How accurate do you think the calories burned readout is on gym equipment?

Options
Run_Away_Turtle
Run_Away_Turtle Posts: 47 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
Basically just what the title says. I don't want to be over adding calories if, in fact, the machine has lost its mind.
«1

Replies

  • tiffanyfoundit
    tiffanyfoundit Posts: 130 Member
    Options
    Honestly probably pretty terrible. I'm sure mine over estimates like a lot. Cause my burn is pretty high on it. However, I don't eat my exercise calories back at all (or I do very rarely) so it's not something that I stress about.
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    edited November 2015
    Options
    What's the equipment & how much data do you provide?

    A heart rate monitor uses your height, weight, age, and gender - do you plug in some of these things? A heart rate monitor is still a guess also.

    Your best bet is to get a few estimates and use the lowest number. If you see weight loss slowing down....eat less exercise calories. If weight loss is faster than expected....eat more exercise calories.

    Eating back exercise calories is how MFP is designed. You were given a calorie deficit with ZERO exercise factored in. The purpose of eating back calories is to keep the deficit from becoming too large. A large deficit makes it harder for your body to support existing lean muscle mass.

    I eat back exercise calories because my goal is fat loss...not just weight loss.
  • zdyb23456
    zdyb23456 Posts: 1,706 Member
    Options
    I have an older model treadmill- I input my weight and age and it's surprisingly accurate. It tells me I burn just under 100 cal per mile whether I walk or run.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Options
    Vague question is vague! :)

    The range is from outright humorous to extremely accurate, more accurate than a HRM (especially one that hasn't been calibrated to the individual).

    By the way it's slightly amusing that some people are quick to assume an expensive piece of equipment is less accurate than a cheap gadget on their wrist.

    Is the mystery "gym equipment" you are using pretty industry standard (like a Concept2) and/or give you a power reading?
  • Psychgrrl
    Psychgrrl Posts: 3,177 Member
    Options
    When I wear my HRM, it tells me I burn 25-40% fewer calories the what the machines read. An hour on the Pre-Cor and the machine says 720 calories while the HRM says 450.
  • ForecasterJason
    ForecasterJason Posts: 2,577 Member
    Options
    There was an instance in which I walked on my treadmill for 40 minutes. At the end, I believe it had me around 150 calories burned while my Fitbit said about 275. While I don't know if it's the treadmill, clearly one of them was way off.
  • lizzocat
    lizzocat Posts: 356 Member
    Options
    I don't go by the machines, but I would say, if you log 30% lower, you should be okay. I used to log 50% of what the machine said just to be careful
  • Meganthedogmom
    Meganthedogmom Posts: 1,639 Member
    Options
    I log 75% of what the machine says, but I don't always necessarily eat all 75% of it back. This seems to work for me.
  • TheopolisAmbroiseIII
    TheopolisAmbroiseIII Posts: 197 Member
    Options
    Unless you're working out intensely, you can probably skip eating back your calories, in all honesty. If you're working out intensely with the intention of being able to eat more, then you should get a Heart Rate Monitor and have a more accurate assessment.

  • Hendrix7
    Hendrix7 Posts: 1,903 Member
    Options
    Not very
  • tulips_and_tea
    tulips_and_tea Posts: 5,711 Member
    Options
    Personally I don't trust the machines at all as far as calorie burns. I get vastly different readings from the treadmill, the elliptical and the step mill even though I input the exact same stats and the duration is the same. Yes, I realize intensity varies, but there's no way I burn the amount of calories it says I do.

    I do however keep track of that number and then keep trying to exceed it every time so that I keep working out harder and don't become stagnant.
  • RoxieDawn
    RoxieDawn Posts: 15,488 Member
    Options
    In my home, I have both a Sole Treadmill and Sole Elliptical and they are both absolutely not accurate. I have had a Fitbit and now have a Garmin with HR..

    I can tell you that my Sole Treadmill is off about 40 percent. It is configured with my height, weight, etc.. and my Garmin hr is calibrated as well.. What the treadmill gives me is way way off. The elliptical (its off about 35 to 40 percent as well), when I used it regularly, I used it with the heart monitor it came with, but the calories burned on the machine is not affected by the HR, the HR is only for your information such as exercise zones.. I do not use the HR that came with my Sole Treadmill . I use the Garmin HR exclusively.

    For me, I can burn 9 to 12 calories a minute give or take the effort, etc.. At first I used apps and calculators online to help me figure it out and take a range and thank goodness I only ate back a small portion of my exercise calories.


  • cheesychiplet
    cheesychiplet Posts: 27 Member
    Options
    Hm I just did 40 on the treadmill. Didn't input my weight or height or anything as it is old and doesn't have that option. I fast walked the first and last ten minutes and jogged 20 of them. I was sweating so I know things were all good. I burned (apparently)140 fat calories and 445 calories at 2.6 miles. I ate back none of those calories to be safe and I just like seeing how many calories I could potentially have burned! Even if it is a dream haha x
  • morihay
    morihay Posts: 50 Member
    Options
    I always thought they were overexagerated untill I got a HR monitor it is actually higher than the tread mill was saying treadmill says 400 HRM said 598
  • robertw486
    robertw486 Posts: 2,389 Member
    Options
    I think it would vary quite a bit from machine to machine, as well as by brand of machine and the formulas they use, as well as the number of inputs it has.

    My personal opinion is that a decent machine should have a much more accurate number than a stand alone HRM or any other calculator. Why? The machine has more inputs to calculate with. It knows all variations in pace over total time regardless. They also have a lot of inputs unique to that machine type, like an elliptical having ramp/resistance inputs.

    On a bike or elliptical, stide or stroke length of the pedals is a known to the machine. As such there is little room for error if the machine tracks pace. On a treadmill, the user can alter those things, so differences in efficiency at different strides and paces are more possible.
  • Run_Away_Turtle
    Run_Away_Turtle Posts: 47 Member
    Options
    Thank you all.
  • TravisBremner
    TravisBremner Posts: 6 Member
    Options
    Honestly, I think it's best to eat based on your caloric intake without an exercise-adjusted number.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    robertw486 wrote: »
    I think it would vary quite a bit from machine to machine, as well as by brand of machine and the formulas they use, as well as the number of inputs it has.

    My personal opinion is that a decent machine should have a much more accurate number than a stand alone HRM or any other calculator. Why? The machine has more inputs to calculate with. It knows all variations in pace over total time regardless. They also have a lot of inputs unique to that machine type, like an elliptical having ramp/resistance inputs.

    On a bike or elliptical, stide or stroke length of the pedals is a known to the machine. As such there is little room for error if the machine tracks pace. On a treadmill, the user can alter those things, so differences in efficiency at different strides and paces are more possible.

    While it is true that machines can measure actual workload with good accuracy, that workload then has to be translated into an estimated oxygen cost/calorie burn, and THAT'S where the inaccuracy occurs. Most machines use algorithms that are either only rough estimates, or are borrowed from another related activity. In order to accurately estimate calories, a company would have to develop their own machine-specific algorithms and then do validation studies for each type of equipment. Realistically, that rarely happens.
  • tomatoey
    tomatoey Posts: 5,446 Member
    Options
    gia07 wrote: »
    . At first I used apps and calculators online to help me figure it out and take a range and thank goodness I only ate back a small portion of my exercise calories.

    I did exactly this, using the TDEE method -just kept steady intake at 1900-2100 (using measuring cups [!!]). It got me from 178 lbs to 124 lbs. If you are able to do 30-45 minutes of vigorous cardio every other day, or 45-60 minutes of moderate cardio most days, the heart rate monitor and machine numbers don't matter all that much.
  • bclarke1990
    bclarke1990 Posts: 287 Member
    Options
    Just play it safe. If you have a good workout and you feel hungry have some extra food. Too many variables to even bother basing your tdee on an exercise machine

Categories