What is the most accurate app for counting calories burned and distance walked?

Options
xproofx
xproofx Posts: 43 Member
edited July 2017 in Fitness and Exercise
I use a combination of MapMyWalk and Pedometer on my Android device, but I am very leary of the results they provide. My current weight is 286 pounds and I walked 2.1 miles this afternoon at about 3.2 mph.

MapMyWalk reports my calories burned as 412 and my Pedometer app reports 295.8 calories burned. Both apps have been configured for my current weight.

Regardless, whatever calories burned report I get from an app or exercise equipment at the gym, I always under report it to MFP by 15%.

In addition, I am so concerned about going over my calories that some days I come in 400-700 under because I am not sure I can trust the numbers.

This of course could lead me to not getting enough calories during the day. I don't feel like I'm losing energy, but it still is a concern for me. I've been working at this for 2 months and I've lost 36 pounds and I don't want to lose too much too quickly.

I understand that early on, giving my obese state that the pounds will fall a little quicker but I want to make sure I am doing this right.

That being said, what do you all suggest I change, if anything?

In addition, if someone can point me in the direction of an accurate app for counting my calories burned, it would be much appreciated.

Thanks everyone!
«1

Replies

  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    Options
    Bodyweight in lbs x 0.3 x distance in miles.
  • xproofx
    xproofx Posts: 43 Member
    Options
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    Bodyweight in lbs x 0.3 x distance in miles.

    Does this account for speed?
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    xproofx wrote: »
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    Bodyweight in lbs x 0.3 x distance in miles.

    Does this account for speed?

    Speed isn't a significant factor until you transition to running. Then after that cusp point is largely not important for most people.
  • gamerbabe14
    gamerbabe14 Posts: 876 Member
    Options
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    xproofx wrote: »
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    Bodyweight in lbs x 0.3 x distance in miles.

    Does this account for speed?

    Speed isn't a significant factor until you transition to running. Then after that cusp point is largely not important for most people.

    This!
  • DX2JX2
    DX2JX2 Posts: 1,921 Member
    Options
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    xproofx wrote: »
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    Bodyweight in lbs x 0.3 x distance in miles.

    Does this account for speed?

    Speed isn't a significant factor until you transition to running. Then after that cusp point is largely not important for most people.

    Interestingly, I think I read somewhere once you hit 5 mph, you actually burn more calories walking than running the same speed (if you've never tried it, walking 5mph is incredibly hard...the article said that this is really the realm of competitive speed walkers).
  • xproofx
    xproofx Posts: 43 Member
    Options
    Damn those apps were WAY off then. I'll be sure to leave that feedback in my reviews of them. You would think, with such a simple formula to calculate calories burned, they would incorporate it into their program.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Options
    The formula is for net calories, the app you are using may be trying to estimate gross calories.

    Or they may just be spitting out vanity numbers to encourage people! ;)
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    Options
    DX2JX2 wrote: »
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    xproofx wrote: »
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    Bodyweight in lbs x 0.3 x distance in miles.

    Does this account for speed?

    Speed isn't a significant factor until you transition to running. Then after that cusp point is largely not important for most people.

    Interestingly, I think I read somewhere once you hit 5 mph, you actually burn more calories walking than running the same speed (if you've never tried it, walking 5mph is incredibly hard...the article said that this is really the realm of competitive speed walkers).

    I was racing on Saturday and a few fellow runners observed that I was walking faster than they were running. Very muddy trails, so it was easier to walk the climbs than run them. Personally I'm comfortable walking about 4-5 mph, but yes that's a reasonable point. For most people there is a tendency to bump up to running, rather than walk uncomfortably fast.
  • Out_of_Bubblegum
    Out_of_Bubblegum Posts: 2,220 Member
    edited July 2017
    Options
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    Bodyweight in lbs x 0.3 x distance in miles.

    Source please?
    I've been using this - which is significantly different than the formula you use.
    https://www.verywell.com/walking-calories-burned-per-minute-3887138

    I also use a HRM for tracking cals when walking, which more closely resembles the charts I provided...

    (not challenging your formula, just would like to research it and learn)
  • ssbbg
    ssbbg Posts: 153 Member
    Options
    @bwmalone

    Here is the 0.3x BWX miles.

    http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning

    As pointed out above, it is net calories. Total calories matches with your table (verywell), at least for the entry I tried. Total calories is 0.53* BW* miles. 1 hour at 3 mph (so 3 miles) at 100 pounds give 159 calories by both the formula and the table.
  • Out_of_Bubblegum
    Out_of_Bubblegum Posts: 2,220 Member
    Options
    @ssbbg I see what the difference is now... Thanks much!
  • DX2JX2
    DX2JX2 Posts: 1,921 Member
    Options
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »

    I was racing on Saturday and a few fellow runners observed that I was walking faster than they were running. Very muddy trails, so it was easier to walk the climbs than run them. Personally I'm comfortable walking about 4-5 mph, but yes that's a reasonable point. For most people there is a tendency to bump up to running, rather than walk uncomfortably fast.

    4 mph seems to be my limit for a sustainable walking pace. Once I hit 5 I generally begin to run without thinking about it. The walking motion at that speed feels so awkward and difficult.
  • xproofx
    xproofx Posts: 43 Member
    Options
    sijomial wrote: »
    The formula is for net calories, the app you are using may be trying to estimate gross calories.

    Please elaborate. The app in question is MapMyWalk, made by the same company that makes MFP.

  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Options
    xproofx wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    The formula is for net calories, the app you are using may be trying to estimate gross calories.

    Please elaborate. The app in question is MapMyWalk, made by the same company that makes MFP.

    @xproofx
    Net calories = the extra calories you burned from the walking.

    Gross calories = all the calories you burned in that time period, every function your body is performing 24x7 plus the walking calories.
    You could express it as 1 MET + exercise calories.

    It's often quite difficult to discover what algorithms a particular app uses.
  • Carnhot
    Carnhot Posts: 367 Member
    Options
    I use Simply Walking. It accounts for speed but not incline.
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,478 Member
    Options
    TavistockToad wrote: »
    Bodyweight in lbs x 0.3 x distance in miles.

    This, and nothing else.

    Speed has fairly little to do with it. There seems to be some research that suggests there is a very minor influence, but not much. Hey, think back to school physics: if you push a big box over 2 miles the energy needed is higher than over 1 mile. Speed has no influence on that.
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,728 Member
    Options
    Once you get past 4mph, there's a bump, once you get past 5mph walking burns as many or more calories than running.

    http://www.runnersworld.com/peak-performance/running-v-walking-how-many-calories-will-you-burn

    But, as above, walking at that pace isn't comfortable for most people.
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,728 Member
    Options
    xproofx wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    The formula is for net calories, the app you are using may be trying to estimate gross calories.

    Please elaborate. The app in question is MapMyWalk, made by the same company that makes MFP.

    The various MapMyxxxx apps tend to overestimate calories for reasons that aren't entirely clear. Belonging to a family of apps is largely irrelevant to whether an app plays well with others.

    Personally, and I know others have the same experience, Garmin does the best job of estimating calories for distance over time.
  • Fitness_and_FODMAP
    Fitness_and_FODMAP Posts: 72 Member
    edited August 2017
    Options
    I use my Polar HR to get my calories and distance, I use the iOS version of Polar Beat and set it to GPS Walk mode and it does it all for you, it's probably the most accurate, because it knows my age, gender, weight & is monitoring my heart rate - I love it
  • xproofx
    xproofx Posts: 43 Member
    Options
    sijomial wrote: »
    xproofx wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    The formula is for net calories, the app you are using may be trying to estimate gross calories.

    Please elaborate. The app in question is MapMyWalk, made by the same company that makes MFP.

    @xproofx
    Net calories = the extra calories you burned from the walking.

    Gross calories = all the calories you burned in that time period, every function your body is performing 24x7 plus the walking calories.
    You could express it as 1 MET + exercise calories.

    It's often quite difficult to discover what algorithms a particular app uses.

    Thanks. Makes perfect sense!

Categories