HOW MANY CALORIES DID I TRULY BURN? HRM? EQUIPMENT? OR MFP?

VeraciousVAL
VeraciousVAL Posts: 19
in Fitness and Exercise
I ride a recumbent bike 7 days a week normally average 30 minutes minimum. Low resistance (bad knees) at about 15 mph. On average 8 miles per day. I suspect my calories burned amount is off. I am losing inches but not losing pounds weekly. I've lost 22 inches, 28 pounds since January 16. I am not hitting my target heart rate. My resting is 65, my highest has been 86 and yes I sweat. What do you recommend I use to calculate calories burned? Today I cycled 10.19 miles in 40 minutes. The bike says I burned 374.8 calories, HRM says I burned 40 and if I used MFP (lowest scenario) it is 495. Would a average be realistic...303? Just moving my fat butt daily is a huge accomplishment, knowing I burned something would be a nice incentive, this is a life changing experience for me. Any advice will be greatly appreciated.

Replies

  • JenMc14
    JenMc14 Posts: 2,389 Member
    HRM is probably most accurate, but it's typically better to underestimate. What I do (using MFP and another site or two, I don't have a HRM) is average the burns and go with that number. I also sometimes shave another 10-15 off of that if it still seems a bit high.
  • mountaingirl2207
    mountaingirl2207 Posts: 181
    I would have a hard to e trusting your HRM. Your body burns 100 calories an hour doing nothing, so for the HRM to say you're burning less than that on a 40 minute bike ride is doubtful. Usually they're right, but I think something might be wrong with yours. How much do you weigh?
  • JenMc14
    JenMc14 Posts: 2,389 Member
    I would have a hard to e trusting your HRM. Your body burns 100 calories an hour doing nothing, so for the HRM to say you're burning less than that on a 40 minute bike ride is doubtful. Usually they're right, but I think something might be wrong with yours. How much do you weigh?

    I assumed the 40 was a typo for 400. If it wasn't a typo, I agree that the HRM is likely way off.
  • KilikiMom
    KilikiMom Posts: 237 Member
    is the 40 supposed to be 400?? LOL if so then I would go with the HRM...if you really did type 40 I would try a new battery LOL
  • heypurdy
    heypurdy Posts: 196 Member
    If you have a reliable HRM with a strap, I would use that number. I love my Polar FT7.
  • Mokey41
    Mokey41 Posts: 5,769 Member
    If it's a reliable HRM with a chest strap I'd go with it but only getting your HR up to 85 from 65 is not going to give you much of a burn. Try pedaling faster if you can't add resistance and doing the same exercise day after day will backfire on you in the long run. Your body becomes very efficient at doing the same task over and over.
  • lua_
    lua_ Posts: 258 Member
    I don't have a HRM, but the difference between what MFP says and what the machine said was confusing today:

    Running 6mph for 20 minutes, the machine said 118 calories burnt, MFP says 249
    Elliptical for 20 minutes (2.56 miles) the machine said 200, MFP says 249
    The elliptical isn't too bad, but the running is way off!
    Any advice?
  • VeraciousVAL
    VeraciousVAL Posts: 19
    I'm at 297. And it was 40...not 400. Compared to my blood pressure monitor, it was also 5 beats higher and I know my BP monitor is accurate. The HRM is new and I didn't buy top of the line. I know that the amount of calories burned is more if you're heavier. I also know that MFP is generous with the caloric burn amount. I just want a more accurate count of how many calories I'm burning and how best to obtain that.
  • mountaingirl2207
    mountaingirl2207 Posts: 181
    At 297 I would wager that you would be somewhere in that 3-400 calorie range. I know you said you have bad knees, but are you able to do the elliptical? It gives you an amazing workout that should get heartbeat much higher. Have you ever used the machine's heartbeat sensors to compare?
  • jkestens63
    jkestens63 Posts: 1,164 Member
    My HRM (Polar FT7) typicall records numbers that are about 60% lower than what MFP or the cardio equipment records. I use my HRM number because I eat my exercise calories and don't want to overeat.
  • VeraciousVAL
    VeraciousVAL Posts: 19
    My HRM (Polar FT7) typicall records numbers that are about 60% lower than what MFP or the cardio equipment records. I use my HRM number because I eat my exercise calories and don't want to overeat.
  • VeraciousVAL
    VeraciousVAL Posts: 19
    jkestens63...first and foremost...CONGRATULATIONS!!! Folks like you give me the most hope that this is going to happen. WOW! 269 POUNDS! No weight loss is to be taken lightly, but when you start out morbidly obese, it is a bit of different scenario in weight loss. I am just now able to sit in the floor for long periods of time and not feel like I'm struggling to breathe. My knees are incredibly weak and after research I purchased a recumbent as my best choice to start. Thanks for all of your input, your help is very much appreciated and may you all reach your goals!

Categories