Cycling calories
tennispolly
Posts: 5 Member
Ive been thinking about cycling and if there is any calorie counting apps for it ? What's the best one ?
0
Replies
-
There are plenty of apps available. Of the ones that connect directly to MFP, I'd recommend strava (and in general one of the better ones anyway). Also has a good social side and can be used to track runs also. Enjoy life on two wheels..0
-
strava is a beautiful trap!
0 -
I use the formula 100 calories burned for every 5 kilometres cycled. That seems to work.1
-
I am frustrated by the different calculations I get from different programmes. Wahoo, which reads my sensors and tracks me via gps gave me 2500 calorie expenditure for a 70km cycle much of which were hill climbs. When I shared the data with Strava, it recalculated the calorie expenditure, giving me a 1400 cal burn. MFP calculated 1999 for the same trip based on minutes ridden, which is a happy medium. A good average of multiple readings is probably as good as it gets, IMHO.0
-
I am frustrated by the different calculations I get from different programmes. Wahoo, which reads my sensors and tracks me via gps gave me 2500 calorie expenditure for a 70km cycle much of which were hill climbs. When I shared the data with Strava, it recalculated the calorie expenditure, giving me a 1400 cal burn. MFP calculated 1999 for the same trip based on minutes ridden, which is a happy medium. A good average of multiple readings is probably as good as it gets, IMHO.
Well, using 100 cal/5 km ... 70 km would be 1400 cal. If it were me, I'd go with that.0 -
I use Strava for my calorie burns from cycling. It takes into account the terrain and how fast you are going - the faster you go, the more you burn, the more climbing, the more calories per mile. I wouldn't recommend using something like 100 calories/5km. Also see: http://www.crankcycling.com/garmincalories/0
-
i use map my fitness for cycle rides and gives you different options ie road cycle, mountain biking etc x good luck0
-
Interestingly the Strava number is often really close to the 100 cal/5 km calculation.
Incidentally, 100 cal/5 km = 33 cal/mile which is also a common calculation.0 -
Interestingly the Strava number is often really close to the 100 cal/5 km calculation.
Incidentally, 100 cal/5 km = 33 cal/mile which is also a common calculation.
Some of my ride data (calories from Strava):
Distance / Avg. Speed / Calories / Elevation / Calories per 5km
43.0 / 28.7 / 801 / 140 / 93
45.8 / 32.6 / 1022 / 128 / 111
105.4 / 26.0 / 2768 / 1851 / 131
122.0 / 29.8 / 2548 / 730 / 104
0 -
ConicalFern wrote: »Interestingly the Strava number is often really close to the 100 cal/5 km calculation.
Incidentally, 100 cal/5 km = 33 cal/mile which is also a common calculation.
Some of my ride data (calories from Strava):
Distance / Avg. Speed / Calories / Elevation / Calories per 5km
43.0 / 28.7 / 801 / 140 / 93
45.8 / 32.6 / 1022 / 128 / 111
105.4 / 26.0 / 2768 / 1851 / 131
122.0 / 29.8 / 2548 / 730 / 104
Your math is off.
43 km/5 = 8.6*100 = 860 cal ... which isn't so much different from 801.
45.8/5 = 9.16*100 = 916 cal ... which isn't too far from 1022.
105.4/5 = 21.08*100 = 2108 cal ... which is a little bit less than 2768, but that's OK.
122/5 = 24.4*100 = 2440 cal ... which is pretty close to 2548 cal.
0 -
I just ride and use whatever Garmin Connect spits out. It's not really a concern of mine (calorie counts) so it's good enough. Usually around 600-700 calories an hour is what it works out to be.0
-
I use Strava app on my phone and Garmin Edge with HR monitor.
Strava is quite motivational to compare your efforts against your previous rides and other riders.
Both under-estimate calories compared to a calibrated HRM and power meter equipped trainers so tend to take whichever gives the highest number.
By the way - my idea of "best" is the most convenient and most interesting rather than the most accurate otherwise I would wear my Polar HRM.0 -
ConicalFern wrote: »Interestingly the Strava number is often really close to the 100 cal/5 km calculation.
Incidentally, 100 cal/5 km = 33 cal/mile which is also a common calculation.
Some of my ride data (calories from Strava):
Distance / Avg. Speed / Calories / Elevation / Calories per 5km
43.0 / 28.7 / 801 / 140 / 93
45.8 / 32.6 / 1022 / 128 / 111
105.4 / 26.0 / 2768 / 1851 / 131
122.0 / 29.8 / 2548 / 730 / 104
Your math is off.
43 km/5 = 8.6*100 = 860 cal ... which isn't so much different from 801.
45.8/5 = 9.16*100 = 916 cal ... which isn't too far from 1022.
105.4/5 = 21.08*100 = 2108 cal ... which is a little bit less than 2768, but that's OK.
122/5 = 24.4*100 = 2440 cal ... which is pretty close to 2548 cal.
My maths is fine... Note the final column is calories per 5km, not total calories.
Anyway, yes for 3 rides I will acknowledge it's pretty close, but 660 cals is a pretty big difference. Of note is that that ride had much elevation. If you live in Cambridge (UK) (like me) 100Cal/5km isn't bad. If you live somewhere that has hills (the Lake District, UK) it's out...0 -
ConicalFern wrote: »ConicalFern wrote: »Interestingly the Strava number is often really close to the 100 cal/5 km calculation.
Incidentally, 100 cal/5 km = 33 cal/mile which is also a common calculation.
Some of my ride data (calories from Strava):
Distance / Avg. Speed / Calories / Elevation / Calories per 5km
43.0 / 28.7 / 801 / 140 / 93
45.8 / 32.6 / 1022 / 128 / 111
105.4 / 26.0 / 2768 / 1851 / 131
122.0 / 29.8 / 2548 / 730 / 104
Your math is off.
43 km/5 = 8.6*100 = 860 cal ... which isn't so much different from 801.
45.8/5 = 9.16*100 = 916 cal ... which isn't too far from 1022.
105.4/5 = 21.08*100 = 2108 cal ... which is a little bit less than 2768, but that's OK.
122/5 = 24.4*100 = 2440 cal ... which is pretty close to 2548 cal.
My maths is fine... Note the final column is calories per 5km, not total calories.
Anyway, yes for 3 rides I will acknowledge it's pretty close, but 660 cals is a pretty big difference. Of note is that that ride had much elevation. If you live in Cambridge (UK) (like me) 100Cal/5km isn't bad. If you live somewhere that has hills (the Lake District, UK) it's out...
I live in Tasmania ... very hilly.
I just prefer to estimate my exercise calories low. It's worked for me ... I lost the weight I needed to lose.0 -
ConicalFern wrote: »ConicalFern wrote: »Interestingly the Strava number is often really close to the 100 cal/5 km calculation.
Incidentally, 100 cal/5 km = 33 cal/mile which is also a common calculation.
Some of my ride data (calories from Strava):
Distance / Avg. Speed / Calories / Elevation / Calories per 5km
43.0 / 28.7 / 801 / 140 / 93
45.8 / 32.6 / 1022 / 128 / 111
105.4 / 26.0 / 2768 / 1851 / 131
122.0 / 29.8 / 2548 / 730 / 104
Your math is off.
43 km/5 = 8.6*100 = 860 cal ... which isn't so much different from 801.
45.8/5 = 9.16*100 = 916 cal ... which isn't too far from 1022.
105.4/5 = 21.08*100 = 2108 cal ... which is a little bit less than 2768, but that's OK.
122/5 = 24.4*100 = 2440 cal ... which is pretty close to 2548 cal.
My maths is fine... Note the final column is calories per 5km, not total calories.
Anyway, yes for 3 rides I will acknowledge it's pretty close, but 660 cals is a pretty big difference. Of note is that that ride had much elevation. If you live in Cambridge (UK) (like me) 100Cal/5km isn't bad. If you live somewhere that has hills (the Lake District, UK) it's out...
I live in Tasmania ... very hilly.
I just prefer to estimate my exercise calories low. It's worked for me ... I lost the weight I needed to lose.
Depends whether you trying to lose or maintain then 1 -
I use Strava app on my phone and Garmin Edge with HR monitor.
Strava is quite motivational to compare your efforts against your previous rides and other riders.
Both under-estimate calories compared to a calibrated HRM and power meter equipped trainers so tend to take whichever gives the highest number.
By the way - my idea of "best" is the most convenient and most interesting rather than the most accurate otherwise I would wear my Polar HRM.
I gave up using HR for calories; I found it was massively swayed by the temperature - such that if it was cold I would 'burn' 1000 cals fewer on a 70 mile ride0 -
Is the OP talking about bicycling calories, or calorie cycling/zig zag calories?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions