Garmin vs MFP Calorie Burn Estimations

johnknappcc

Just got the Forerunner 910xt triathlon version. I've taken it for a moderate pace 5mi run, and a fast pace 22 mile ride on the road bike. Given that the Garmin has my weight, heart rate, and a bunch of other stuff, I'm assuming it's more accurate than the mfp estimations.

Up until now I was using a polar ft60, and it's calorie burn estimations were fairly close to the mfp estimations, but the garmin's are 25% less than mfp.

Gamin says my last bike ride, 22 miles, 75 minutes, avg pace 17.4 mph burned 903 calories, but mfp said it should be closer to 1200 calories.

I just put the lesser down, but it seems odd to me that the algorithms would be that much different between the garmin, the polar, and mfp.

scottb81

Garmin is lower for everybody. It uses an entirely different algorithm and calculation method from FIrstbeat in Finland. It is claimed to be the most accurate

See the White Papers at http://www.firstbeat.fi/physiology/heart-beat-analysis