Which do you trust - MFP or mapmywalk

Achaila
Achaila Posts: 264 Member
edited November 20 in Fitness and Exercise
according to mapmywalk I have burned 146 calories. It's linkEd with this account, and according to MyFitnessPal I've only burned 53 - with the same amount of steps. So does MyFitnessPal under exaggerate or does MapMyWalk over exaggerate? Because that's almost a 100 calorie difference which is pretty big! If it was just off by a few I wouldn't worry but..that's too much to not question it.

Replies

  • initialsdeebee
    initialsdeebee Posts: 83 Member
    I just discovered this site today on the recommendation of someon here because I was unsure how to log my bike commute. I have the same question. Today mapmyfitness said I burned almost 250 calories walking whereas MFp said about 150 or so. Also it supposedly factors in elevation gain, I had a 30-40 minute bike commute climbing for about 450 - 500 feet and supposedly burned 170 in mapmyfitness. That same app then said I burned nearly 250 on a flat 25 minute ride. I was going faster but not nearly as strenuous since it was flat. Anyway sorry for rambling and piggy-backing my own junk on your post. Just the same thing on my mind today. Personally I err to choosing the lower estimate, but will increase or eat more if I feel my body needs it , i.e. Hungry/low energy etc.
  • PudgyPanda91
    PudgyPanda91 Posts: 72 Member
    I generally take the lower number. They're both estimates anyways, and I'd rather err on the side of caution. If I'm hungry I'll eat more anyways.
  • Achaila
    Achaila Posts: 264 Member
    Now MFP is saying 121 with the same amount of steps. I'm going to go with that. It's only 25 under what mapmywalk is saying. It just irks me. Why allow them to synch if they're not going to share the same info!
  • Lola2248
    Lola2248 Posts: 126 Member
    There is an issue with the Map my walk app which overestimates. I stick to MFP. But Map my walk is good for picking up the speed I walk, so I use that information to calculate on MFP.

  • dawniemate
    dawniemate Posts: 395 Member
    I use runkeeper. ..I think both overestimate calories used, so I usually half it. :smile:
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,267 Member
    are you sure you did an apples to apples comparison.

    I walked last night and MMF said 257 calories...MFP said 227...not a huge difference in my case...
  • BrianSharpe
    BrianSharpe Posts: 9,248 Member
    How far are you walking? To sanity check the numbers use .30 x your weight in lbs x distance in miles (you'd burn an additional 30 calories for every 100lbs of body weight per mile walked)

    source: runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning
  • earlnabby
    earlnabby Posts: 8,171 Member
    I use MFP, MMW, and Fitbit. I trust the Fitbit numbers more than any of the others. I have compared MMW with Fitbit and they aren't too far apart. MMW is maybe 10-15% higher. MFP is closer to 25% higher than Fitbit.
  • htg20
    htg20 Posts: 116 Member
    edited June 2015
    I just take the duration and mph and log it into mfp. I usually estimate low on mph and impact. For example, when I hike I just log it as "leisurely walking." Still got 450 extra cals Saturday after a two hour hike.
  • bmele0
    bmele0 Posts: 282 Member
    When I used my heart rate monitor and MapMyRun, it was actually pretty close, so I ditched the HRM while jogging just so I'd have less to wear. I still only eat about 50-75% of it back.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    edited June 2015
    I don't trust either, I calculate my own:

    walking burn = miles walked (from GPS) * weight in pounds * 0.3
  • hbrittingham
    hbrittingham Posts: 2,518 Member
    I don't know about MMW, but MapMyRun seriously overestimates my calorie burn. MFP way overestimates it, too. I use a HRM, which comes in with a much lower burn than either one.
  • jhard728
    jhard728 Posts: 52 Member
    MapMyRun is always high, I figure I burn about half of what they say.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories