Database calories vs machine readouts

Options
pinktoesjb
pinktoesjb Posts: 302 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
OK, I'm recently back to the gym and really loving it, however the when I log my exercise here it's showing much higher calorie burns than the machines in the gym say when I finish. Anyone know which is better to go by?

Replies

  • jennifer_417
    jennifer_417 Posts: 12,344 Member
    Options
    I've heard that even the machines aren't all that accurate, but I think they are still more accurate that MFP, because they record my speed while working out and thus are able to do that additional calculation. I've consistently had MFP calculate more cals than the elliptical, about 1/3 more.
  • pinktoesjb
    pinktoesjb Posts: 302 Member
    Options
    Yeah that's what I thought, did seem too good to be true!
  • jennifer_417
    jennifer_417 Posts: 12,344 Member
    Options
    Right?!
  • DaniKenmir
    DaniKenmir Posts: 387 Member
    Options
    I have no idea, mfp and my treadmill never get along, mfp knows my weight but the treadmill knows my incline changes and speed. I think we both need a HRM
  • PJ_73
    PJ_73 Posts: 331 Member
    Options
    I use my HRM when at the gym and the estimations on that are reasonably similar to the machines at the gym - although the latter come in a little higher.

    In comparison to my HRM, the database seriously overestimates!

    Would be a problem if you were eating ALL your exercise calories back, because you would be overeating, I would say!
  • srawson82
    srawson82 Posts: 16
    Options
    I always use my HRM that way I know what I really have to replace cus it could make a big difference.
  • geebusuk
    geebusuk Posts: 3,348 Member
    Options
    Neither will be that accurate - a HRM will provide the best approximation.
    A lot of people think MFP over-estimates it's calorie burn calculations.
  • pinktoesjb
    pinktoesjb Posts: 302 Member
    Options
    Neither will be that accurate - a HRM will provide the best approximation.
    A lot of people think MFP over-estimates it's calorie burn calculations.


    I guess so, would explain why I'm not having great results at the moment. HRMs seem expensive though so not so much of an option at the moment. I think I'm just going to keep up the gym time and not eat back all the alleged exercise calories for now. Disappointing though it sort of defeats the point of having the database there.
  • geebusuk
    geebusuk Posts: 3,348 Member
    Options
    You don't list where you live but when I last looked [edit, just checked again, even less...] £12.99 will get you a heart rate monitor with a strap that will give you a calorie burn figure.
    May not be as accurate as some of the fancier ones, but probably better than any other guestimaters.

    I've got myself a motoactv which I'm really liking because I it does push bike stuff, automatically uploads workouts, total calories burnt and lots of other useful stuff for working out what I'm doing.
  • Deejalert
    Deejalert Posts: 13 Member
    Options
    I'd use the machine output, but monitor progress over a couple of weeks. If using the output is not generating the results you desire, then adjust. At a 7000 weekly deficit you should be losing about 2 lbs a week. If using the output and tracking your calorie intake shows a 7000 cal deficit on mfp, but your weight loss is not matching up, adjust up or down. I find that using the output has been pretty much spot on, but I don't log all my activities such as calisthenics(maybe sp), stretching, general walking and have my activity set to sedentary as I have a desk job.
  • Malozing0809
    Malozing0809 Posts: 71 Member
    Options
    You also have to consider your weight at the time. It can affect how much you burn for some exercises.

Categories