Fit bit accuracy

Options
georgiamaxine1
georgiamaxine1 Posts: 77 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
How accurate is the fit bit blaze? It says I burn 2,700 calories typically is it very accurate? Thanks
«13

Replies

  • BoxerBrawler
    BoxerBrawler Posts: 2,032 Member
    Options
    I don't know about the blaze but I have a Fitbit Charge HR 2 and it's extremely accurate.
  • BurlzGettingFit
    BurlzGettingFit Posts: 115 Member
    Options
    I have the blaze and I've found it to be very accurate.
  • 2011rocket3touring
    2011rocket3touring Posts: 1,346 Member
    Options
    I should have kept the link to that video...
    Some lab did a test of 4 units: the Apple watch, a fitbit, Microsoft Pulse and a garmin.
    In order from most accurate to least:
    1. Microsoft Pulse
    2. Apple Watch
    3. Fitbit
    4. garmin
  • fitmom4lifemfp
    fitmom4lifemfp Posts: 1,575 Member
    Options
    My Fitbit calculates a very high calorie number for me, so no, not accurate.
  • T0M_K
    T0M_K Posts: 7,526 Member
    Options
    Fitbit and maybe others require you to setup the appropriate stride length to be more accurate. can we ever really know exactly how accurate. some say yes, takes some number crunching over time AND some very accurate logging to understand what your body is doing and if its accurate. IMO.
  • hesn92
    hesn92 Posts: 5,967 Member
    Options
    Some people say it is. Only way to know for sure (for you) is to experiment. Try eating what mfp tells you based on your fitbit steps and if you lose weight then it's accurate
  • Tried30UserNames
    Tried30UserNames Posts: 561 Member
    Options
    It is my understanding that most modern devices are pretty accurate at counting things like walking or running, but very inaccurate for calculating calories burned for things like strength training or kettle balls or cardio classes.
  • Sara2652
    Sara2652 Posts: 158 Member
    Options
    I've caught my fitbit one tracking steps while riding in the car but I think its only because I'm holding the button down to check because it doesn't show up when I check online in the evening.

    Depending on your height, weight and activity level 2,700 isn't too hard to get to. At 5'5 and 220lbs my BMR is 1765cal. then you add simple daily going ons plus what ever workout and I'm typically around 2,600cal a day (I'm not that active yet).

    Side note I was in a group where we actually had our true BMRs tested and mine was 20% higher then the average in other words no slow metabolism excuse for me but also why going too far into a generally suggested deficit had me starving and dizzy all the time.
  • jec228
    jec228 Posts: 67 Member
    Options
    I have the alta HR and I get around a 2,600 burn/day. I think it's fairly accurate but still trying to figure that out. I have my MFP diary set to sedentary so sometimes it adds in an additional 1,000 cals/day to eat. I know I am unable to lose if I eat all of these back so still trying to find that sweet spot.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    Gave Beth 1,000 steps driving home from the last hike we did. Bigly accurate! The best!
  • BoxerBrawler
    BoxerBrawler Posts: 2,032 Member
    Options
    Tried30UserNames wrote: »
    It is my understanding that most modern devices are pretty accurate at counting things like walking or running, but very inaccurate for calculating calories burned for things like strength training or kettle balls or cardio classes.

    This is why I like the HR monitor... even if you're not taking steps it's calculating your burn based upon your heart rate which is super accurate.

  • StaciMarie1974
    StaciMarie1974 Posts: 4,138 Member
    Options
    IT will vary person to person, depending on habits/model. But best way to know? Track data for 4, 8, 12 weeks. IF you lose as expected, yours is fairly accurate. If you lose faster, your Fitbit is underestimating calories burned. Or the opposite if you lose slower.

    This presupposes accurate logging, of course.

    For me, my Fitbit is accurate. If I eat under what it shows, I lose weight. I'm in maintenance so I am not trying to lose weight.

    If you don't know, assume a 5-10% error rate to err on the side of caution. If your Fitbit says you burned 2500, assume 2250. And leave 250 calories behind.
  • StaciMarie1974
    StaciMarie1974 Posts: 4,138 Member
    Options
    ps my Fitbits HR function is NOT super accurate depending on what I'm doing. Too often it shows no reading, or will show 60-something when I'm in the middle of a brisk walk going uphill.
  • LadyLilion
    LadyLilion Posts: 276 Member
    Options
    I have noticed that, on my Charge 2, though my husband's stride is clearly longer than mine, he routinely gets more steps when we walk together. A mile for me will be 2200 steps and for him 2600, for instance. We've never manually set the stride length, but walk outside and their GPS feature should take care of that as we've had them for 3 months or more. We also noticed that he got a number of steps driving. He holds the wheel in his left hand and the car needs alignment, so the wheel shakes slightly. The vibration gave him steps. Once he took it off, that stopped so it was definitely the vibration.

    Is the HR accurate? Maybe. Clearly better than what the elliptical and treadmills my local Y show...as they'll have me at 60 beats one second then 179 then zero. All things considered, I like my Fitbit as a tool to keep me moving, but I don't consider it 100% accurate.
  • BoxerBrawler
    BoxerBrawler Posts: 2,032 Member
    Options
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    cushman5279 wrote: »
    Tried30UserNames wrote: »
    It is my understanding that most modern devices are pretty accurate at counting things like walking or running, but very inaccurate for calculating calories burned for things like strength training or kettle balls or cardio classes.

    This is why I like the HR monitor... even if you're not taking steps it's calculating your burn based upon your heart rate which is super accurate.

    Heart rate isn't super-accurate for those things though. It's best when you're doing steady-state cardio.

    Really? Could have fooled me! My last Rank test in Muay Thai calculated the hell out of my calorie burn. I wasn't moving my feet too much... just dancing around really, as MMA folks do. The calorie burn based on my heart rate (HIIT), was off the charts!

  • CharlieBeansmomTracey
    CharlieBeansmomTracey Posts: 7,682 Member
    Options
    cushman5279 wrote: »
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    cushman5279 wrote: »
    Tried30UserNames wrote: »
    It is my understanding that most modern devices are pretty accurate at counting things like walking or running, but very inaccurate for calculating calories burned for things like strength training or kettle balls or cardio classes.

    This is why I like the HR monitor... even if you're not taking steps it's calculating your burn based upon your heart rate which is super accurate.

    Heart rate isn't super-accurate for those things though. It's best when you're doing steady-state cardio.

    Really? Could have fooled me! My last Rank test in Muay Thai calculated the hell out of my calorie burn. I wasn't moving my feet too much... just dancing around really, as MMA folks do. The calorie burn based on my heart rate (HIIT), was off the charts!

    calorie burns are going to be an estimate no matter what you do/what you use. its going to be more accurate(but still have a percentage of being off by a bit) for those who do steady state cardio. heart rate is great if you are training for something and want to know where your heart rate is,but other than that it can say you burn more than you did.Not to mention that fitbits also take your BMR(what your body burns by being alive) and adds that to your exercise calories. if heart rate had anything to do with calories burned,then those who have a naturally high heart rate would burn big calories just sitting still. or if you were scared,had a heart attack,etc.

  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    cushman5279 wrote: »
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    cushman5279 wrote: »
    Tried30UserNames wrote: »
    It is my understanding that most modern devices are pretty accurate at counting things like walking or running, but very inaccurate for calculating calories burned for things like strength training or kettle balls or cardio classes.

    This is why I like the HR monitor... even if you're not taking steps it's calculating your burn based upon your heart rate which is super accurate.

    Heart rate isn't super-accurate for those things though. It's best when you're doing steady-state cardio.

    Really? Could have fooled me! My last Rank test in Muay Thai calculated the hell out of my calorie burn. I wasn't moving my feet too much... just dancing around really, as MMA folks do. The calorie burn based on my heart rate (HIIT), was off the charts!

    That a HRM records calorie burn for certain activities doesn't establish that the calories recorded are particularly accurate. That's a whole different thing.

  • CharlieBeansmomTracey
    CharlieBeansmomTracey Posts: 7,682 Member
    Options
    StaciMarie1974 wrote: »
    ps my Fitbits HR function is NOT super accurate depending on what I'm doing. Too often it shows no reading, or will show 60-something when I'm in the middle of a brisk walk going uphill.

    same here when exercising a lot of times it will show no heart rate, sometimes when Im even sitting still. I tell hubby"well according to my fitbit Im dead" lol.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,970 Member
    Options
    cushman5279 wrote: »
    Tried30UserNames wrote: »
    It is my understanding that most modern devices are pretty accurate at counting things like walking or running, but very inaccurate for calculating calories burned for things like strength training or kettle balls or cardio classes.

    This is why I like the HR monitor... even if you're not taking steps it's calculating your burn based upon your heart rate which is super accurate.

    Yup. I burned 1,800 calories on the couch last night, just by watching a scary movie!

Categories