Garmin watch or iPhone more accurate in calories?

FatRunningMan1966
FatRunningMan1966 Posts: 45 Member
edited November 23 in Fitness and Exercise
I carried my iPhone and wore my Garmin watch today and did 12,000 Steps .

According to my iPhone I burnt 280 Calories but the Garmin Vivoactive is reporting 900 Calories?

Which one should I believe?

Replies

  • ally0015
    ally0015 Posts: 4 Member
    I would tend to go with the lesser of the two although you probably burned more calories than the 280 stated. The Garmin takes in to account the calories that your body would require (although estimated to an extend) to function normally even at rest as well as incorporating the calories you burned doing your 12,000 steps.

    Good job though.
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,727 Member
    VA HR? Always on HR monitoring causes major discrepancies.

    Additionally, Apple health and Garmin Connect use quite different algorithms to estimate activity.
  • FatRunningMan1966
    FatRunningMan1966 Posts: 45 Member
    Thank you. Did not want to risk it so only ate back the 280
  • FatRunningMan1966
    FatRunningMan1966 Posts: 45 Member
    And yes it’s the Vivoactive HR
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    FatRunningMan1966 wrote: »
    And yes it’s the Vivoactive HR

    If you're only walking then HR can cause a significant overestimate.
  • purpleannex
    purpleannex Posts: 61 Member
    You're asking whether to trust, for accurate fitness information... a dedicated, time respected running watch manufacturer or a company that sells over priced fashion accessories to gullible people...... hmmmm

    Descisions .....Descisions. ....
  • jennybearlv
    jennybearlv Posts: 1,519 Member
    edited January 2018
    That is a big difference. Keep meticulous track of your calories in, weight, and what you are using for your calories out for a month. 1 pound is about 3500 calories. This is how I know non-HR Garmin devices overestimate for me and that I need to add on calories to the MFP estimate to meet my target and not feel like I'm starving to death.
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,727 Member
    jennybearlv wrote: »
    That is a big difference. Keep meticulous track of your calories in, weight, and what you are using for your calories out for a month. 1 pound is about 3500 calories. This is how I know non-HR Garmin devices overestimate for me and that I need to add on calories to the MFP estimate to meet my target and not feel like I'm starving to death.

    Did you mean underestimate?

    Since if they're overestimating, you'd end up with extra calories.

    Just want to understand exactly what your issue is.

    I'm pretty sure my Vivoactive 1(Non-HR) underestimates... and for me, that's ok, because It allows me to be much less precise with my calorie estimation and still lose at a reasonable rate.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    purpleannex wrote: »
    You're asking whether to trust, for accurate fitness information... a dedicated, time respected running watch manufacturer or a company that sells over priced fashion accessories to gullible people...... hmmmm

    Descisions .....Descisions. ....

    :lol:
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    edited January 2018
    purpleannex wrote: »
    You're asking whether to trust, for accurate fitness information... a dedicated, time respected running watch manufacturer or a company that sells over priced fashion accessories to gullible people...... hmmmm

    Descisions .....Descisions. ....

    I think it's fair to say that the Garmin entry in the bargain basement end of the market didn't go well. The first generation of VivoSmart wasn't a reliable product. The VivoActive, on the other hand, is a solid entry level piece of kit.

    Wouldn't disagree with your underlying point though.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories