ok I know everyone is different but

JennSchn
JennSchn Posts: 65
edited September 20 in Fitness and Exercise
Does it seem a little high to have a cal burn of 700 and 800 when doing a 5 mile one hour walk? I do the Leslie Sansone thing and it seems that that is pretty high. I use a cheap $30 Walmart hrm watch. I am 5'4" 180lbs. I am new to this so would appreciate any input.

Replies

  • mlove1307
    mlove1307 Posts: 151
    Your weight is is not in the normal range for your height (and calories burned are calculated from an average woman) so adding that to your fitness level and the fact that 5mph is technically a slow jogging pace then... No, it is not THAT high.. ((I am NOT calling you fat!!!))

    When I was much heavier, it was a lot easier to get big burns.. now, I realllllly have to work to get a 700, so its rare. :]

    If you're still wondering about the accuracy, check your heart rate for 30 minutes... resting heart rates are usually around 60 beats per minute and you should burn anywhere from half to ONE calorie a minute. So thirty minutes = about thirty calories at rest (think watching tv) then your watch is pretty accurate.

    In addition to that, make sure your weight is configured into your watch correctly.. Hope this helps!!:flowerforyou:
  • IdalieBeyer
    IdalieBeyer Posts: 12 Member
    A five mile/hour walk is a very brisk walk. Also the more you weigh the more cals you will burn and another thing I learned, if your heart is strong and your endurance is strong you will NOT burn as much, but if you are just starting out and your heart has to work harder then you will burn alot. Hope that helps. I don't have my calorie heart monitor yet. That is my next investment.
  • JayAlexander
    JayAlexander Posts: 268 Member
    I was wondering the same thing on my stationary bike. I ride for an hour at about 16mph and it says I burn 1300 calories. I keep my heart rate at about 130. I am 5'7" and currently weigh 240. Accurate?
  • BigdaddyJ
    BigdaddyJ Posts: 357
    heavier people (wtich i'm a part of^^) burn more Calories because of the xtra weight we carry around, the same principle is applied to bodybuilders who run with those weighted vest to get better muscle deffinition :wink:

    do the test...go on http://www.shape.com/fitness/tools_and_calculators/calorie_burn_tool, pick any exercise and play with the weight, you'll see, the lower the person's weight, the lower calorie burn...
  • emorym
    emorym Posts: 344
    I would say 5 miles in an hour is a good pace. I do the galloway method of running run 3 mins. walk 1 min. We did 5.2 miles on Thursday in almost 62 min. Anway I figure 100 calories per mile. My HRM said 606 cals. So my rough estimate is pretty close.

    http://connect.garmin.com/activity/23958008

    Click on the splits to see all the data. The firs mile and the last mile are on flat ground. The middle 3 miles have bridges so it takes more energy running uphill.
  • pinbotchick
    pinbotchick Posts: 3,904
    Are you logging based on HRM or on MFP estimates? If using MFP estimates, I log Leslie's walking DVDs as low impact aerobics for time done not by miles completed in a time frame. HRM are supposed to be more accurate if set to your body weight, age, etc. I have a cheap HRM from Woot and find that it is not very accurate. Polar HRM sound like they are much more accurate.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    If you are walking (not doing a walk/jog) and the distance is indeed 5 miles and the time was 60 minutes, then, at your weight, the total calories burned is probably in the 550 to 650 range.

    If you are walking, the usual prediction equations for determining energy expenditure have more variability because differences in walking style cause more variation at faster speeds.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    I was wondering the same thing on my stationary bike. I ride for an hour at about 16mph and it says I burn 1300 calories. I keep my heart rate at about 130. I am 5'7" and currently weigh 240. Accurate?

    No. I suspect your bike is using the calculations for an outside ride, pedaling constantly at that speed (no coasting).

    The only way to reasonably estimate calories burned on an exercise bike is if the bike is a calibrated ergometer. Most top-brand commercial bikes are pretty accurate.

    In this case, your actual caloric burn is probably no more than 50% of what your machine is telling you.,
  • BigdaddyJ
    BigdaddyJ Posts: 357
    I was wondering the same thing on my stationary bike. I ride for an hour at about 16mph and it says I burn 1300 calories. I keep my heart rate at about 130. I am 5'7" and currently weigh 240. Accurate?

    No. I suspect your bike is using the calculations for an outside ride, pedaling constantly at that speed (no coasting).

    The only way to reasonably estimate calories burned on an exercise bike is if the bike is a calibrated ergometer. Most top-brand commercial bikes are pretty accurate.

    In this case, your actual caloric burn is probably no more than 50% of what your machine is telling you.,

    machine's HRM are sooo inacurate they should be illegal!!! lol
This discussion has been closed.

Categories