Which tracker to believe?

ssakcik
ssakcik Posts: 121 Member
edited December 1 in Fitness and Exercise
I've been using a pre-installed tracker on my smartphone (LG g4) to track my walks and calories burned... I've also started C25k (on week 4 day1). I decided to download endomondo today. I went out walking today and used both to track to see if there's a big difference... Oh my! I walked 8.39 9km (5.21 miles). My pre-installed app says 221 calls burned and endomondo says 606.... Which one should I believe? Both have my stats.

Replies

  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    At 160lbs I burn about 50-60 cals per mile walking.

    Endomondo does include BMR, but I do find it tends to be a bit overenthusiastic with calorie estimations for running.
  • ssakcik
    ssakcik Posts: 121 Member
    Thank you... I did think 606 was quite high and at the same time that 221 was quite low... I'm 163 lbs so will calculae using 60 calories per mile as I was walking quite fast without stopping.
  • ssakcik
    ssakcik Posts: 121 Member
    Using the MFP exercise database and my average speed my calorie burn comes out as 397 so I'd say that endomondo has grossly overestimated my calorie burn.
  • ShodanPrime
    ShodanPrime Posts: 226 Member
    There's a reason for overestimates. Has to do with acceptable error rates, reinforcement and monetization.
  • ssakcik
    ssakcik Posts: 121 Member
    ShodanPrime wrote: »
    There's a reason for overestimates. Has to do with acceptable error rates, reinforcement and monetization.

    Thank you... But 200 calories over seems quite a lot of you're trying to lose weigh like I am..
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    ShodanPrime wrote: »
    There's a reason for overestimates. Has to do with acceptable error rates, reinforcement and monetization.

    huh?
  • ssakcik
    ssakcik Posts: 121 Member
    Huh

    Lol... That's was my thought too lol
  • barefootdaze
    barefootdaze Posts: 3 Member
    edited April 2016
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    ShodanPrime wrote: »
    There's a reason for overestimates. Has to do with acceptable error rates, reinforcement and monetization.

    huh?

    they're doing it on purpose to sell their product.

    to OP: your phone will not be entirely accurate, either. it depends on how well your cell reception is. gps can't work without cell signal.
  • ssakcik
    ssakcik Posts: 121 Member
    edited April 2016
    But is 200 calories an acceptable error rate? And as nice as it was of the OP to reply it didn't actually answer my question lol
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    barefootdaze wrote: »
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    ShodanPrime wrote: »
    There's a reason for overestimates. Has to do with acceptable error rates, reinforcement and monetization.

    huh?

    they're doing it on purpose to sell their product.

    I know what was implied, I just think it's nonsense.

    Whilst this is a forum and los of people contribute, I'm just struggling to see the relevance to a genuine question.
  • ssakcik
    ssakcik Posts: 121 Member
    My thought too
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    barefootdaze wrote: »
    gps can't work without cell signal.

    The two are completely unrelated.

    Whilst phone GPS is less accurate than a dedicated GPS device the impact on calorie estimation is negligible.

  • ssakcik
    ssakcik Posts: 121 Member
    I had 4g reception all the way... And if one app wasn't getting reception the other wouldn't either... It was just that both seemed not quite right...one being too low and the other too high.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories