Walking

hayley_strathearn5
hayley_strathearn5 Posts: 2 Member
edited November 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
Hi
Does anyone find that there steps trackers tracks low calories? For 10,000 steps I’ll get about 150 calories. If I enter that as a big walk around 2 hours it’s over 400. I’m walking for exercise currently and it’s a bit disheartening pounding the streets for miles on end for a measly 150 calories. Does anyone enter it as exercise and remove the step counter intake? Thanks.

Replies

  • meganmdewar
    meganmdewar Posts: 14 Member
    edited February 2018
    I'm not sure what you mean by "step tracker" as it relates to calories. I have a Fitness Activity Tracker watch that is similar to a FitBit, it tracks my steps (my phone does as well), but the one thing I didn't see in your post is the speed that you're walking. Believe it or not, it makes a difference. (For example, if you log 2mph walking for 30mins, calories burned is 81 for 143lbs. Walking at 3.5 (a brisk pace), calories burned is 123.) I suffer from Meniere's Disease, so high impact jumping, turning, spinning around is not an option for me. I walk. A lot. I am unable to walk on the treadmill due to my disease but I can generally guest-imate how fast I'm walking based on how fast (and winded) I walked on the treadmill previously.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    meganmdewar wrote: »
    Believe it or not, it makes a difference.

    No, calorie expenditure per mile of walking is about 1/3 bodyweight in lbs. That doesn't really vary by pace until you're moving to rapidly to walk comfortably and start having to skip a little.

    hayley_strathearn5 wrote: »
    Hi
    Does anyone find that there steps trackers tracks low calories?

    A step tracker is estimating the distance that you've travelled by making an assumption about the distance each step covers. If that calibration is wrong, then the estimate of calories will be wrong as well. That said, moving around the house, workplace, or shops is likely to be different to going for a deliberate walk. Your step length is different, for a start.

    I'd also ask where you're deriving that 150cals from. It may be that you're seeing a correction factor in MFP, rather than the actual estimate. If you have negative adjustments set then essentially the offset is against your 24hour BMR.
  • hayley_strathearn5
    hayley_strathearn5 Posts: 2 Member
    Hi, thanks for replying, it’s the basic fitness app on my phone that tracks steps, it syncs with MyFitnessPal and has the calories burned. I walk about 1.3 miles in 30 mins, not as fast as I’d like but I’m pushing a pram at the same time, which myfitnesspal gives a lot more calories burned for.
  • middlehaitch
    middlehaitch Posts: 8,486 Member
    Compare your cals your fitness tracker gives you to this equation.
    Weight x .3 x distance in miles.

    Ie. I am 103 lbs so it would be
    103 x .03= 30.9x 1.3miles = 40.17 cals burnt.

    Of course the heavier you are the more you will burn.

    If you want it in km
    Weight x .3 x (distance in km x .621)

    Cheers, h.
  • Roobyzooby
    Roobyzooby Posts: 189 Member
    I use the Map my walk app which I have linked to MFP, in my opinion it gives a fair estimation of calories burnt for each walk. It tracks the time and distance not steps. I do the same exact walk each school day and it certainly shows the difference between the walk to school (just me) and the walk home with an 11 year old dragging her feet...
  • spiriteagle99
    spiriteagle99 Posts: 3,752 Member
    Your fitness tracker may be assuming the steps are just part of your daily rounds, so isn't giving you a lot extra. You might want to just not sync your steps. Instead input the time you spend walking under intentional exercise. My watch counts steps, but I don't sync it to MFP. I do my walks and runs individually. Even then, it undercounts my calories a bit, but not enough to matter.
  • huntersvonnegut
    huntersvonnegut Posts: 1,177 Member
    http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs.html
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,993 Member
    Map my walk I think gives gross calories, thus the calories for the activity plus the calories of your bmi, which you would burn anyway if you were sitting at home. Also, most people find that MMW grossly overstates calories burned for walking. weight * distance * 0.3 (or roughtly weight * distance * 0.37 in kg and km) seems to work for most people.

    And think about it: walking is not meant to burn a lot of calories because we are adapted to it. We walk on two legs, that's what our bodies are made for. We would not be walking on two legs if it burned a lot of calories.
  • Machka9
    Machka9 Posts: 25,743 Member
    I don't use a step tracker, but I've found that when I walk approx. 5 km/hour (3 mph), I burn approx. 200 cal/hour.
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,993 Member
    Machka9 wrote: »
    I don't use a step tracker, but I've found that when I walk approx. 5 km/hour (3 mph), I burn approx. 200 cal/hour.

    Though this number depends purely on your weight. Thus it is completely different for someone else.
  • Machka9
    Machka9 Posts: 25,743 Member
    edited February 2018
    yirara wrote: »
    Machka9 wrote: »
    I don't use a step tracker, but I've found that when I walk approx. 5 km/hour (3 mph), I burn approx. 200 cal/hour.

    Though this number depends purely on your weight. Thus it is completely different for someone else.

    MFP gave me different numbers when I weighed more vs when I was lighter, but I kept it at 200 cal/hour (lower weight number) the whole time. I didn't want to over eat ... best (for me) to eat less so that I could lose weight. :)

    When it comes to any exercise, I tend to use my goal weight to calculate calories burned, not my heavier weight.
    .
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    hayley_strathearn5 wrote: »
    Hi, thanks for replying, it’s the basic fitness app on my phone that tracks steps, it syncs with MyFitnessPal and has the calories burned. I walk about 1.3 miles in 30 mins, not as fast as I’d like but I’m pushing a pram at the same time, which myfitnesspal gives a lot more calories burned for.

    Thought I'd responded to this yesterday, but I may not have hit post.

    3mph is about average walking pace, so just below that whilst pushing a pram isn't something to worry about.

    The weight of pram, and baby, will be consuming more energy.
  • briscogun
    briscogun Posts: 1,138 Member
    I actually prefer the lower calorie burned figures when I work out/exercise so I don’t eat back too many calories.
  • angelsja
    angelsja Posts: 859 Member
    edited February 2018
    I burned 750cals on a 100min dog walk today according to my Fitbit
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,993 Member
    angelsja wrote: »
    I burned 750cals on a 100min dog walk today according to my Fitbit

    That sounds like a lot, unless you're 300lbs and walked 8 miles.
  • angelsja
    angelsja Posts: 859 Member
    Erm no I'm 178lbs I walked about 6miles that is total calories for the time I was out walking I believe :/
  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,997 Member
    On a 4 mile hike, which my pedometer assumes is flat (even though it's not) these are the measurements I got from my app:

    9,536 steps
    4.06 miles
    1:44.12 hr/min/sec
    2.3 mph
    362.4 cals

    This works prorates to about 207 cal/hr which is similar to the OP's figures.

    The actual cals burned on the hike were actually much higher because of a 1k+ ft elevation change. Those estimates were calculated using MapMyHike and an online hiking calculator.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories