We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!

Understanding MapMyWalk discrepancies

jjsutherland68
jjsutherland68 Posts: 3 Member
edited February 25 in Fitness and Exercise
Hi,
I've been using MMW for a few weeks now, and for the most part like it - especially the route mapping & height profile. However I've noticed a couple of things re: calorie burn which I'm struggling to understand:
1) MMW seems to read high re: calorie burn compared to MyFitnessPal
Can anyone confirm if MMW takes account of height gain/lost on a walk which would contribute to a higher calorie burn?
(I have ensured I update my weight in MMW each week along with MFP)
2) MMW has a "walking" and a "hiking" activity. Hiking seems to record significantly higher calorie burn for the same walk (same distance, speed and height gain) but I can't find any info on what distinguishes a "walk" from a "hike" in MMW. Does it assume rough ground (more effort and slower speeds)? Does it assume you are carrying backpack? (additional weight means greater effort)

Currently I simply adjust the calorie burn down to the MFP value for the same duration/speed and I'm happy with that, just curious if anyone can explain the difference...

Replies

  • Aroesner
    Aroesner Posts: 5 Member
    I'm shocked that no one has replied to this question because I am having the same difficulties understanding as you are.
    Today I went for a "3.0 moderate, walking a dog" walk for 42 minutes and when I entered that into mfp, it was over 100 calories lower than mmw...... so i am thinking that mmw is including the hills and what not... HMMMMMM.

    Me, personally, I always just lower my exercise number anyway so I don't over eat and if I do, then I know I burned some calories that I didn't submit. HAHA
  • StaciMarie1974
    StaciMarie1974 Posts: 4,138 Member
    Just my thought process: Hiking would be outdoors, in the woods or some other uneven sort of terrain. You'd have to work a little harder to navigate the terrain that walking thru a neighborhood or down the street. Though I don't think the burn would be significantly higher.

    I use MMW for the GPS tracking but I delete the calories. They are higher according to MMW than Fitbit, and I prefer to use the more conservative approach.
  • Jenny775
    Jenny775 Posts: 108 Member
    In my opinion the only way you're going to get an accurate calorie burn is with a heart rate monitor. I use MMW as well with my monitor and the calorie burn reported by MMW has been pretty on target.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories