Does Driving Actually Burn Calories?

13»

Replies

  • Rocbola
    Rocbola Posts: 1,998 Member
    Of course you burn calories while driving, but there is no need to log something like that.
  • Awfy
    Awfy Posts: 3 Member
    I would have agreed with all of you, except I've recently driven 1,000 miles over 2 days, eating fairly normally, and found I had lost nearly 2 kg. Admittedly it was a stressful drive, with girlfriend arguing with me and satnav, heavy rain, car misbehaving, etc!
    I've checked a couple of calorie databases and both give figures around 150-170 cph.
    (Driving back on my own with only satnav for company only earned me 1kg weight loss)
    Why not check it out yourselves?
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    Now calm down! I'm not going to log my 7 hours of driving in lieu of an actual workout but isn't this interesting?

    Calories Burned Driving a Car

    Driving requires energy. Moving the wheel, using your feet to operate the pedals and turning your head all require calories to power the body. According to CalorieLab.com, on average, a person weighing 150 lbs. will burn about 68 calories an hour driving. A person who weighs 120 lbs. will burn about only 55 calories an hour driving, while a person weighing 220 lbs. will burn about 100.

    Variables

    Calories burned per hour goes up with certain types of cars and certain types of driving. A 150-lb. person driving a bus, heavy truck or tractor burns about 136 calories an hour, and that same person driving a race car burns about 340 calories an hour. Driving a truck, including loading and unloading, will burn about 374 calories an hour, about the same amount in a Whopper Jr. from Burger King.

    Weight Loss and Driving

    Unfortunately, truck driving does not lend itself to weight loss. While the number of calories required to drive a truck is higher than those required to drive a car, a study by the Centers for Disease Control shows that 73 percent of truck drivers are overweight and more than 50 percent are obese. This could be because driving long distances can be boring and eating breaks up the monotony. For instance, a Pew Research poll showed that 41 percent of car drivers had eaten a meal while driving in the last year.

    Read more: http://www.ehow.com/about_5452973_calories-burned-driving.html#ixzz2ZRy1l8Uo

    Yeah, except those driving burns you are reporting are just normal sitting, breathing amounts.
  • snowflake930
    snowflake930 Posts: 2,188 Member
    You would probably be burning the same number of calories just sitting or maybe even sleeping. Just by living, you are burning calories. Logging it though...............seems kind of ridiculous.

    Losing weight is mostly about eating at a calorie deficit. Exercising is mostly about building muscle (weight training) and making a more healthy circulatory system (cardio).

    Many people do not even eat back exercise calories. Just saying.
  • misskarne
    misskarne Posts: 1,765 Member
    Hmm. I wonder how many calories I would have burnt while rallying? The average rally was 6 hours or more, and I'd spend most of that time getting tossed about like a ragdoll in harness while trying to keep my voice level, collected and clear.

    I suppose dad would have burned a lot more than me...I was just the talking ballast. :laugh:
  • snowflake930
    snowflake930 Posts: 2,188 Member
    and, I am probably burning more calories working 11-12 hours 6 days a week in an office with all of the getting up and down and moving around I do. I also have a 90 minute commute driving round trip. Never gave it a thought as being exercise and never will. It is day to day life.
  • BigdaddyTrippy
    BigdaddyTrippy Posts: 1 Member
    Driving Semi uses lots in a day. Changing gears using a clutch 6 to 8 times between lights. Changing gears to climb hills as well to go down hills. These take lots of arm movements. Your turning head from side to side making sure your not running over people and cars in turns. Your climbing in and out of a tall vehicle. There are lots of other activities done as part of that work too.

    Those that say it's like sitting at your computer typing have little concept of the job. Every job will have some form of cal burn. Some more some less. Semi driving is not driving a taxi.

    As for truck drivers being heavy for a large part of them. They have less for food choices due to how much space is needed for parking. They eat many meals in their semi meaning it has to be mobil friendly food. Not easy to find low calorie foods in hand friendly form, that truck driver has access to. I am not saying it's impossible just very difficult and limited. It's easy to get into bad eating habits driving semi.
  • Debmal77
    Debmal77 Posts: 4,770 Member
    I'm watching paint dry tomorrow. Can I log that?
  • dhimaan
    dhimaan Posts: 774 Member
    Yes but it is insignificant.
  • Awfy
    Awfy Posts: 3 Member
    Snowflake and Debmai seem to have missed the point, it's about getting an accurate balance and not about macho attitudes. I've classed myself as sedentary, therefore virtually any exercise (including not funny watching paint dry) could reasonably be included in the net result. Also, apart from the physical activity, don't forget that driving involves considerable concentration and the brain uses a surprisingly large percentage of calorie expenditure. My example also showed a significant weight loss solely due to driving, which proved the point. I'm going to keep counting the net difference between just existing and driving as a valid exercise for any journey longer than 1 hour.
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    My heart rate is about at its lowest when driving. Physical effort is about the same as holding a laptop or lifting a TV remote.
  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    Awfy wrote: »
    Snowflake and Debmai seem to have missed the point, it's about getting an accurate balance and not about macho attitudes. I've classed myself as sedentary, therefore virtually any exercise (including not funny watching paint dry) could reasonably be included in the net result. Also, apart from the physical activity, don't forget that driving involves considerable concentration and the brain uses a surprisingly large percentage of calorie expenditure. My example also showed a significant weight loss solely due to driving, which proved the point. I'm going to keep counting the net difference between just existing and driving as a valid exercise for any journey longer than 1 hour.

    Yeah, no.
  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    edited January 2016
    yarwell wrote: »
    My heart rate is about at its lowest when driving. Physical effort is about the same as holding a laptop or lifting a TV remote.

    You should move to houston; ridiculous drivers can really get your heart rate going. Still not exercise.
  • snowflake930
    snowflake930 Posts: 2,188 Member
    edited January 2016
    Awfy wrote: »
    Snowflake and Debmai seem to have missed the point, it's about getting an accurate balance and not about macho attitudes. I've classed myself as sedentary, therefore virtually any exercise (including not funny watching paint dry) could reasonably be included in the net result. Also, apart from the physical activity, don't forget that driving involves considerable concentration and the brain uses a surprisingly large percentage of calorie expenditure. My example also showed a significant weight loss solely due to driving, which proved the point. I'm going to keep counting the net difference between just existing and driving as a valid exercise for any journey longer than 1 hour.

    If you are alive, you are burning calories, so yes, you do burn calories driving, and just living. Exercise, to me, is any activity you do to increase your heart rate or build muscles, beyond day to day living. I have a 45 minute commute one way, to work. I make a conscious effort to move more throughout my day, and get 18K to 20K steps daily, but I only count the 65 minutes I spend at the gym, doing cardio,as exercise. Don't see how that is a macho attitude. It is the way it is. You are not going to get much benefit counting day to day normal activities as exercise, just saying.

  • debrakgoogins
    debrakgoogins Posts: 2,033 Member
    Are you driving an Indie car around a track at 200 MPH and fighting to keep it from flying off the track? No? Then, no, not any more that your other daily activities do.
  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    Awfy wrote: »
    Snowflake and Debmai seem to have missed the point, it's about getting an accurate balance and not about macho attitudes. I've classed myself as sedentary, therefore virtually any exercise (including not funny watching paint dry) could reasonably be included in the net result. Also, apart from the physical activity, don't forget that driving involves considerable concentration and the brain uses a surprisingly large percentage of calorie expenditure. My example also showed a significant weight loss solely due to driving, which proved the point. I'm going to keep counting the net difference between just existing and driving as a valid exercise for any journey longer than 1 hour.

    And to clarify, sedentary does not mean doing absolutely nothing except breathing and existing all day. I believe the "explanation" they give is works a desk job. That assumes a fair amount of things in the day: that person feeds himself, fork gets moved to mouth. He also goes to a restaurant or grocery store at least occasionally to accomplish this. He gets out of bed in the morning, he walks to the bathroom, he walks to his car, and he drives to work.

    Sedentary is different than minimally conscious, so everyday activities should not be logged as exercise.
  • Geocitiesuser
    Geocitiesuser Posts: 1,429 Member
    Hello really old thread from the past. I keep getting this thread in google when searching about calories burned while driving. I drove 500 miles a couple of times this week, and it has both times left me feeling exhausted, so I've been researching it a bit.

    There seems to be a bit and back forth on the issue but from what I've seen there tends to be a concensus that there IS an elevated calorie burn from driving (both from being the driver, and to a lesser extend the passenger), because your muscles are constantly making very small corrections to account for the bumps in the road and small adjustments to the wheel.

    Obviously, this extra calorie burn would be very, very low. But still higher than something like watching TV.

    One calorie burn calculator estimates it at around 68 calories per hour for a 150lb person. I have to imagine that is gross calorie burn though. So if I was going to make a completely hypothetical guess at net calorie burn, I'd wager it burns 5-20 net calories per hour depending on body size.

    For most still probably not worth logging. But it's fun food for thought. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if a 5 hour drive resulted in an extra 70 calories burned.
  • ShrinkingViolet1982
    ShrinkingViolet1982 Posts: 919 Member
    I wouldn't log this, only because it doesn't raise my heart rate. Each to their own, but why log something that doesn't give you cardiovascular benefit?
  • FreyasRebirth
    FreyasRebirth Posts: 514 Member
    If you were to drive an antique (no power steering, ect), that could be a workout.
  • Chadxx
    Chadxx Posts: 1,199 Member
    Driving Semi uses lots in a day. Changing gears using a clutch 6 to 8 times between lights. Changing gears to climb hills as well to go down hills. These take lots of arm movements. Your turning head from side to side making sure your not running over people and cars in turns. Your climbing in and out of a tall vehicle. There are lots of other activities done as part of that work too.

    Those that say it's like sitting at your computer typing have little concept of the job. Every job will have some form of cal burn. Some more some less. Semi driving is not driving a taxi.

    As for truck drivers being heavy for a large part of them. They have less for food choices due to how much space is needed for parking. They eat many meals in their semi meaning it has to be mobil friendly food. Not easy to find low calorie foods in hand friendly form, that truck driver has access to. I am not saying it's impossible just very difficult and limited. It's easy to get into bad eating habits driving semi.

    As a professional driver, I completely agree with this, especially regarding food. I now pack my meals in a cooler and just eat them cold everyday because I refuse to eat crap and get fat again. Btw, you forgot about getting beat to death bouncing around, especially on lease roads or in construction zones. I don't log it but it definitely isn't sitting at a desk.
  • stealthq
    stealthq Posts: 4,298 Member
    jetlag wrote: »
    Well, yes, because you burn calories every minute of every day. EVERYTHING burns calories.

    I suspect that driving doesn't burn many more calories than sitting down, however, especially if you drive an automatic, so I wouldn't be inclined to log it.

    Yep.

    I mean, unless you're normally lying down all day. Anyone have their calorie goal set to BMR - deficit? Then you're good to log driving.
  • VeryKatie
    VeryKatie Posts: 5,961 Member
    edited April 2017
    Annnnddd those people who log it as exercise probably are the ones posting on the forums "Help I'm not losing weight!" Or "Help! I'm eating a deficit but GAINING weight".

    ETA: Unless it's the golf thing. But even then I think that's pushing it.
  • brznhabits
    brznhabits Posts: 126 Member
    edited April 2017
    Only if you also sing for those 7 hours :p

    It does burn a little more (compared to sitting at work on a non-challenging brain day), I know because when I road trip I know I burn a little bit more. Though it could be my excellent singing.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,181 Member
    edited April 2017
    Nice necro-tread revival.

    The answer is that you (should) log the (actual) calories you burn in excess of what you told MFP you were going to burn.

    It really doesn't matter one bit (for the purpose of the accuracy of the calculation) whether the calories got spent naval gazing or pulling on a rope attached to a jumbo jet, or to a buddy who fell down a cliff!

    Sitting, quietly, watching tv, watching a movie, talking on the phone are all activities that burn approximately 1.3x to 1.5x BMR. https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/Activity-Categories/inactivity

    You will note that MFP's SEDENTARY setting is set at 1.25x BMR.

    As such you will need a LOT of minutes of such activities before you see a divergence worth taking a note off.

    Driving on the other hand seems to be classified as an activity that burns approximately 2.5x BMR https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/Activity-Categories/transportation

    Looking at the history (1993, 2000, 2011), it seems that driving a car has gone up from being a MET 2 activity to becoming a MET 2.5 activity, and driving a semi (truck) seems to have decreased from a MET 3 activity to a MET 2.5 activity over time (probably in response to technological change).

    Be that as it may, it looks like driving takes appreciably more effort than sitting quietly.

    Admittedly, driving down the freeway on cruise control vs driving in the downtown core of a major city probably requires different amounts of effort.

    This would be similar to people who log "vigorous swimming freestyle 2 hours". Really? You were swimming non stop and vigorously for the full two hours? Unless you're already sponsored... I have some doubts about that! So, buyer beware, and it is up to you to determine how long you actively engaged in the particular activity you're logging!

    Having said that, if you're setup on MFP as sedentary, and drive for half a day non stop, I would expect that logging a driving activity would probably make more sense than not.

    If you're set as "very active" on MFP (BMR x 1.8)... probably NOT logging would make sense. When you're asleep you're actually only spending BMR x 0.95, but MFP expects you to be spending 1.8xBMR 24/7/365 based on your activity settings... so you have some serious catching up to do to end up with an average level of activity of BMR x 1.8 over the 24 hours of the day.

    It is all a numbers game and in the end your trending weight and fat % are the final arbiters of your logging, not whether you "should" be logging something or not because it matches a particular definition.
  • Nony_Mouse
    Nony_Mouse Posts: 5,646 Member
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    Nice necro-tread revival.

    The answer is that you (should) log the (actual) calories you burn in excess of what you told MFP you were going to burn.

    It really doesn't matter one bit (for the purpose of the accuracy of the calculation) whether the calories got spent naval gazing or pulling on a rope attached to a jumbo jet, or to a buddy who fell down a cliff!

    Sitting, quietly, watching tv, watching a movie, talking on the phone are all activities that burn approximately 1.3x to 1.5x BMR. https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/Activity-Categories/inactivity

    You will note that MFP's SEDENTARY setting is set at 1.25x BMR.

    As such you will need a LOT of minutes of such activities before you see a divergence worth taking a note off.

    Driving on the other hand seems to be classified as an activity that burns approximately 2.5x BMR https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/Activity-Categories/transportation

    Looking at the history (1993, 2000, 2011), it seems that driving a car has gone up from being a MET 2 activity to becoming a MET 2.5 activity, and driving a semi (truck) seems to have decreased from a MET 3 activity to a MET 2.5 activity over time (probably in response to technological change).

    Be that as it may, it looks like driving takes appreciably more effort than sitting quietly.

    Admittedly, driving down the freeway on cruise control vs driving in the downtown core of a major city probably requires different amounts of effort.

    This would be similar to people who log "vigorous swimming freestyle 2 hours". Really? You were swimming non stop and vigorously for the full two hours? Unless you're already sponsored... I have some doubts about that! So, buyer beware, and it is up to you to determine how long you actively engaged in the particular activity you're logging!

    Having said that, if you're setup on MFP as sedentary, and drive for half a day non stop, I would expect that logging a driving activity would probably make more sense than not.

    If you're set as "very active" on MFP (BMR x 1.8)... probably NOT logging would make sense. When you're asleep you're actually only spending BMR x 0.95, but MFP expects you to be spending 1.8xBMR 24/7/365 based on your activity settings... so you have some serious catching up to do to end up with an average level of activity of BMR x 1.8 over the 24 hours of the day.

    It is all a numbers game and in the end your trending weight and fat % are the final arbiters of your logging, not whether you "should" be logging something or not because it matches a particular definition.

    Dammit, I just moved so that I don't have to drive for 1 1/2 - 2 hours every day!! Of course I will be replacing that driving with walking to work instead, so...
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,181 Member
    Nony_Mouse wrote: »
    Dammit, I just moved so that I don't have to drive for 1 1/2 - 2 hours every day!! Of course I will be replacing that driving with walking to work instead, so...

    Oh, Nony, walking is WAY more fun ;-)
    https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/Activity-Categories/walking
  • Nony_Mouse
    Nony_Mouse Posts: 5,646 Member
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    Nony_Mouse wrote: »
    Dammit, I just moved so that I don't have to drive for 1 1/2 - 2 hours every day!! Of course I will be replacing that driving with walking to work instead, so...

    Oh, Nony, walking is WAY more fun ;-)
    https://sites.google.com/site/compendiumofphysicalactivities/Activity-Categories/walking

    Oh believe me, I know!! I am an avid walker and day hiker.
  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    edited April 2017
    Awfy wrote: »
    I would have agreed with all of you, except I've recently driven 1,000 miles over 2 days, eating fairly normally, and found I had lost nearly 2 kg. Admittedly it was a stressful drive, with girlfriend arguing with me and satnav, heavy rain, car misbehaving, etc!
    I've checked a couple of calorie databases and both give figures around 150-170 cph.
    (Driving back on my own with only satnav for company only earned me 1kg weight loss)
    Why not check it out yourselves?

    @Awfy Just no.

    You did not lost 2kg of fat over 2 days driving. That would mean you burned an extra 12-15,000+ calories, around the same as running 4 or 5 marathons.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Awfy wrote: »
    I would have agreed with all of you, except I've recently driven 1,000 miles over 2 days, eating fairly normally, and found I had lost nearly 2 kg. Admittedly it was a stressful drive, with girlfriend arguing with me and satnav, heavy rain, car misbehaving, etc!
    I've checked a couple of calorie databases and both give figures around 150-170 cph.
    (Driving back on my own with only satnav for company only earned me 1kg weight loss)
    Why not check it out yourselves?

    @Awfy Just no.

    You did not lost 2kg of fat over 2 days driving. That would mean you burned an extra 12-15,000+ calories, around the same as running 4 or 5 marathons.

    People just need to stop thinking that weight loss is linear and that your weight loss or gain will directly reflect what you ate the day before. That's just not how it works.

    I lost 3 lbs the day I drove back from my vacation too (7 hours), but it's because I just happened to drop water weight that day. The drive had no impact whatsoever with the weight loss (except the part where I had to stop every hour to pee). The actual fat loss happened in the WEEKS before that drive.