Nike Plus/Ipod Running

kmcme
kmcme Posts: 8 Member
edited September 21 in Fitness and Exercise
I've realized that my Nike + that tracks my running calories and MFP caloric running count is WAYYY off...Unless Nike has been wrong all this time? I was looking at all my friends burned calorie counts and they are way in 800's and 1000's...I can do 43 min running at a pace of 9-10mph and only burn 399?!?! Am I wrong? Does anyone have this problem??

Replies

  • Nharley
    Nharley Posts: 201
    I'm going to follow your thread, as I hope to glean some information about the realiablity of the Nike + shoe & Ipod pedometer. When I first saw this combo. in the store yesterday I thought wow! what a great idea! However if you are experiencing that big of a difference, I wonder who is right?
  • randilea
    randilea Posts: 140
    I use the on a daily basis and I go with the Nike+ for my calories burned. Make sure that you have it calibrated to you stride and have your weight set appropriately. I like to think in my head that Nike+ is more accurate then MFP since it is calibrated to my stride, but who knows.
  • ricflairandy
    ricflairandy Posts: 2 Member
    Well i did 5k yesterday and the treadmill said it was 335 cals. yet my hrm (yes i know diff from nike+) said 538. The hrm like your nike+ will know your age, hieight and weight. So if its calibrated properly id go with that.
  • mlpeterman
    mlpeterman Posts: 2 Member
    I don't run at all without my nike+. at 5'9, 167, I will burn around 500 calories in a 40 minute run at a 6 ish pace. It is key to calibrate your nike+ as your pace is calculated by time/distance. When I first started, my nike+ guaged way farther than I actually went. I have also notice it is skewed on treadmills and walking. Other than that, I love it, and it keeps me running, so 500 or 800 calories, doesn't matter. Its about getting out there for an hour of fun and hard work.
  • rana_bear
    rana_bear Posts: 55
    i've used my nike plus with my ipod while running on the treadmill just to see if the results were similar and they weren't far off (maybe out by 10%). I never rely on MFP exercise calories because there generally much higher then my nike plus & the treadmill which account for my weight, age, etc. MFP is just a really rough guide and the amount of calories you burn is such an individual thing, which depends on many factors.
  • twingirls05
    twingirls05 Posts: 52
    I think the only time you can get a true and accurate reading for calories burned is when you use a HRM and have it set up to your weight/height. The only way of knowing how many calories burned is by where you are pushing your heart rate zones.

    I have a Garmin Forerunner for my runs and I always think it calculates high. I usually jus stick with about 100 calories for every mile run (unless I'm pushing it hard). I keep my long runs at a conversational pace (8+ miles), so I'm not burning as many calories on that run as I am if I'm doing 3x800's on a 6 mile run.
  • oh_that_MLE
    oh_that_MLE Posts: 2 Member
    I've noticed that my nike+ calculates HIGH for calories burned. I had to stop running recently due to a knee injury but I still try to walk everyday. I walk at about 3 mph and my Nike+ indicates I've burned 720 calories in an hour. However, MFP says I only burned 457, so I did a bit of research and found that MFP is correct. Calories burned is 1.5*body weight*1 hour (use .25 increments)

    Running for an hour at a steady pace of 8 mph, calories burned is 6*body weight*time ran. Example: 6*167*.75=752 calories burned in 45 minutes.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories