Spin Class Calorie Burn - HRM versus MFP

CaraRadz
CaraRadz Posts: 169 Member
edited September 23 in Fitness and Exercise
Today I wore my new heart rate monitor (Polar FT7) to spin class for the first time. I was interested in how accurate the MFP exercise database was, so when I got home I compared some numbers.

I started the monitor when class began and stopped it when we dismounted the bikes. So the reading includes the class warm-up and cool-down, including stretching done on the bike. For 57 minutes of class, my HRM told me I burned 783 calories. Here are the numbers the MFP database says I should have burned in that amount of time:

Spinning: 624
Stationary Bike - General: 624
Stationary Bike - Moderate Effort: 624
Stationary Bike - Vigorous Effort: 937

What's interesting is that the spinning numbers (which oddly are identical to Stationary Bike - General/Moderate Effort) from MFP are 20% lower than what my HRM said I burned. Conversely, the Stationary Bike - Vigorous Effort numbers from MFP are 20% higher than what my HRM said I burned. The average of the two is 780.5, which is almost right on to what I burned.

Before getting my HRM, I'd been using the "Spinning" option in the MFP database, so I've been under-counting my exercise calories by about 20%. This means that I've been under-eating as a result.

There have been lots of threads about HRMs versus the calorie burn numbers on machines at the gym. I just thought I'd share my observations about HRMs versus the MFP database (at least for this specific spin class that I took tonight). I'm inclined to give more weight to the HRM since it's based on my heart rate and the amount of energy I'm putting into the class in addition to the height/weight/sex that MFP uses.

Replies

  • FaeFae
    FaeFae Posts: 243 Member
    my HRM reads about 100 less calories than the machines. I have never tried spinning though. I might try it soon i'm just not looking forward to the sore bum. lol
  • smrach83
    smrach83 Posts: 20
    I've always wondered how close this site was to "real" #'s, I can't wait untill my HRM comes in!!! Thanks for the update!
  • Danilouise86
    Danilouise86 Posts: 14
    I have the same HRM as you and it is so much better than trying to trust the machines or the database. I always burn less than what those things say and its helping me really keep things in perspective!
  • KoalaGirl8
    KoalaGirl8 Posts: 1
    That would be a useful thing to have. Especially if I want to keep up with my spin class. Do you know if they work while you're doing strength training as well?
  • Nigel99
    Nigel99 Posts: 498 Member
    Once I bought my HRM, I discovered that I was regularly off on a lot of things. I burned way more calories shoveling snow than what MFP said, and I found then when I exercised with Your Shape on the Xbox 360 Kinect, the "game" was underestimating my calories burned by nearly 50% or more.
  • CaraRadz
    CaraRadz Posts: 169 Member
    @KoalaGirl - An HRM will measure your calorie burn regardless of what you're doing, so it could definitely be useful for use when strength training.

    UPDATE: I went to another spin class this morning with my HRM. Since it was an early morning class, I didn't really put in the same level of intensity as I would in an evening class. This time the burn on my HRM was right in line with the Spinning numbers in the MFP database. It just goes to show that every workout will result in a different calorie burn, depending on the amount of effort that you put in.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    That would be a useful thing to have. Especially if I want to keep up with my spin class. Do you know if they work while you're doing strength training as well?

    No--HRM calorie counts are not accurate for strength training.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories