Calories Burned

kristy_estes21
kristy_estes21 Posts: 434 Member
edited September 28 in Fitness and Exercise
I've been logging my Insanity workouts as "aerobic - high impact" because I feel like that is the closest description in MFP. I don't have my HRM yet so I can't enter a more accurate workout description with calories burned. (It'll be here next week though! yay! lol)
Anyways, I found this website and entered all of my info and it said I burned about 400 calories during my 40 minute workout versus the 275 calories that MFP said. I'm assuming the website is more accurate since it asked for age, gender, height, weight, resting heart rate, average heart rate during workout, length of workout, and VO2 max. I'm a little nervous to enter that I burned more calories though, but wouldn't the formula that used all of the above info be more accurate than MFP that doesn't use heart rate?? Thoughts?

http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/heart-rate-based-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx

Replies

  • nehtaeh
    nehtaeh Posts: 2,849 Member
    I haven't done Insanity but from other workouts that are similar, I would say the 400 is more accurate than 275 for 40 minutes. With all that information it is likely more accurate as well.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    I've been logging my Insanity workouts as "aerobic - high impact" because I feel like that is the closest description in MFP. I don't have my HRM yet so I can't enter a more accurate workout description with calories burned. (It'll be here next week though! yay! lol)
    Anyways, I found this website and entered all of my info and it said I burned about 400 calories during my 40 minute workout versus the 275 calories that MFP said. I'm assuming the website is more accurate since it asked for age, gender, height, weight, resting heart rate, average heart rate during workout, length of workout, and VO2 max. I'm a little nervous to enter that I burned more calories though, but wouldn't the formula that used all of the above info be more accurate than MFP that doesn't use heart rate?? Thoughts?

    http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/heart-rate-based-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx

    How did you get your VO2 Max? If you are using the top one to calculate it is a way over estimation, it assumes your VO2 Max is 82, or at least gives you the same results as the chart below choosing 82 as the V02 Max. Use the chart near the bottom and enter 35-40 as your V02 Max as 82 is quite high, Lance Armstrong's was 84, and not many people are above 60.
  • bonastigg
    bonastigg Posts: 3
    I have a similar problem with P90X workouts. I have been consistenly doing the Kenpo workout because I like that one and it makes me sweat but putting it in MFP is difficult. I have to log it under sparring or shadowboxing and I'm pretty sure the calories burned are off significantly. Maybe we need to figure out a formula and make the Insanity and P90X workouts show up in MFP.
  • Mrs_TrimWaistFatWallet
    Mrs_TrimWaistFatWallet Posts: 486
    "age, gender, height, weight, resting heart rate, average heart rate during workout, length of workout, and VO2 max"

    That certainly helps, but it is also highly dependent on your fitness as it is. It's probably closer to 400. At least by next week, you'll know for sure!!

    ex. my HIIT cycling workout was 300 calories / 30 min...
  • Buckeyt
    Buckeyt Posts: 473 Member
    Which Insanity workout? I"m male and 180 pounds and I burn well over 600 calories doing something like Pure Cardio, so I'd go with the higher number
  • kristy_estes21
    kristy_estes21 Posts: 434 Member
    I've been logging my Insanity workouts as "aerobic - high impact" because I feel like that is the closest description in MFP. I don't have my HRM yet so I can't enter a more accurate workout description with calories burned. (It'll be here next week though! yay! lol)
    Anyways, I found this website and entered all of my info and it said I burned about 400 calories during my 40 minute workout versus the 275 calories that MFP said. I'm assuming the website is more accurate since it asked for age, gender, height, weight, resting heart rate, average heart rate during workout, length of workout, and VO2 max. I'm a little nervous to enter that I burned more calories though, but wouldn't the formula that used all of the above info be more accurate than MFP that doesn't use heart rate?? Thoughts?

    http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/heart-rate-based-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx

    How did you get your VO2 Max?

    There are equations on that website to show you how to get it. One is without physical exertion (I'm assuming this is less accurate) and three with. I first did the one without and then realized the others asked for more info such as gender, weight, etc. I have spent many hours/miles walking on a treadmill (usually an incline) so I have a pretty good estimate on my time and heart rate so I plugged all that info into the 2nd VO2 equation and got a lower number than the first so I used that one. I need to DO the actual physical test when I get off work, but wanted a good estimate for now. But 275 versus 400 is a significant difference.
  • kristy_estes21
    kristy_estes21 Posts: 434 Member
    Which Insanity workout? I"m male and 180 pounds and I burn well over 600 calories doing something like Pure Cardio, so I'd go with the higher number

    Yesterday was Cardio Power & Resistance and my heart rate was roughly 145-150 the whole time.
  • kristy_estes21
    kristy_estes21 Posts: 434 Member
    I've been logging my Insanity workouts as "aerobic - high impact" because I feel like that is the closest description in MFP. I don't have my HRM yet so I can't enter a more accurate workout description with calories burned. (It'll be here next week though! yay! lol)
    Anyways, I found this website and entered all of my info and it said I burned about 400 calories during my 40 minute workout versus the 275 calories that MFP said. I'm assuming the website is more accurate since it asked for age, gender, height, weight, resting heart rate, average heart rate during workout, length of workout, and VO2 max. I'm a little nervous to enter that I burned more calories though, but wouldn't the formula that used all of the above info be more accurate than MFP that doesn't use heart rate?? Thoughts?

    http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/heart-rate-based-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx

    How did you get your VO2 Max? If you are using the top one to calculate it is a way over estimation, it assumes your VO2 Max is 82, or at least gives you the same results as the chart below choosing 82 as the V02 Max. Use the chart near the bottom and enter 35-40 as your V02 Max as 82 is quite high, Lance Armstrong's was 84, and not many people are above 60.

    It didn't tell me mine was 82. LOL
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    I've been logging my Insanity workouts as "aerobic - high impact" because I feel like that is the closest description in MFP. I don't have my HRM yet so I can't enter a more accurate workout description with calories burned. (It'll be here next week though! yay! lol)
    Anyways, I found this website and entered all of my info and it said I burned about 400 calories during my 40 minute workout versus the 275 calories that MFP said. I'm assuming the website is more accurate since it asked for age, gender, height, weight, resting heart rate, average heart rate during workout, length of workout, and VO2 max. I'm a little nervous to enter that I burned more calories though, but wouldn't the formula that used all of the above info be more accurate than MFP that doesn't use heart rate?? Thoughts?

    http://www.shapesense.com/fitness-exercise/calculators/heart-rate-based-calorie-burn-calculator.aspx

    How did you get your VO2 Max? If you are using the top one to calculate it is a way over estimation, it assumes your VO2 Max is 82, or at least gives you the same results as the chart below choosing 82 as the V02 Max. Use the chart near the bottom and enter 35-40 as your V02 Max as 82 is quite high, Lance Armstrong's was 84, and not many people are above 60.

    It didn't tell me mine was 82. LOL

    I've looked at some other calorie counters and if you put in 0 or leave V02 Max Blank, it comes out as if it were 62. Still high, but a little more reasonable. I would be fine if I was in the 50's. I did see the tests as well and the ones I have done had me between low 40's and low 60's. I think it would be interesting to have a real V02 Max test performed, just to see.
  • kristy_estes21
    kristy_estes21 Posts: 434 Member
    Entering in my estimates from what I normally do while on the treadmill, it gave me 44 as my VO2 max.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    Entering in my estimates from what I normally do while on the treadmill, it gave me 44 as my VO2 max.

    That sounds reasonable, and is quite good. Since you do insanity and are in good shape I am not surprised at all.
  • kristy_estes21
    kristy_estes21 Posts: 434 Member
    I'm anxious to see what the HRM says. I'm not even sure which one of those would be more accurate...the HRM or the site. haha We'll see what all info the HRM asks for when I set it up.
    Mainly I just thought that 275 calories burned sounded pretty low for as much as hard as I'm working in those 40 minutes. Even before Insanity I was doing 30-60 minutes of cardio everyday along with strength training.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories