a interval training ride.
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    What I CAN tell you is that MFP WAY overestimates for cycling for me. I don't mountain bike though - I ride on paved hilly trails in a local park. I use my HRM for that but MFP is WAY higher...like nearly double sometimes. For running and walking, MFP is low compared to my HRM.

    So, I would be very wary of MFPs numbers for cycling.

    This is one area where I agree. Most of the calorie burns MFP estimates are in the ballpark. But, bike riding just seems to be way off.

    I've heard the elliptical is way off too, but I don't do that so I can't compare.
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    They are all wrong. Get an HRM.

    Runkeeper is using the distance formula which works for road riding. Less so for mountainbiking where grade/condition can easily double the effort.

    MFP is just an estimate.

    Weight, age, HR are significant variables in these activities.
    BTW, you might want to remove 10-15% from the HRM on long rides as I am not sure that MFP does already have that as part of the TDEE base.

    edit:typo.
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    They are all wrong. Get an HRM.

    Runkeeper is using the distance formula which works for road riding. Less so for mountainbiking where grade/condition can easily double the effort.

    MFP is just an estimate.

    Weight, age, HR are significant variables in these activities.
    BTW, you might want to remove 10-15% from the HRM on long rides as I am not sure that MFP does already have that as part of the TDEE base.

    edit:typo.

    I do remove my BMR from the calories my HRM lists. That becomes more important the longer you're exercising for sure. Under 30 minutes and I don't worry about it, but most of my workouts are 45 min to 1.5 hours so I do subtract it for that. For me (I had my RMR tested), I subtract 70 calories per hour.