We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
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 then1 -
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
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.5K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 442 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 927 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions