Elliptical Stats vs. MyFitnessPal Stats

Options
2

Replies

  • suziepoo1984
    suziepoo1984 Posts: 915 Member
    Options
    Neither, atleast for me. Both of them over estimate, i usually go by what my HRM says.
  • disasterman
    disasterman Posts: 746 Member
    Options
    A few weeks ago I had the following results from a 45 minute elliptical workout:

    Elliptical 1082
    MFP 580
    HRM 311

    .
  • bugaha1
    bugaha1 Posts: 602 Member
    Options
    What I’ve learned from my HRM is that the healthier I get the harder or longer I have to workout to burn the same amount of calories I did a few months ago.
  • bugaha1
    bugaha1 Posts: 602 Member
    Options
    A few weeks ago I had the following results from a 45 minute elliptical workout:

    Elliptical 1082
    MFP 580
    HRM 311

    .

    45 min and only 311, I think you need to up the resistance a wee bit =)
  • disasterman
    disasterman Posts: 746 Member
    Options
    45 min and only 311, I think you need to up the resistance a wee bit =)


    Probably. But it takes a lot to get my HR going. Resting is about 40 so I guess I'm very adapted.

    ETA - I should say "possibly". >400 calories/hour burn isn't too bad for someone in excellent condition.
  • ellybeann
    ellybeann Posts: 122 Member
    Options
    Per a friend that is an exercise equipment maintenace guy.... most cardio machines are pre set at a 150lb man, so always enter your weight and age. It wont be spot on but closer. I too use a polar heart rate chest strap with watch and wow was I surpirised at the difference. In some cases I was shorting myself and in some not so much.... Good Luck!!
  • nikkylyn
    nikkylyn Posts: 325 Member
    Options
    How does MFP know how intense you worked out.... Your calorie burn is gonna diff if your going slow reading a book or if you are really cranking it out and sweating.

    I enter my weight on the eliptical my calorie burns from the machine always show at least 100 less than what MFP estimates. This is me going pretty moderate to intense at times. Since then I dont trust MFP estimates because intensity can vary and throw calorie counts way off.

    Heart rate monitor?? I want one also but no $$ LOL. So for now I always enter my weight on the machines I figure that is closer than what MFP states.
  • bugaha1
    bugaha1 Posts: 602 Member
    Options
    Probably. But it takes a lot to get my HR going. Resting is about 40 so I guess I'm very adapted.

    I follow you I just started up on my elliptical again after 4 months off because of summer running and biking. I found out I’m way more elliptical fit than I was four months.
  • perfectflightisbeingthere
    perfectflightisbeingthere Posts: 66 Member
    Options
    I wouldn't trust the MyFitnessPal Stats at all. I got a HRM a few weeks ago and I was shocked on how little calories I burned, especially in comparison to MFP. I have never tracked my calories with an elliptical or treadmill so I don't have any advice on that. They don't "average" the calories, they have a default weight already entered. Is this a machine that relies only on you holding the handles all the time to get the heart rate, or do you use a chest band with it? I would only really trust something with a chest band to tell me how many calories I burned.

    I would agree - I use a Polar HRM and it gives consistently lower calories than elipticals or other machines and the MFP or similar calculations, normally by around 20% but sometimes much more (although on static exercise bikes it always reads higher). To be fair though, HRMs are not necessarily entirely accurate either, they too have to estimate calories using formulae based on weight etc and including heart rate as a measure of exertion levels. The only proper way to measure calories burned is in a laboratory using indirect calorimetry, but obviously in the real world we have to use a best guess - and with a HRM there is more reliable data going into the estimate. I would tend to take the lowest of all the calorie used estimates to be on the safe side, especially if intending to consume the calories burned!

    Don't get me started on how difficult it is to accurately measure calories consumed in any given meal either, but the key for me is to record everything I eat and all my exercise and hope the overs and unders in the various estimates average out over time...
  • disasterman
    disasterman Posts: 746 Member
    Options
    Probably. But it takes a lot to get my HR going. Resting is about 40 so I guess I'm very adapted.

    I follow you I just started up on my elliptical again after 4 months off because of summer running and biking. I found out I’m way more elliptical fit than I was four months.

    I run too and I think the elliptical is easier even on the higher resistance settings. What I focus on, and others have mentioned this I think, is getting consistent results. All of those numbers are just estimates and I don't really know or care which one is "right" I only care about getting the results I expect which I do when I use the lower calorie burn numbers.
  • mynewlife10
    mynewlife10 Posts: 52
    Options
    And, here I thought I would get just one or two responses, but this is great!

    So, how does the HRM give an accurate "calorie burned" stat? The elliptical let's met monitor my heart rate too (in fact, I have to monitor it some way due to my heart surgery).
  • kbgall
    kbgall Posts: 2
    Options
    I had heard that the machines base calorie burn on a 150 lb person if you don't enter your weight
  • KathyPBiles
    KathyPBiles Posts: 292 Member
    Options
    I have been using the elliptical since January, and I have found the HRM to be the safest way to count. My experience is MFP and my elliptical always estimate way higher!
  • ash8184
    ash8184 Posts: 701 Member
    Options
    Definitely go with a HRM for accuracy. If you do the weight loss/fat burning or intervals settings, in my experience, you burn more than if you do a straight-line.

    If you need a quick fix for today, I would do the lower estimate to be on the safe side - MFP definitely overestimates!
  • mynewlife10
    mynewlife10 Posts: 52
    Options
    Thank you. How does the HRM tell you the calories burned? Does it calculate it for you?
  • _amluvstld_
    _amluvstld_ Posts: 47
    Options
    MFP tends to inflate calories burned. I'd be more inclined to trust the elliptical, especially if it allows you to enter your stats and measures your HR but even then it wont be accurate. Best bet is to get a basic heart rate monitor; I love my Polar Ft4.
  • joesimtre
    joesimtre Posts: 48 Member
    Options
    When I enter my weight and age in the elliptical I get close to the same number when I wear my Polar Heartrate monitor. MFP is always a little lower so I use their numbers.

    70 minutes on the elliptical
    (Stride on 9 - Resistance on 10)
    (10223 steps)

    MFP - 940
    Elliptical Machine - 980
    Polar HRM - 1013
  • bugaha1
    bugaha1 Posts: 602 Member
    Options
    Thank you. How does the HRM tell you the calories burned? Does it calculate it for you?

    You wear a HR strap and a watch and the manufacturer of the HRM will calculate the calories burned for you. Like someone said earlier, HRM calories burned is just an estimate based on a formula but the HR you see during the working is pretty accurate.
  • 40andFindingFitness
    40andFindingFitness Posts: 497 Member
    Options
    I wouldn't trust the MyFitnessPal Stats at all. I got a HRM a few weeks ago and I was shocked on how little calories I burned, especially in comparison to MFP. I have never tracked my calories with an elliptical or treadmill so I don't have any advice on that. They don't "average" the calories, they have a default weight already entered. Is this a machine that relies only on you holding the handles all the time to get the heart rate, or do you use a chest band with it? I would only really trust something with a chest band to tell me how many calories I burned.

    ^ Yup, this. ^ My HRM says I am within range for my age etc. and MFP says I'm a super track star that hits 600 cals when sleeping (exaggeration of course).
    Is this a machine that relies only on you holding the handles all the time to get the heart rate, or do you use a chest band with it? I would only really trust something with a chest band to tell me how many calories I burned.

    ^ Definitely this. ^ I find that the machines are on average closer to what my HRM says (when I input the required info) than what MFP says.
  • ThinLizzie0802
    ThinLizzie0802 Posts: 863 Member
    Options
    My HRM was the opposite...said I burned way more than what MFP said.

    My HRM is a good model and has all my stats plugged in.

Categories