How accurate are exercise machine displays?
naf2014
Posts: 13 Member
Hi everyone,
I've recently started using my stationary bike (took long enough!). I have gradually built up stamina to be able to use it for 55/60 minutes and am spending the majority of the time with it on highest resistance (8). Anyway, according to the bike I'm burning around 580 calories. That seems a lot, and I can't imagine I am, but does anyone know how much these estimates are usually out by?
Thank you
I've recently started using my stationary bike (took long enough!). I have gradually built up stamina to be able to use it for 55/60 minutes and am spending the majority of the time with it on highest resistance (8). Anyway, according to the bike I'm burning around 580 calories. That seems a lot, and I can't imagine I am, but does anyone know how much these estimates are usually out by?
Thank you
0
Replies
-
There is no such thing as usual - can vary from comically bad (low or high) to the most accurate estimate possible.
I could hit those calories in that time easily, but I'm not you.
0 -
Any idea of how far you're pedaling in that time?
Like sjomial I can hit 600 cal in an hour of intense riding but without knowing how far / how fast it's all guesswork.0 -
I am not sure but I think you can use a heart rate monitor to calculate calorie burn to see if it is even close to accurate.0
-
I use a Nordic track ski machine. It tells me that a 45-minute work out burns roughly 445 calories, which is around 10-15% below what MFP tells me. It's a basic machine that doesn't let me adjust tension; hand levers, foot boards, and an LCD display, pretty much. I log the machine calories, but generally try not to eat back more than half. So far, it's working for me.0
-
Thank you for the replies. When at highest resistance the display states I ride at a speed of 19.5 to fastest being 19.7km/h, and if I take it down to 6 then I'm riding st a speed of anything between 20.5 to 21.1km/h.
I will look into getting a heart rate monitor0 -
Not accurate at all in my opinion. I have a Polar FT4 heart rate monitor that syncs with my gym equipment by displaying my heart rate without me having to grab the hand sensors. I did Cardio for 45 mins and my Polar said I burned close to 500 cals and the machine said something like 646. It's always way off and these are new machines so I never go by their numbers.Its always like 150 cals off compared to my Polar.0
-
The elliptical at my gym is pretty darn accurate if I input my age and weight. And it's roughly about 20% less than what MFP gives me. Through trial and error I've learned that most of MFP calorie burns are about 20% higher than what I actually burn. Of course that will vary per person.0
-
mrspett323 wrote: »Not accurate at all in my opinion. I have a Polar FT4 heart rate monitor that syncs with my gym equipment by displaying my heart rate without me having to grab the hand sensors. I did Cardio for 45 mins and my Polar said I burned close to 500 cals and the machine said something like 646. It's always way off and these are new machines so I never go by their numbers.Its always like 150 cals off compared to my Polar.
And a very basic HRM like that could be miles out too.
When I was average fitness my FT7 would over-estimate by up to 20%.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 435 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions