Calories Burned

dedmon
dedmon Posts: 19
edited September 27 in Health and Weight Loss
Hey folks!

I have a general question about calories expelled during exercise. While I realize reading of calories burned are generally approximations, I still find it quite confusing and difficult to understand.

For instance my daily routine for this cycle is:
Elliptical machine/ 30-45 min
Stationary bike/ 10-20 min
Walk (4 MPH) 15 min
Jog (6 MPH) 15 min
Strength Training (Heavy) 20 min

Now according to each exercise on MFP I burn:
Eliptical 30 min - 510 cal
Stationary Bike - 132 cal
Jogging (6MPH) - 283 cal
Walk - 142 cal
Strength Training- 113 cal
Total- 1180 cal

Now here's where things confuse me. I have a "Mio Drive" watch that I use that calculates calories burned based on BMR and heart rate, provided I keep checking my heart rate when ever there is a change. All exercises I do have no rest in between as I immediately jump to the next.

The watch tells me I've burned a total of 1561 calories.

I stop the timer before starting strength training....otherwise it would be far greater calories burned.
As if that isn't confusing enough, each machine that I use has the same ability as my watch with a heart rate monitor and BMR entry. All machines from the Elliptical, Stationary Bike, and Treadmill are Polaris branded.

My heart rate display on my watch matches the display on each work out machine.
I've recorded each read out on the Polaris machines and they only help to confuse the matter.

Polaris Elliptical Machine - 389 cal
Polaris Stationary Bike - 141 cal
Polaris Treadmill - 372 cal
Strength Training (MFP) - 113 cal

Total- 1015

Just for added info, I keep my heart rate at 75-90% of my max.

It seems there is no exact science to this and my watch readings are too good to be true, but anyone have a better idea of how to determine a more accurate caloric burn?

Replies

  • fatboypup
    fatboypup Posts: 1,873 Member
    does your watch have a chest strap?
  • dedmon
    dedmon Posts: 19
    does your watch have a chest strap?
    Nope, no chest strap. That's one of the reasons I got this was because I didn't have to wear one and Mio watches have been reported to be just as efficient.....so they say.
  • fatboypup
    fatboypup Posts: 1,873 Member
    does your watch have a chest strap?
    Nope, no chest strap. That's one of the reasons I got this was because I didn't have to wear one and Mio watches have been reported to be just as efficient.....so they say.

    ya ..... so they say if your really into this and you feel you really need to know exactly how much you've burned invest in a decent HRM with a chest strap
  • dedmon
    dedmon Posts: 19
    does your watch have a chest strap?
    Nope, no chest strap. That's one of the reasons I got this was because I didn't have to wear one and Mio watches have been reported to be just as efficient.....so they say.

    ya ..... so they say if your really into this and you feel you really need to know exactly how much you've burned invest in a decent HRM with a chest strap
    Yeah, guess that's what I'm going to have to do. I had one and while this was when I was 60lbs bigger, I found the strap to be quite irritating to me belly. But I don't really have much of that anymore...so I guess I could try again. lol
  • Losing2Live69
    Losing2Live69 Posts: 743 Member
    Does your HRM have a chest strap? I tried a MIO and it wasn't accurate. It was one without a chest strap that didn't monitor my actual heart beat. Also...it is set with your age, weight, height, etc. isn't it? I don't think the figures on MFP are based on our specific information...I'm not positive of that though, I may be wrong. I know my HRM has much different figures than MFP. It is slightly different than the readings on the machines at the gym. If your HRM doesn't have a chest strap you may want to consider getting one with one.
  • aippolito1
    aippolito1 Posts: 4,894 Member
    I'd go with the machines. A HRM with a chest strap would be much more accurate.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories