Activity tracker vs MFP

Options
Cwyman1
Cwyman1 Posts: 72 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I recently purchased a Garmin Vivosmart Activity tracker. This morning I jogged at 5mph for 47 minutes. The Vivosmart shows that I burned 163 calories. This was measured without a HRM. But if I manually enter in the same time and speed in MFP it estimates my calorie burn to be 542 calories.
Why the large difference? I'm sure out will be more accurate once I get my HRM, but until then I'd like to know if anyone else is seeing similar results with their activity tracker.

Replies

  • alikonda
    alikonda Posts: 2,358 Member
    Options
    I have never seen divergence quite that huge, but 163 calories for ~4 miles seems really low! (I generally estimate 100 cal/mile)
  • LittleRed_1976
    LittleRed_1976 Posts: 1
    Options
    Along the same lines, I turned the activity tracker off on the Vivo and have been manually entering the exercise into MFP. It seemed as though everything duplicated if the activity tracker was on. Is anyone else experiencing the same issue?
  • jdhcm2006
    jdhcm2006 Posts: 2,254 Member
    Options
    I have a VivoFit, and I have MFP and Garmin Connect synced. So I allow Garmin Connect to move my exercise over to MFP. Before when I was entering the workout on MFP, Garmin was also entering the workout on MFP, so I would have a double entries. Once I just let Garmin Connect do it's thing, I haven't had any issues.
  • KrzyGal
    KrzyGal Posts: 139 Member
    Options
    I got the FitBit Tracker and like it so much better than relying on the stuff MFP says. I've googled for comparison and it seems MFP is off but is a general; doesn't take in your age, weight, etc.
  • cnadiger
    cnadiger Posts: 168 Member
    Options
    MFP seems to always overestimate calories, but 163 seems really low for that distance. With my Fitbit, it seemed really good for awhile, but now is showing the right amount on Fitbit while showng at least 50% less on MFP. Maybe something in the app syncs got messed up?
  • Sweetvirgo63
    Sweetvirgo63 Posts: 119 Member
    edited October 2014
    Options
    If you go on other websites to use calorie-burn calculators, you'll find out that they will all give you a different answer for the same activity and duration. The Elliptical Trainer showed my calorie burn at 314 this morning for 40 minutes, MFP showed 547, and another website gave 214. The only activity tracker I use is MapMyWalk and it's mostly to keep track of the distance covered [and the neat designs I create with my walking] ;)
  • Cwyman1
    Cwyman1 Posts: 72 Member
    Options
    jdhcm2006 wrote: »
    I have a VivoFit, and I have MFP and Garmin Connect synced. So I allow Garmin Connect to move my exercise over to MFP. Before when I was entering the workout on MFP, Garmin was also entering the workout on MFP, so I would have a double entries. Once I just let Garmin Connect do it's thing, I haven't had any issues.

    This is how I have mine set up too.
  • Cwyman1
    Cwyman1 Posts: 72 Member
    Options
    I just picked up a Wahoo HRM so workouts should be much more accurate now.
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    Options
    One of the problem with any activity tracker is that they often tend to use gross rather than net calories. Running at pretty much any rate is about 2/3 x bodyweight x distance for net calories and walking is a little more complex but generally 1/3 rather than 2/3. Using a HRM will always give me a huge caloric burns since my HR tends to be higher than the formulas -- I'm usually dead while running according to the charts since my HR is often over 170 or even over 190 when running testing my anaerobic and lactic acid thresholds.

    I usually look at a net calorie calculator like exrx.net/Calculators/Calories.html to get a better idea but certain exercises like weight lifting and elliptical machines are rarely very accurate.
  • tjohnoconnor
    tjohnoconnor Posts: 58 Member
    Options
    All activity trackers are going to be off, even an HRM. An HRM can accurately monitor your heart rate but even the calorie burn it estimates is going to be an estimate. I have found the best results is to stick with one tracker and subtract the number of calories consumed from the calories burned. Divide by 3500 and compare that to the amount of weight loss. Whatever percentage difference you get + or - you adjust accordingly. Or you can throw the whole calorie burn concept out the window and follow the TDEE Method. Maybe its just me but rewarding oneself with a snack or earning food from watching calories burned is like giving a snack to a pet for not peeing on the floor

Categories