Calories for exercise

Options
mcafton
mcafton Posts: 190 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
It seems like the calorie estimates for cardio exercise on this app are way overestimated. For instance I go on a bike ride today for 133 minutes at around 15 mph. Strava says I burned 893 calories. MFP says around 2400 for a similar ride. I see people's posts for exercise and they also seem high. Since a lot of people eat back these calories, it seems that in reality many of us would be eating too many calories. thoughts?

Replies

  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Options
    Notice that the type of cycling isn't mentioned in the cycling speed ratings on here - which makes them useless for most people.
    If you are cycling over hard terrain off road they might be somewhat accurate, I find them dreadfully inflated for road riding.

    There's far better ways to estimate cycling calories. Indoors I use a power meter (highly accurate), outdoors I use use Strava's etimates (not that accurate but reasonable enough to be usable).
    Those estimates worked out fine for 300+ hours of riding last year.

    The eating back calories method works if you put some work into making your estimates reasonable.
  • Josh_lol
    Josh_lol Posts: 317 Member
    Options
    The calorie estimates are notoriously high on here. A lot of people recommend only using around 25-50% of the exercise calories if you plan on eating them back.

    Cardio has been known to raise your resting metabolic rate for a number of hours after doing said exercise so it might also be trying to take that into account.
  • CharlieBeansmomTracey
    CharlieBeansmomTracey Posts: 7,682 Member
    Options
    mcafton wrote: »
    It seems like the calorie estimates for cardio exercise on this app are way overestimated. For instance I go on a bike ride today for 133 minutes at around 15 mph. Strava says I burned 893 calories. MFP says around 2400 for a similar ride. I see people's posts for exercise and they also seem high. Since a lot of people eat back these calories, it seems that in reality many of us would be eating too many calories. thoughts?

    everything is an estimation which is why its said to eat back at least half of your exercise calories and adjust them as time goes on(too fast weight loss eat more back,too little eat less back). some people can eat all their exercise calories back and still lose while others can only eat back 25-50% of theirs. its possible strava is off too. not saying it is or isnt. but yeah MFP sometimes overestimated calories burned. its all trial and error. same with MFPs calorie goal for some it may be too high others it may be too low.
  • CharlieBeansmomTracey
    CharlieBeansmomTracey Posts: 7,682 Member
    Options
    sijomial wrote: »
    Eating 50% of a bad estimate is far less accurate than eating 100% of a good estimate.
    :smile:

    This exercise database on here is flawed for sure but it's not double for every kind of exercise.

    yeah thats true. for me I learned that eating half back or less is better for me I tried not eating any back and it gets hangry in here lol. some of those exercise apps are good for overestimation too. I cant think of the one I used a few years ago. it told me I was burning 1 calorie every 5 seconds. yeah that wasnt even close.
  • BecMarty14
    BecMarty14 Posts: 351 Member
    Options
    I agree with adapting based on results.
    If a calorie estimate seems way off, I will check it using another calorie calculator online.
    The best indication is the results.
  • cleesus
    cleesus Posts: 87 Member
    Options
    You are better off using a seperate app and having that apps estimates added to mfp
  • mcafton
    mcafton Posts: 190 Member
    Options
    sijomial wrote: »
    Notice that the type of cycling isn't mentioned in the cycling speed ratings on here - which makes them useless for most people.
    If you are cycling over hard terrain off road they might be somewhat accurate, I find them dreadfully inflated for road riding.

    There's far better ways to estimate cycling calories. Indoors I use a power meter (highly accurate), outdoors I use use Strava's etimates (not that accurate but reasonable enough to be usable).
    Those estimates worked out fine for 300+ hours of riding last year.

    The eating back calories method works if you put some work into making your estimates reasonable.

    I used to use run keeper because I like their interface, but started using Strava this year. So I am just now realizing that I was thinking all last summer that I was burning twice as much calories as I probably am. Which was frustrating at first, but I am adjusting. I have a road bike and mainly ride paved trails between 20 and 33 miles 3 or 4 times a week. I don't have a power meter, but will eventually get one. thanks for your response.
  • mcafton
    mcafton Posts: 190 Member
    Options
    Josh_lol wrote: »
    The calorie estimates are notoriously high on here. A lot of people recommend only using around 25-50% of the exercise calories if you plan on eating them back.

    Cardio has been known to raise your resting metabolic rate for a number of hours after doing said exercise so it might also be trying to take that into account.

    Good insight on the metabolic rate thing.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Options
    mcafton wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    Notice that the type of cycling isn't mentioned in the cycling speed ratings on here - which makes them useless for most people.
    If you are cycling over hard terrain off road they might be somewhat accurate, I find them dreadfully inflated for road riding.

    There's far better ways to estimate cycling calories. Indoors I use a power meter (highly accurate), outdoors I use use Strava's etimates (not that accurate but reasonable enough to be usable).
    Those estimates worked out fine for 300+ hours of riding last year.

    The eating back calories method works if you put some work into making your estimates reasonable.

    I used to use run keeper because I like their interface, but started using Strava this year. So I am just now realizing that I was thinking all last summer that I was burning twice as much calories as I probably am. Which was frustrating at first, but I am adjusting. I have a road bike and mainly ride paved trails between 20 and 33 miles 3 or 4 times a week. I don't have a power meter, but will eventually get one. thanks for your response.

    I started out using Runkeeper too - also found it too generous, also too generous for walking and running.

    Strava tries to make a rough power estimate based on the stats entered in your profile, route ridden and speed and then convert power (watts) to calories. There's obviously things it can't know such as head winds, riding position, tyres etc. but I find its estimates pretty reasonable if not a little low.

    Strava and my Garmin Edge tend to be in the same ballpark but diverge a bit depending on the speed/intensity of my rides.

Categories