Garmin Connect vs Strava vs MFP

newtonuk
newtonuk Posts: 13 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I wonder if any of you more knowledgeable folk might be able to explain this for me please?

My morning bike ride synced from Garmin Connect this morning (+1 for integration at long last) and gave me a calorie deficit of 713 calories.

I also have Strava set up to sync to MFP, as they introduced syncing before Garmin, however Strava only offered me 351 calories.

So, just to round things off, I entered the same exercise (Cycling 14-16 mph for 32 minutes) directly into MFP and that gave me 548 calories!

That's one heck of a range of results for the same exercise!

Replies

  • missemmibelle
    missemmibelle Posts: 100 Member
    Which one is connected to a HRM? :)

    This is a really good question. I'd be tempted the believe Garmin if your device calculates elevation and especially if there's a HRM.

    Sans that, I'd go with the lower figure or eat back half of the highest.

    Both Garmin Connect and MFP are serial over-estimaters. I have no experience with Strava.
  • newtonuk
    newtonuk Posts: 13 Member
    Ah, none of them on my daily commute, but Garmin and Strava both get HRM data on my longer weekend rides and both of them come up with different calorie expenditure.

    For example, a recent ride with a HRM showed:

    Garmin 1,890
    Strava 2,528

    So the weighting was the other way around in this example, Strava shows more calories being burned than Garmin (usually the other way around).

    Another ride with a HRM shows:

    Garmin 1,489
    Strava 1,895

    Again, the weighting goes to Strava, whereas without a HRM Strava reports significantly fewer calories than Garmin!

    Interesting stuff!
  • TMattP
    TMattP Posts: 49 Member
    My Calories are usually higher with Strava too. However, I do most of my exercise through Garmin and upload data to Strava because thats what my mates use.

    I use the Garmin data because of the HRM.
  • crawlspeed
    crawlspeed Posts: 2
    If your calories seem a bit low in Strava try going to your profile online and adding in your bike and its weight. I have just started using Strava and was noticing the calories were much lower than the MFP estimates. After adding my mountain bike and its 35 pounds the numbers are much closer. I can only assume MFP is figuring for a more casual user and heavier bike and Strava is figuring for a light weight bike by default or no bike at all unless you enter it.

    On 4 almost identical rides last week these were my results:

    Ride 1: MFP estimate only - Bicycling, 12-14 mph, moderate (cycling, biking, bike riding) Time: 23 Calories: 344
    Ride 2: Strava App before bike added - Bicycling, 12-14 mph, moderate (cycling, biking, bike riding) Time: 27 Calories: 186
    Ride 3: Strava App before bike added - Bicycling, 12-14 mph, moderate (cycling, biking, bike riding) Time: 28 Calories: 217
    Ride 4: Strava App after adding bike - Bicycling, 12-14 mph, moderate (cycling, biking, bike riding) Time: 27 Calories: 353

    After adding the bike I am definitely more comfortable using the Strava synced results.
  • newtonuk
    newtonuk Posts: 13 Member
    What a wide variance!

    I do track my bike in Strava, as I use it to check what mileage I'm getting from tyres etc. on each bike, but thanks for the tip.

Categories