How to log cycling without a HRM?

noobletmcnugget
noobletmcnugget Posts: 518 Member
edited November 17 in Fitness and Exercise
I've recently started cycling out on the roads around where I live. Today I cycled about 30k. But I'm struggling to figure out how to log it and get an estimate of my calorie burn. It must depend a lot on the amount of ascent/descent, average speed, etc. but how are you supposed to come up with a decent estimate when this is so variable? I don't have an activity or heart rate monitor gadget or anything. I tracked the ride using Strava though.

Any advice?

Replies

  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Get Strava, Endomondo or Runkeeper on your phone and use that.
  • noobletmcnugget
    noobletmcnugget Posts: 518 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    Get Strava, Endomondo or Runkeeper on your phone and use that.

    Cheers! Hadn't realised Strava calculated it for you. Any idea how accurate it is?
  • deannalfisher
    deannalfisher Posts: 5,600 Member
    strava is one of the more accurate ones I have used - I prefer it to mapmyrun/ride and it sync's with MFP
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    noobletmcnugget wrote: »
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    Get Strava, Endomondo or Runkeeper on your phone and use that.

    Cheers! Hadn't realised Strava calculated it for you. Any idea how accurate it is?

    There are a lot of variables, but i find Strava a reasonable estimate. It's close to my Garmin forecast.
  • daweasel
    daweasel Posts: 68 Member
    Strava is way off for me on a run (huge overestimation!!!), on a ride...not sure if it is calculating itself or taking the number from Garmin with heart rate. If it's of any use, at 168cm and about 68kg (and female) I generally burn about 400-500cal/hr. If I'm barely pedaling it's more like 300, and racing or training hard can be upwards of 600. Always ride with a HR monitor, and sometimes a power meter, and similar numbers are reported by Garmin and Polar devices.
  • noobletmcnugget
    noobletmcnugget Posts: 518 Member
    Thanks everyone! In that case I think I'll use that estimate and then shave off a bit just to be on the safe side
  • Machka9
    Machka9 Posts: 25,616 Member
    I use a low estimate on MFP, Strava, and my own calculation of 100 cal for every 5 km cycled. They all match ... pretty close. :)
  • TimothyFish
    TimothyFish Posts: 4,925 Member
    On a ride yesterday, there is a 29% difference between the calories Strava estimated and what my Garmin Edge estimated. Strava estimated it lower. There's no easy way to tell which one is closer to right, but Strava is the lower of the two.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    edited April 2017
    noobletmcnugget wrote: »
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    Get Strava, Endomondo or Runkeeper on your phone and use that.

    Cheers! Hadn't realised Strava calculated it for you. Any idea how accurate it is?

    Strava has some fancy math that takes your speed, weight (including bike), and the slope you're on, then calculates how much energy is required to go that fast there. It's different from the way a lot of sites and gadgets come up with a calorie number. It's a better approach overall, but where it falls down is in the wind, and when you're riding close behind somebody else.

    EDIT: For the record, an HRM is not the right device to know how many calories you've burned on a bike. An HRM just counts heart beats. If you wanted to know for sure how many calories you burned, a power meter would be the tool to measure it. They're expensive and I'm not recommending you get one, I'm just telling you HRMs aren't where it's at.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    I find Strava estimates pretty reasonable. MapMyRide was comically high, double for instance.

    Mostly for me Strava is in rough agreement with my Garmin Edge but Garmin under-estimates calories significantly on long, low intensity rides.

    Tracking your progress and setting PRs on Strava can be very motivational too.

    BTW - randomly "shaving a bit off" is most likely to make the estimate worse not better!
  • noobletmcnugget
    noobletmcnugget Posts: 518 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    I find Strava estimates pretty reasonable. MapMyRide was comically high, double for instance.

    Mostly for me Strava is in rough agreement with my Garmin Edge but Garmin under-estimates calories significantly on long, low intensity rides.

    Tracking your progress and setting PRs on Strava can be very motivational too.

    BTW - randomly "shaving a bit off" is most likely to make the estimate worse not better!

    Ok, thanks so much! I'll stick with its estimate as it is in that case. And yeah you're right - it seems like a great way of tracking progress. :)
  • noobletmcnugget
    noobletmcnugget Posts: 518 Member
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    noobletmcnugget wrote: »
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    Get Strava, Endomondo or Runkeeper on your phone and use that.

    Cheers! Hadn't realised Strava calculated it for you. Any idea how accurate it is?

    Strava has some fancy math that takes your speed, weight (including bike), and the slope you're on, then calculates how much energy is required to go that fast there. It's different from the way a lot of sites and gadgets come up with a calorie number. It's a better approach overall, but where it falls down is in the wind, and when you're riding close behind somebody else.

    EDIT: For the record, an HRM is not the right device to know how many calories you've burned on a bike. An HRM just counts heart beats. If you wanted to know for sure how many calories you burned, a power meter would be the tool to measure it. They're expensive and I'm not recommending you get one, I'm just telling you HRMs aren't where it's at.

    Thanks for such a detailed reply!
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    Tracking your progress and setting PRs on Strava can be very motivational too.

    Getting a little off topic here, but I think @noobletmcnugget has her answer.

    I live in Seattle which is a lovely city but I've been here more than a decade now, and there are only so many roads. So I've been driving my bike out of the city to ride in new and interesting places. I would encourage everybody to do that. It's a lot easier to rack up a lot of miles when you're riding through terra incognita. You want to see what's around the next bend. Fitness gains and big calorie burns are just a side effect of the happiness. :smile:

    I've always thought Strava's global heatmap was their best feature. It's a fantastic way to find good routes in a place you're not familiar with.

    Strava-Global-Heatmap.png
  • Machka9
    Machka9 Posts: 25,616 Member
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    EDIT: For the record, an HRM is not the right device to know how many calories you've burned on a bike. An HRM just counts heart beats. If you wanted to know for sure how many calories you burned, a power meter would be the tool to measure it. They're expensive and I'm not recommending you get one, I'm just telling you HRMs aren't where it's at.


    And it becomes quite obvious why an HRM is the wrong tool for the job when you Analyze a ride on Strava and look at the elevation profile and heart rate. Theoretically, my heart rate should gradually increase as I climb a hill, as I'm putting in more effort and burning more calories. But my heart rate is all over the map. It usually spikes just before a climb while I'm still on flat ground not putting in much of an effort and then it levels out as I relax toward the top of a climb. My heart rate is more a measure of how much anxiety I'm feeling on a ride.

This discussion has been closed.

Categories