Calories burned while cycling...

slt0831
slt0831 Posts: 1
edited February 28 in Fitness and Exercise
I use an app called FitApp when I'm cycling. Just today I rode 4 miles in 38 minutes with an average speed of 13.9 mph. My app calculated that I burned 450 calories. Is this anywhere near accurate? It was a workout, but I feel like that's a lit of calories!

Thanks!

Replies

  • Ani45
    Ani45 Posts: 47
    I have a similar question, so bumping this up :)
  • PeterRobe
    PeterRobe Posts: 1
    I use Endomondo for all my tracking, it also links with the FitBit app on my phone. I recently did a ride just over 5 miles and it says I burned 539 kcals.

    I think with most of these apps they use generalised averages to give a 'best guess' and I know that the calories burned will vary between people depending on you as a person.

    Hope that helps.
  • pgsp
    pgsp Posts: 1 Member
    i use Strava.And for my average 28 km ride i burn 530 cal.
    It is suppose to be accurate.

    Cheers
  • VastBreak
    VastBreak Posts: 322 Member
    I think it will depend on you weight and fitness level. For me I need to ride close to 70 minutes for a 400ish calorie burn. Lots of factors, the Terrain your riding on? How much are you pushing/exerting yourself?
  • _Terrapin_
    _Terrapin_ Posts: 4,301 Member
    I use an app called FitApp when I'm cycling. Just today I rode 4 miles in 38 minutes with an average speed of 13.9 mph. My app calculated that I burned 450 calories. Is this anywhere near accurate? It was a workout, but I feel like that's a lit of calories!

    Thanks!

    The math doesn't work. 4 miles in 38 minutes is 13.9 mph?!?
  • hearthwood
    hearthwood Posts: 794 Member
    You always have to question your apps. I think a lot of them overestimate calories burned. Really I think the best way is to use one of those heart monitors. At least they say they are the most accurate.
  • tycho_mx
    tycho_mx Posts: 426 Member
    very unlikely.

    I use an ergometer on my bike. It measures the actual energy spent on the pedals. Burning 900 calories per hour on a road bike means going over 35 km/h (22 mph). Solo.

    My Garmin HR monitor overestimates calories by about 30%. My old HR monitor was much worse, it regularly stated 1000+ calories per hour. MFP is the worst of all - it's one or two tiers off-calibration: I did a very hard workout on saturday (90 km in 2.5 h). Per time, the calorie consumption corresponds to their 23-26 km/h pace.

    Just a note - calorie consumption on a bike is not very mass related on the flat since it is not a load-bearing exercise (the saddle supports you), and higher speeds require much more energy than slow - it's not a linear relationship due to air resistance.
  • 47Jacqueline
    47Jacqueline Posts: 6,993 Member
    I've found that most of these apps are way off base in calculating calories. I wrote a complaint to mapmyfitness about it. As I've lost weight and gotten in better shape, I burn nowhere near the calories I did when out of shape and heavier. I rarely get to 350c even in a full out Zumba class, where I'm sweating, dripping wet and breathing hard.

    I think I read somewhere that most canned calculations are based on a 150lb person (male,female? in/out of shape?)



    Personal, Aqua and Group Fitness Instructor
    AFAA Personal and Group Fitness Instructor Certificates
    Licensed Zumba Instructor
    Five years as a Health Professional
  • texrgb1
    texrgb1 Posts: 1
    You really need a heart rate monitor to see how hard your body is working. I can do the same ride, at two different paces and my calorie burn can be up to 250 calories in difference
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    I fail to see weight mentioned, which is a decent factor, even bigger if going up any hills.
    Because the energy saved going back down doesn't equal what is spent extra going up. Down has extra wind resistance.

    Flat has extra road resistance with heavier weight.

    And it all depends on personal effort, though at that speed you are getting near the wind resistance you will going faster.

    About the most accurate you'll get, depending on how accurate you make the input.

    While it is entirely possible, depending on weight, weight of bike, type of tires, incline, wind, your position on bike, it's probably a tad more unlikely than likely.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    I've found that most of these apps are way off base in calculating calories. I wrote a complaint to mapmyfitness about it. As I've lost weight and gotten in better shape, I burn nowhere near the calories I did when out of shape and heavier. I rarely get to 350c even in a full out Zumba class, where I'm sweating, dripping wet and breathing hard.

    I think I read somewhere that most canned calculations are based on a 150lb person (male,female? in/out of shape?)



    Personal, Aqua and Group Fitness Instructor
    AFAA Personal and Group Fitness Instructor Certificates
    Licensed Zumba Instructor
    Five years as a Health Professional

    Most exercise is totally about weight based action, so your fitness level has little bearing on the amount of calories burned.

    You and another person at same weight doing same weight-based workout (walking, jogging, cycling, ect) will burn the same, even if you've been doing the same thing for 2 yrs and they for 3 months.

    And if you both had the same HRmax potential, but your HR during the workout was 30 bpm lower than theirs, it merely means your VO2max is higher. Means you are burning more fat doing it, they more carbs.

    That's where the cheaper Polar's and most HRM's fail, no VO2max stat or means of getting it. They assume bad BMI is bad level of fitness - which isn't true.

    But to your point, indeed, you move less mass around at same pace, you should be burning less.

    But being in or out of shape has no bearing except for the first few weeks.

    Regarding the model person using the system, that's usually cardio machines when you do NOT input your own weight.
    These sites should have your weight and be using rather standard and highly accurate formula's for calorie burn walking and jogging, biking can be a bit off until you get longer and longer to balance out wind and hills.
  • SingingSingleTracker
    SingingSingleTracker Posts: 1,866 Member
    I use an app called FitApp when I'm cycling. Just today I rode 4 miles in 38 minutes with an average speed of 13.9 mph. My app calculated that I burned 450 calories. Is this anywhere near accurate? It was a workout, but I feel like that's a lit of calories!

    Thanks!

    HR montior with the preferences set to your weight, age, and training zones will help get it more accurate. Even better is if you have a power meter (or can use an exercise bike that has a power meter which measures your watts) and is calibrated correctly. I have both and use TrainingPeaks.com to do the most accurate calculations.

    As an example, I did a 00:37:30 mountain bike ride the other day that covered 6.61 miles (averaged 10.6 mph) which resulted in a burn of 441 kcals. Average HR was 127 with a maximum hit during that ride of 158 (plenty of climbs on this ride to grind out). That was not a very high effort ride for me as during a race I usually average in the 161-176 HR range (and calorie burn is much higher).

    As has been mentioned above, I would error on the side of the number of calories being burned being a bit lower than what your device might show and not eat back all of the calories burned during exercise to make sure that - if weight loss is your goal - is still progressing. And if maintaining, watch carefully at one's consumption using the caloric burn readings from a device you may or may not know is accurate.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories