We are pleased to announce that on March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor will be introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the upcoming changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!

Nike Plus/Ipod Running

kmcme
kmcme Posts: 8 Member
edited September 2024 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