Accurate tracker calorie burn

ciclismolizzy
ciclismolizzy Posts: 8 Member
edited December 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
I'm sure this has probably been asked before but I've got a bit of a bee in my bonnet about trackers and the estimated calorie burn.

My issue is really between endemondo, Garmin and Strava.

I have noticed that when using my Garmin for my cycling it gives me an estimated calorie burn. Strava gives me approx half the calories burnt! I've also noticed this with Endemondo.

Are these trackers accurate? If one gives half the amount then surely they can't be?!


Replies

  • mommazach
    mommazach Posts: 384 Member
    Which one asked for your height and weight and age? There are lots of factors in the equation that need to be calculated. I use my calorie burn estimate on Map my walk because it adds all the information needed. You can find the same result with map my ride (another free app).
  • ciclismolizzy
    ciclismolizzy Posts: 8 Member
    They all ask for height and weight. Essentially they all do what the map my apps do too. I'm just surprised at the calorie output difference from 2 compared to one!
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    ciclismolizzy wrote: »
    I'm sure this has probably been asked before but I've got a bit of a bee in my bonnet about trackers and the estimated calorie burn.

    My issue is really between endemondo, Garmin and Strava.

    I have noticed that when using my Garmin for my cycling it gives me an estimated calorie burn. Strava gives me approx half the calories burnt! I've also noticed this with Endemondo.

    Are these trackers accurate? If one gives half the amount then surely they can't be?!


    I'm guessing your cycling is steady state cardio. Does one of these measure your heart rate? If so, go with that one.

    Calorie burn is height, weight, age, gender, exertion level and more (hormones, lean muscle mass, etc). All of the above are estimates....a heart rate measure attempts to measure exertion level. No phone app is going to do that, and the ONE formula in a HRM won't work for all forms of exercise. They are ALL estimates.

    Pick one of the estimates. Live with that number for awhile. Are you losing as expected? Tweak those estimates up or down, according to actual progress.

  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    If you're using a chest strap HRM, then the Garmin device will have the best estimate, assuming it uses the Firstbeat algorithm.

    If not, then Strava will be the second best if you use a device with a barometric altimeter and Strava recognizes it as such.

    Beyond that, they're not going to be especially good guesses.
  • billutzman
    billutzman Posts: 74 Member
    I strictly use a Polar Heartrate monitor with the chest strap. Input age, weight, height, etc. for supposedly realtime beats per minute straight from heart beat and not pulse rates on the wrist. Then it computes calories burned.

    What I like the most about wearing monitors is that I have it set to my max plus 10bpm. If I go over it, it beeps. That way I know I dont go overboard for an extended period of time.
  • ciclismolizzy
    ciclismolizzy Posts: 8 Member
    They all give different even mfp. I feel strava is best.

    With regards to hrm and chest straps... did use one a couple of seasons ago, batteries just keep corroding as I'm a sweat monster lol! Did try one last year but it made my chest feel all funny of which there is no reason for it to. Advice was it could have the electro magnetics or something so I stay away from them!
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    If you're not using a heart monitor, none of them will be close to accurate. Strava should be the least wrong because it works differently than the others, it tries to guess your power requirements based on its elevation model and then bases your calories on its guestimated power. The rest just multiply your ride time by some number.
  • kcjchang
    kcjchang Posts: 709 Member
    Get a power meter. Accuracy is around 2% as long as you know your efficiency factor. The apps are far less accurate and HRM is NO better.
  • kyleliermann
    kyleliermann Posts: 156 Member
    ciclismolizzy wrote: »
    I'm sure this has probably been asked before but I've got a bit of a bee in my bonnet about trackers and the estimated calorie burn.

    My issue is really between endemondo, Garmin and Strava.

    I have noticed that when using my Garmin for my cycling it gives me an estimated calorie burn. Strava gives me approx half the calories burnt! I've also noticed this with Endemondo.

    Are these trackers accurate? If one gives half the amount then surely they can't be?!


    If you have a bunch of friends with a certain brand I would go with that so you guys can track together. makes it more fun.

    But I have had a Garmin, body media, life fitness, active tracker watch, fitbit, and now a Samsung S2. The most accurate for 24 hour tracking was body media but there is a monthly fee to use it. Fitbit was my favorite because it was accurate, light, and the app was super user friendly.

    The Samsung app sucks :/
This discussion has been closed.

Categories