Anyone use CardioTrainer on the Droid/Iphone?
Options
ZacFields
Posts: 62 Member
I don't know if it's on the Iphone, but I have a Droid and that is what I use to calculate my calories burnt during exercise. Sometimes, it feels to me like the amount of calories that MFP calculates for something can be a bit too liberal.
A good example: I wanted to do 30 minutes of jogging yesterday, and MFP had me pegged at about 400 calories burned. That might be perfectly accurate, but 30 minutes of "jogging" to me right now is really more like 10 minutes of jogging with 20 minutes of walking and catching my breath mixed in there. And unfortunately MFP doesn't have a "30 minutes of Lazy Jogging" entry.
But anyway, Cardiotrainer tracks your movement via GPS. It knows how fast you're running/walking, how far you've gone, and how long you've been exercising. After my workout yesterday, the real amount that I burned was actually about 289 calories (again, because Cardiotrainer knows that I walked for part of the way).
Just curious if anyone has ever tried this. It's kind of neat because every 2 minutes it voices a status message for you. Alternates between something like "Distance: 2.2 miles, 22 minutes" and "Speed: 5.3 miles per hour." Just updates you so you don't have to constantly be looking at it. You can also set it to play music (your downloaded MP3s) while you're working out.
Just a tip. I enjoy it and it's a free app that helps me feel more comfortable that I'm getting the correct amount of calories logged so I don't end up over-eating.
A good example: I wanted to do 30 minutes of jogging yesterday, and MFP had me pegged at about 400 calories burned. That might be perfectly accurate, but 30 minutes of "jogging" to me right now is really more like 10 minutes of jogging with 20 minutes of walking and catching my breath mixed in there. And unfortunately MFP doesn't have a "30 minutes of Lazy Jogging" entry.
But anyway, Cardiotrainer tracks your movement via GPS. It knows how fast you're running/walking, how far you've gone, and how long you've been exercising. After my workout yesterday, the real amount that I burned was actually about 289 calories (again, because Cardiotrainer knows that I walked for part of the way).
Just curious if anyone has ever tried this. It's kind of neat because every 2 minutes it voices a status message for you. Alternates between something like "Distance: 2.2 miles, 22 minutes" and "Speed: 5.3 miles per hour." Just updates you so you don't have to constantly be looking at it. You can also set it to play music (your downloaded MP3s) while you're working out.
Just a tip. I enjoy it and it's a free app that helps me feel more comfortable that I'm getting the correct amount of calories logged so I don't end up over-eating.
0
Replies
-
Newp, I use Nike+ GPS >_<0
-
I love CardioTrainer! I have it on my Droid Eris. It's great to use in combination with the C25K Lite app. I still use my Polar HRM for the calories burned, but I love the GPS feature. I really like seeing my max speed and my total distance, AND having my route mapped out for me. It'll even post your workout to FB if you link it to your FB account and select the autopost option. You can also choose different exercises, like: Running, Walking, Treadmill walking, Bicycling, and Horseback Riding... etc. etc.0
-
I actually bought a heartrate monitor (I think I got my at ****'s Sporting Goods) that has a strap that goes around your chest and tracks everything on a watch that comes with it. You put in your height, weight, & gender, and then it keeps track of your heartrate and monitors your calories burned.0
-
I use runnerkeeper on my Droid. Its a free app also.0
-
It's good to see that not everyone blindly trusts the database exercises on MFP. Like I said, if you can jog for an entire 30 minutes, then you probably will burn 400 calories, but I don't know many people who do that unless they're already fit.
To me, it felt like a really good way to overestimate your exercise calories and thus eat significantly more calories in a day than you should have.
I think all of the tools mentioned are good. I just have a tough time trusting some generic calculator. For instance, my fiance wants to do 45 minutes of Tae Bo tomorrow to burn some calories so we can have a nice dinner. MFP says she'll burn around 600 calories. That sounds reasonable, but I feel like you could burn a lot more or a lot less depending on how much effort you put into it. If you half-*kitten* it, I bet you wouldn't lose half that much. But then you'd go off and eat an extra 600 calories when you really only burned 300.0 -
I love CardioTrainer and find it to be very accurate calorie-wise, having cross-referenced it with other reliable sources like a heart rate monitor I've been using for a long time. Use the numbers from CardioTrainer for sure for your calories from working out and you will be successful.0
-
I use Cardio Trainer on my Droid... every once in a while. If I'm not mistaken, it tells you what your current MPH is and your average MPH. (If not both while walking/jogging, it does give you your minimum, maximum and average in the history when you save the workout.) Since I'm not getting caught up on every little detail, I'm okay with estimating how many calories I burn when working out. It tends to keep me more relaxed that way.
Anyway, when I'm finished walking, I use the average MPH I traveled, see if there's something close to it in MFP, plug in how long I walked at that average MPH and see what it says my calories burned should be. I'll compare that to what Cardio Trainer says it was. Since I like to eat my workout calories, if they're not waaaay different, I go with whichever one is higher. :-)0 -
The problem with MFP is that the database is made up on an individual. If you took "walking 5 kilometres per hour" and put in your 30 minutes. You'd actually get a burn that was for a 124kg 5'3 woman. Because I actually inputted that. So. With MFP you are best to start your OWN entries. or use the inbuilt ones, but always find out the burn for your height and weight.0
-
I think all of the tools mentioned are good. I just have a tough time trusting some generic calculator. For instance, my fiance wants to do 45 minutes of Tae Bo tomorrow to burn some calories so we can have a nice dinner. MFP says she'll burn around 600 calories. That sounds reasonable, but I feel like you could burn a lot more or a lot less depending on how much effort you put into it. If you half-*kitten* it, I bet you wouldn't lose half that much. But then you'd go off and eat an extra 600 calories when you really only burned 300.
Simple solution... don't half-*kitten* it.
0 -
It's good to see that not everyone blindly trusts the database exercises on MFP. Like I said, if you can jog for an entire 30 minutes, then you probably will burn 400 calories, but I don't know many people who do that unless they're already fit.
To me, it felt like a really good way to overestimate your exercise calories and thus eat significantly more calories in a day than you should have.
I think all of the tools mentioned are good. I just have a tough time trusting some generic calculator. For instance, my fiance wants to do 45 minutes of Tae Bo tomorrow to burn some calories so we can have a nice dinner. MFP says she'll burn around 600 calories. That sounds reasonable, but I feel like you could burn a lot more or a lot less depending on how much effort you put into it. If you half-*kitten* it, I bet you wouldn't lose half that much. But then you'd go off and eat an extra 600 calories when you really only burned 300.
That's true of most methods of estimating calories, including HRMs. The GPS program you mention is using the exact same formula that MFP uses--but, like you said, it's able to detect when you are stopping and starting, which is a convenience. But, just to be fair, you could do the same thing on MFP, if you just broke down the running and walking parts.
The "problems" with MFP databases are not exclusive to MFP. This site gets the database information from standard lists and published information--it's not like the site owner just makes it up. Unless the activity is simple with an established set of valid equations behind it--walking, running, for example--any database anywhere is only going to be a rough estimate.
And, no, unless your wife weighs about 250 and can work it really hard, she is not going to burn 600 calories in a tae bo class.0 -
I use Cardio Trainer on my Droid... every once in a while. If I'm not mistaken, it tells you what your current MPH is and your average MPH. (If not both while walking/jogging, it does give you your minimum, maximum and average in the history when you save the workout.) Since I'm not getting caught up on every little detail, I'm okay with estimating how many calories I burn when working out. It tends to keep me more relaxed that way.
Anyway, when I'm finished walking, I use the average MPH I traveled, see if there's something close to it in MFP, plug in how long I walked at that average MPH and see what it says my calories burned should be. I'll compare that to what Cardio Trainer says it was. Since I like to eat my workout calories, if they're not waaaay different, I go with whichever one is higher. :-)
It depends on how Cardio Trainer works. If it actually calculates the calories burned during the run speeds vs the walk speeds, that number would probably be better. However, if the Cardio Trainer bases the calories burned based solely on average speed, then it will underestimate calories expended, as will MFP if you just use average speed.
I should clarify: this is an issue only if you are doing a walk/jog workout. If you are doing all running (faster than 5.0 mph) or all walking, then using avg speed is fine.
However, running burns calories at a significantly higher rate compared to walking. The increase is non-linear.
Here is an example for an 80Kg person who walks at 3.0 mph for 15 min and jogs at 5.0 mph for 15 min. The average speed for 30 min is 4.0 mph. If you entered "4.0 mph for 30 min) into a database, you would get 162.5 calories burned for 30 min.
However, if you input separately "walk 3.0 mph for 15 min" and "jog 5.0 mph for 15 min" and add the results, the total for 30 min would be 239 calories. That's a 47% difference, although in terms of actual calories (76.5), it is negligible.
This is probably more detail that you either want or need, but there is a difference, in case anyone is interested.0 -
I use Cardio Trainer on my Droid... every once in a while. If I'm not mistaken, it tells you what your current MPH is and your average MPH. (If not both while walking/jogging, it does give you your minimum, maximum and average in the history when you save the workout.) Since I'm not getting caught up on every little detail, I'm okay with estimating how many calories I burn when working out. It tends to keep me more relaxed that way.
Anyway, when I'm finished walking, I use the average MPH I traveled, see if there's something close to it in MFP, plug in how long I walked at that average MPH and see what it says my calories burned should be. I'll compare that to what Cardio Trainer says it was. Since I like to eat my workout calories, if they're not waaaay different, I go with whichever one is higher. :-)
It depends on how Cardio Trainer works. If it actually calculates the calories burned during the run speeds vs the walk speeds, that number would probably be better. However, if the Cardio Trainer bases the calories burned based solely on average speed, then it will underestimate calories expended, as will MFP if you just use average speed.
I should clarify: this is an issue only if you are doing a walk/jog workout. If you are doing all running (faster than 5.0 mph) or all walking, then using avg speed is fine.
However, running burns calories at a significantly higher rate compared to walking. The increase is non-linear.
Here is an example for an 80Kg person who walks at 3.0 mph for 15 min and jogs at 5.0 mph for 15 min. The average speed for 30 min is 4.0 mph. If you entered "4.0 mph for 30 min) into a database, you would get 162.5 calories burned for 30 min.
However, if you input separately "walk 3.0 mph for 15 min" and "jog 5.0 mph for 15 min" and add the results, the total for 30 min would be 239 calories. That's a 47% difference, although in terms of actual calories (76.5), it is negligible.
This is probably more detail that you either want or need, but there is a difference, in case anyone is interested.
I appreciate that you took the time to give such a detailed reply to my comments. I understand you have a background in health/fitness and respect your experience. But, honestly, when I saw the length and detail of your reply and percentages, my eyes just glazed over and I hit "Quote" to reply. (Yes, I understand the irony of the length of this reply to your message.)
While I love the MFP Website and format, I think it causes more problems for people that are trying to lose weight vs get healthy than it's worth... at times. Yes, it's great that we can track our calories/nutritional information and our workouts! BUT, the thing I see time and again is people that get caught up on the details. They freak out if they go over their protein grams by 2 grams in a day or they're under ____ by ___. It's almost as if those numbers paralyze them and they don't know what to do about it. I don't want to be one of those people that only looks at the numbers and freaks out when something doesn't come up EXACTLY "right". I believe that taking a relaxed approach is better for lifestyle change and long-term success.
Do I have the mental capabilities of figuring out the exact formula for how many calories I've burned in a workout? Sure. Numbers have always been my thing. I just don't want to have to be that detail oriented, everyday for the rest of my life. That's why my explanation was so simplistic and estimated.
Life should be fun. We shouldn't bog ourselves down in detailed mathematical equations. That's why we have all these neat little gadgets. Besides, just going ahead and using the numbers that we get from the gadgets could almost serve as a placebo (sp?) effect. I firmly believe that weight loss is 90% mental. When we think we're losing 300 calories in a workout, even if we're only losing 250, that's going to have a positive affect on the bottom line... IMO.0 -
I use Cardio Trainer on my Droid... every once in a while. If I'm not mistaken, it tells you what your current MPH is and your average MPH. (If not both while walking/jogging, it does give you your minimum, maximum and average in the history when you save the workout.) Since I'm not getting caught up on every little detail, I'm okay with estimating how many calories I burn when working out. It tends to keep me more relaxed that way.
Anyway, when I'm finished walking, I use the average MPH I traveled, see if there's something close to it in MFP, plug in how long I walked at that average MPH and see what it says my calories burned should be. I'll compare that to what Cardio Trainer says it was. Since I like to eat my workout calories, if they're not waaaay different, I go with whichever one is higher. :-)
It depends on how Cardio Trainer works. If it actually calculates the calories burned during the run speeds vs the walk speeds, that number would probably be better. However, if the Cardio Trainer bases the calories burned based solely on average speed, then it will underestimate calories expended, as will MFP if you just use average speed.
I should clarify: this is an issue only if you are doing a walk/jog workout. If you are doing all running (faster than 5.0 mph) or all walking, then using avg speed is fine.
However, running burns calories at a significantly higher rate compared to walking. The increase is non-linear.
Here is an example for an 80Kg person who walks at 3.0 mph for 15 min and jogs at 5.0 mph for 15 min. The average speed for 30 min is 4.0 mph. If you entered "4.0 mph for 30 min) into a database, you would get 162.5 calories burned for 30 min.
However, if you input separately "walk 3.0 mph for 15 min" and "jog 5.0 mph for 15 min" and add the results, the total for 30 min would be 239 calories. That's a 47% difference, although in terms of actual calories (76.5), it is negligible.
This is probably more detail that you either want or need, but there is a difference, in case anyone is interested.
I appreciate that you took the time to give such a detailed reply to my comments. I understand you have a background in health/fitness and respect your experience. But, honestly, when I saw the length and detail of your reply and percentages, my eyes just glazed over and I hit "Quote" to reply. (Yes, I understand the irony of the length of this reply to your message.)
While I love the MFP Website and format, I think it causes more problems for people that are trying to lose weight vs get healthy than it's worth... at times. Yes, it's great that we can track our calories/nutritional information and our workouts! BUT, the thing I see time and again is people that get caught up on the details. They freak out if they go over their protein grams by 2 grams in a day or they're under ____ by ___. It's almost as if those numbers paralyze them and they don't know what to do about it. I don't want to be one of those people that only looks at the numbers and freaks out when something doesn't come up EXACTLY "right". I believe that taking a relaxed approach is better for lifestyle change and long-term success.
Do I have the mental capabilities of figuring out the exact formula for how many calories I've burned in a workout? Sure. Numbers have always been my thing. I just don't want to have to be that detail oriented, everyday for the rest of my life. That's why my explanation was so simplistic and estimated.
Life should be fun. We shouldn't bog ourselves down in detailed mathematical equations. That's why we have all these neat little gadgets. Besides, just going ahead and using the numbers that we get from the gadgets could almost serve as a placebo (sp?) effect. I firmly believe that weight loss is 90% mental. When we think we're losing 300 calories in a workout, even if we're only losing 250, that's going to have a positive affect on the bottom line... IMO.
There are plenty of different approaches. I provide detail when I think someone has posed a question that has a general relevance. It's there for people who are interested in the nuts and bolts. I also think that providing some detail--even if one just glosses over it--can help some people make better choices about exercises, products, etc. Much if not most of the fitness information available on the internet is inaccurate, so I try to do my tiny part to counteract that.
But you also express a valid approach. I agree with a lot of what you have to say. I am considering writing blog that is going to argue the position that monitoring exercise calories is probably not that important. I also think that people get too caught up in meal and exercise timing, protein shakes, supplements, drinking water etc, instead of just focusing on being consistent and doing quality workouts.
Some people relate to data and some don't. I think the best thing is to know yourself and do what makes sense for you.0 -
There are plenty of different approaches. I provide detail when I think someone has posed a question that has a general relevance. It's there for people who are interested in the nuts and bolts. I also think that providing some detail--even if one just glosses over it--can help some people make better choices about exercises, products, etc. Much if not most of the fitness information available on the internet is inaccurate, so I try to do my tiny part to counteract that.
But you also express a valid approach. I agree with a lot of what you have to say. I am considering writing blog that is going to argue the position that monitoring exercise calories is probably not that important. I also think that people get too caught up in meal and exercise timing, protein shakes, supplements, drinking water etc, instead of just focusing on being consistent and doing quality workouts.
Some people relate to data and some don't. I think the best thing is to know yourself and do what makes sense for you.
Good points.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 401 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 996 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions