800-1,000 cal BURN

1356

Replies

  • bonjour24
    bonjour24 Posts: 1,119 Member
    2 years ago when i was 230lbs (and 5'2") and a beginner with a HRM, i would burn 450-500 cals in 30 mins on the elliptical. And in hindsight i was going slow, although i was giving it full effort at the time. My first c25k run (at the same time) burned about 800 cals in 45 mins and had a lot of walking in it. If i had the ability to keep it up for an hour, i expect i would have burned 1000 cals.

    Now I'm a very slow 175lb distance runner. Same HRM. I burn 500-600 cals an hour on a long run. I burn about 600 cals an hour on the elliptical (doing HIIT on it). At the track, tanking it, i burn 600 max an hr. For me, I burn about 600 cals an hour- but my intensity could be better.

    My hubby wore my HRM (6'0" and 230lbs) and pottered around the garden for a bit doing nothing too strenuous. *kitten* burned 1200 cals.

    We're all different.

    ETA- I'm not saying a HRM is right or wrong, but as a single tool of comparison it is clear that I have to work harder to burn cals now than i did before when i was a chubber.
  • Codefox
    Codefox Posts: 308 Member
    Polar hrms are very accurate. Far more so than a simple formula. They've put years of medical research into their devices and use far more information on their high end hrms such as vo2. Gamin is also very accurate.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Polar hrms are very accurate. Far more so than a simple formula. They've put years of medical research into their devices and use far more information on their high end hrms such as vo2. Gamin is also very accurate.

    Polar are designed for steady state cardio only. Intervals will affect accuracy.

    Not all Garmin models base their calorie burns on heart rate.

    Another great post by Azdak on HRM accuracy
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1044313-this-is-why-hrms-have-limited-use-for-tracking-calories?page=1


    And one from Heybales that lists the factors that affect accuracy with reference to the study
    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/773451-is-my-hrm-giving-me-incorrect-calorie-burn
  • GiddyNZ
    GiddyNZ Posts: 136 Member
    It definitely depends on the type of exercise and intensity of what you are doing.. I can burn 450 cals in a 55 min pump class, but when I was 10kg heavier I used to regularly burned 550 cals at the same intensity.. even if my weights are higher now.

    I have just gotten back from a 2 hour mountain bike ride where I burned 1500 calories, average heart rate during that time according to my Polar FT7 was 161 (max 188), so by the time I drag myself and my bike up hill and down dale for 25km with 600m of climbing over 2 hours, YES a burn of 1000 + calories is entirely possible, in fact I regularly hit 2000 - 3000 on longer rides.

    You just need to push yourself harder for longer!!
  • Queen_JessieA
    Queen_JessieA Posts: 1,059 Member
    I use my heart rate monitor for an accurate cal burn and I don't go by the numbers here. An hour on the elliptical gives me a 650-750 burn :)
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    As others have accurately noted, burning 1,000 calories an hour, while not something that everyone can do, is hardly unusual. Nor does it really mean anything, other than a random number that our minds give extra value to. Achieving that burn has no "moral" value--by that I mean that it doesn't mean the person is more dedicated or tougher or "pushes harder" or anything like that.

    Calories burned is a product of body weight X intensity. A heavy person with above average fitness or a "midweight" person who is really fit, can achieve that number. A lighter person (i.e. under 150 lbs), even one who is very fit, will find it difficult to burn 1,000 calories in an hour. They just don't have the mass.

    An easy reference is the "10 X 100" level: Someone who can run a 10:00 mile and weighs 100kg will burn roughly 1000 calories in 1 hour of running. It's not a subject of debate--the data that supports this is simple and valid.

    Discussion of this issue is often obfuscated by the over reliance on data from HRMs and a lack of understanding of how HRMs work. Heart rate by itself has nothing to do with calorie burn. This is further compounded by the fact that many people have a max HR that is significantly higher than the default value in their HRM. As a result, their HRMs assume they are working much harder than they are and the calorie values on the HRM are significantly--and sometimes wildly--overestimated.

    Also keep in mind that it takes a *sustained* effort for the entire 60 min to burn 1000 calories in an hour. Most group exercise classes do not have a sustained intensity like this--they include warm up, cool down, and often some ab work or stretching. Because of that, it would be extremely rare for someone to actually burn 1000 calories in a 60-min class like Zumba--or anything else for that matter. That's not a knock against these activities--it's just the way the body works.
  • kckBxer396
    kckBxer396 Posts: 460 Member
    Well, I weigh about 190 pounds, so that helps. Usually when I burn a high number of calories, it's because I have been white water kayaking for 2-3 hours.
  • arc918
    arc918 Posts: 2,037 Member

    Also keep in mind that it takes a *sustained* effort for the entire 60 min to burn 1000 calories in an hour. Most group exercise classes do not have a sustained intensity like this--they include warm up, cool down, and often some ab work or stretching. Because of that, it would be extremely rare for someone to actually burn 1000 calories in a 60-min class like Zumba--or anything else for that matter. That's not a knock against these activities--it's just the way the body works.

    Indeed, I'm at half marathon race pace for almost a solid hour to get over 1,000

    nothing magic, just a number

    the bro-science kid certainly look better with his shirt off than I do, but I can likely run faster & farther because that's what I like to do
  • bregalad5
    bregalad5 Posts: 3,965 Member
    Not in an hour, but my BodyMedia calorie adjustment was regularly 1,000+ on days I worked at a liquor store (which I have very recently left for a new job). My job included a lot of walking and lifting, and we could only sit on lunch and breaks. This was with my MFP TDEE value at 2,400 due to being set to "Active"... I did break 4,000 for my TDEE one day (according to my BodyMedia) , which was pretty cool for a 5'4" 210 pound girl who only went to work for 8 hours and then to the gym for an hour.

    PS For those thinking people are talking about a daily calorie burn, this thread is about exercise calories burned!
  • GiddyNZ
    GiddyNZ Posts: 136 Member
    Just pointing out that no where in the OP does it mention that the 800 - 1000 calories is burn't in a 1 hour session.
  • ritchiedrama
    ritchiedrama Posts: 1,304 Member
    Just pointing out that no where in the OP does it mention that the 800 - 1000 calories is burn't in a 1 hour session.

    Someone did, I _think_ and thats why i mentioned it :D
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • dmanson2
    dmanson2 Posts: 134
    So the calculations are incorrect on treadmills and what not? When i started at 250lbs, i can put the treadmil at 15% incline, set the speed to 4.0MPH & i would hit 1000 around 42 mins. If i could hang in for the last 18 mins, it would be around 1300-1400 calories in that 1 hour.
  • mygrl4meee
    mygrl4meee Posts: 943 Member
    I run about 4 and half miles and burn anywhere between 700 to 800 calories. I am just slightly under 200lbs.
  • Ready2Rock206
    Ready2Rock206 Posts: 9,487 Member
    I'm a big girl and I am pretty sure I would die before I ever burned 800-1000 during a workout. People who say just because you weigh more you burn crazy high numbers are delusional. At least for me that isn't true at all. I wish though!
  • darvin1023
    darvin1023 Posts: 52 Member
    Factors to consider
    1. Muscles: The more muscles you have, the more calories you burn per minute.
    2. Type of Exercises: Cardio exercises burn the most calories per set amount of time vs. say Weight training.
    3. Intensity of your Exercises: Obviously, a person power walking will burn less than someone running 5 miles per hour.
    4. Amount of time Exercising: Joe Schmoe walking for 5 hours will burn more calorie than Peter that ran for just 15 minutes.
    5. Individual: A person genetically gifted to have very high metabolism can eat half a pie of pizza and still be thin as a rail while Average Anne gains a pound just eating a slice. Not everyone has the same DNA, that's why even identical twins have different fingerprints.
  • EGSanz225
    EGSanz225 Posts: 32
    There's this website I ABSOLUTELY LOVE called fitnessblender and they have these 1000 calorie workout videos. I've done it a couple of times. I find it both challenging, dreadful and fun. I would not suggest it for beginners (nearly killed me!)
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    I'm a big girl and I am pretty sure I would die before I ever burned 800-1000 during a workout. People who say just because you weigh more you burn crazy high numbers are delusional. At least for me that isn't true at all. I wish though!

    No one is saying just because you weigh more you burn crazy high numbers but weight is a factor. The more you weigh, the more calories you require. The length of time and intensity are also factors.

    If a 120 lb person and a 220 lb person both run at 6 miles an hour (10 minute mile) over the same course, you will find a considerable difference in the amount of calories burned. No delusion there is real science to back it up.
  • irakrishna1
    irakrishna1 Posts: 106 Member
    Not everyday but thrice a week my schedule is:
    Morning: running 1 hour, stretching(mild Yoga) 20 min
    Night: Walk 1 hour. After my son and hubby are asleep! :P
  • Txracy
    Txracy Posts: 78
    I burn, according to calculators, HRM, etc. about 75 or 76 calories per mile I run.

    That's utterly depressing.

    One serving of gummy bears is 140 calories. Jesus, I only burn off 9 gummy bears per MILE I RUN.

    9 freakin' gummy bears.

    Per mile.

    That I RUN.

    (I suppose the obvious answer is to stop eating so many gummy bears... instead, I've started training for a marathon. )
  • irakrishna1
    irakrishna1 Posts: 106 Member
    azdak Nicely put! :) About HRM I agree with you. Here is an interesting article about this. http://www.sparkpeople.com/community/ask_the_experts.asp?q=75
  • SadFaerie
    SadFaerie Posts: 243 Member
    I'm a tiny thing at 5'3/110lb, so I don't really burn any big numbers.

    Yesterday for me:

    Barbell workout, 45 min, avg HR 124, max HR 153,
    cals burned:
    according to Polar 474
    according to MFP (Strength training (weight lifting, weight training) 113

    Insanity PlyoCardio, 42 min, avg HR 150, max HR 171,
    cals burned:
    according to Polar 568
    according to MFP (Circuit training, general) 269


    Kick boxing (calisthenics, bag, shadow), 60 min, avg HR 140, max HR 168,
    cals burned
    according to Polar 722
    according to MFP (Judo, karate, kick boxing, tae kwan do) 517

    So Polar HRM (Wearlink+ with android apps) estimated my calories burnt as 1764 for 147 minutes of work (in two sessions, weight + Insanity back to back, gym 6 hours later). MFP gave me 899 for the same job done. I went with MPF, I think HRMs vastly overestimate calories burnt.
  • benol1
    benol1 Posts: 867 Member
    I regularly burn between 800 and 1000 calories (according to my HRM) which estimates my calorie burn 1/2 to 1/3 of MFP and 2/3 of cardio machine estimations.

    My routine is a mix of very intense cardio and less intense cardio.
    Typically it involves walking to and from the city to the gym. In the gym I either do an RPM class (anywhere between 500-800 burn depending on my enthusiasm), or a cardio routine using the treadmill (very fast walking on a slope), eliptical trainer (adjusting the level incrementally to raise my heart rate), stationary rowing machine at max level, and on a stationary bike for interval training (cycling heart rate between 75 percent HRMax and 90 percent HRMax. Typically, I spend 20 min on treadmill, 20-30min eliptical trainer, 30-45min rowing machine, stationary bike:30-45min.
    kind regards,

    Ben
  • TabithaMichelle85
    TabithaMichelle85 Posts: 92 Member
    If I spend an hour on the elliptical I burn around 800 calories then spending some time on the treadmill can burn 200 in 30 depending on speed and incline.... Not to mention weights and other equipment used... If I spend an hour and a have at the gym, depending on what I do, I can burn 1000 cals easy
  • Zekela
    Zekela Posts: 634 Member
    Smaller people burn less for the same intensity and duration compared to a bigger person. However, I can see someone thinking that a leaner person would burn more. Most bigger people would have a harder time sustain the intensity and duration of my runs. Hence they would probably stop after 20 mins and hence burn less compared to me sustaining the run for 90 minutes. If they are able to keep up however, their calorie burn would blow mine away. I have a friend of mine that weighs about 50 IBS more than I do. We ran the same half. I finished approximately an hour before her doing 7 minute miles. She did about 9 - 10 minute miles. I burn about 1200 cals while she burn 1700. If she was able to sustain my speed she would have more than doubled my calorie burn for the half.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    I'm a tiny thing at 5'3/110lb, so I don't really burn any big numbers.

    Yesterday for me:

    Barbell workout, 45 min, avg HR 124, max HR 153,
    cals burned:
    according to Polar 474
    according to MFP (Strength training (weight lifting, weight training) 113

    Insanity PlyoCardio, 42 min, avg HR 150, max HR 171,
    cals burned:
    according to Polar 568
    according to MFP (Circuit training, general) 269


    Kick boxing (calisthenics, bag, shadow), 60 min, avg HR 140, max HR 168,
    cals burned
    according to Polar 722
    according to MFP (Judo, karate, kick boxing, tae kwan do) 517

    So Polar HRM (Wearlink+ with android apps) estimated my calories burnt as 1764 for 147 minutes of work (in two sessions, weight + Insanity back to back, gym 6 hours later). MFP gave me 899 for the same job done. I went with MPF, I think HRMs vastly overestimate calories burnt.

    HRMs are not accurate for strength training, you will get an inflated number. They are designed for steady state cardio, so intervals will also affect accuracy. I linked a couple of great posts by Azdak on the last page that explain this well.
  • _Zardoz_
    _Zardoz_ Posts: 3,987 Member
    People seem to forget it's proportional, At present I burn around 800 calories on an hour run and near 1000 on an hour intensive swim. When I was 80 pounds heavier I was burning a few hundred more than that in the same period at that intensity. The burn is proportional to my body weight. Those that are saying its impossible because they only burn 100 calories and weigh a lot less than me should think that proportionately they will burn a similar percentage in relation to body mass and intensity,

    So yes you need to be careful about these figures because even via HRM they are an estimate, I though believe my figures are reasonably accurate though I never eat more than a third of my exercise calories back (normally a lot less). If you believe my figures are correct or not I couldn't really care less 84 pounds says what I'm doing is working. Maybe worry about what you are doing more than what others are
  • elephant_in_the_room
    elephant_in_the_room Posts: 145 Member
    HRM: Garming forerunner 310XT
    Workout: Jillian Michael's 30 day Shred, which is really 27 minutes of proper exercise, not 30.
    Min heartrate:85, max: 178.

    Accidentally, I had it set to the wrong user profile; according to the profile I was male, 8 years younger than I really am and 25kg heavier (89kg = 196lbs =14 stone 2lbs).
    It had me burn 387 calories. That would make 860 per hour.
    The heart rate of the real person who has that profile doesn't go as high.

    When I have it set to my correct profile (65kg = 143 lbs =10 stone 3.3 lbs) it only estimated my burn to be 233 calories. So as a smaller person I burn only 517 per hour. :-/ ;-)
  • SadFaerie
    SadFaerie Posts: 243 Member
    HRMs are not accurate for strength training, you will get an inflated number. They are designed for steady state cardio, so intervals will also affect accuracy. I linked a couple of great posts by Azdak on the last page that explain this well.

    I agree, that's why I go with MFP for estimation on calories burnt. I use HRM for weight training, but only to make sure my HR stays low, as I use NO boosters and don't want to damage my heart.
  • hannakengu
    hannakengu Posts: 79 Member
    I just got home from a 60 minute spinning class and burnt close to 500kcals. There's no way I could do it again today. I have been able to burn at a 600kcals/hour rate, but that was when I was in better shape and even then I couldn't keep up with that pace for more than an hour.

    A different thing is, my work (part-time a couple of times a week, which is why I log it as excercise instead of putting it on my fitness profile) involves lots of lifting boxes and walking, and it's not unusual for me to burn more than 800 during an 8-hour shift of walking around and lifting 50lb boxes. However, I wouldn't call it excercise, I just log it as such to get a correct calorie count.

Categories