Accurate Formula To Determine Calories Burned Jogging

I'm a runner not a jogger

But seriously how accurate is this? I'm not so sure.

It's very close. Closer than the calorie estimates on the food logging side, for sure.

Note that this gives gross calories. Knock of 10-15% for net calories, or calculate your hourly RMR and back it out manually, or just use the standard "0.63 * body weight in pounds * miles run".

I'm a runner not a jogger

But seriously how accurate is this? I'm not so sure.

It's very close. Closer than the calorie estimates on the food logging side, for sure.

Note that this gives gross calories. Knock of 10-15% for net calories, or calculate your hourly RMR and back it out manually, or just use the standard "0.63 * body weight in pounds * miles run".

Hey buddy.

I always knock off 80 (My bmr) so the 0.63 one seems about right.

Hope OP doesn't think I'm being too dismissive I just like to understand fully and it takes a while believe me!

I ran 5k today in 0:33:32. My HRM gave me a burn of 515. I'm 210. I'm just trying to understand why there'd be such a difference.

For running, I found the following article at Runner's World: http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning?page=single

The upshot is:

Your Total Calorie Burn/Mile When Running = .75 x your weight (in lbs.) x # of miles run
Your Net Calorie Burn/Mile When Running = .63 x your weight x # of miles run


Your Total Calorie Burn/Mile When Walking = .53 x your weight
Your Net Calorie Burn/Mile When Running = .30 x your weight

The walking formulas apply to speeds of 3 to 4 mph. At 5 mph and faster, walking burns more calories than running.

Adapted from "Energy Expenditure of Walking and Running," Medicine & Science in Sport & Exercise, Cameron et al, Dec. 2004.

in addition, I found the following article that does a similar calculation for cycling, which is more sensitive to variations in speed:

Running vs. Biking
Although running is also a great form of aerobic exercise, the calories burned per mile always remains the same. Two things will alter the total calories burned---speed and weight. However, with biking there is wind resistance to add into the mix. Because of this, the faster you bike, the faster you burn not only total calories but calories per mile. Running will also give you a more intense workout, but it's easier to burn calories biking, meaning you won't have to bike as intensely as you run to burn the same number of calories.

Calories Per Mile
Dr. Edward Coyle at the University of Texas in Austin has worked with top athletes studying their oxygen consumption. Here is the calorie consumption he has figured out for for biking: 10 mph -- 0.17 calories/pound; 15 mph -- 0.2 calories/pound; 20 mph -- 0.25 calories/pound; 25 mph -- 0.3 calories/pound; and 30 mph -- 0.38 calories/pound.

Calculating Calories Per Mile
To figure how many calories you will burn per mile, take your body weight and multiply it by the calorie consumption listed above for the speed at which you bike. For instance, a 140-pound man biking at 20 mph will burn 35 calories per mile (140 pounds x 0.25 calories/pound), and a 160-pound man biking at the same speed will burn 40 calories per mile (160 pounds x 0.25 calories/pound). The heavier you are, the more calories per mile you will burn.

Total Calories
To calculate how many calories you burn during a bike ride, multiply the calorie factor by your weight and miles biked. For example a 150 lb. biker, biking 20 miles at 15 miles per hour will burn 600 calories (150 pounds x 20 miles x 0.2 calories/pound).

Factors That Could Influence the Numbers
Coyle's calculations don't take into wind and hills. Biking into a headwind will be harder than biking in a tailwind. Biking uphill will be harder than biking downhill. Also, drafting behind another rider could cut your energy needs by one-third.