Accuracy?

gofaulk28
gofaulk28 Posts: 25 Member
in Fitness and Exercise

I don't expect every app/device to show exactly the same data, but my galaxy 6 Watch and my runkeeper app show a significant difference in calories burned. Not sure which one is closer to being correct, the distance is pretty close though. See screenshots. Any advice?

Answers

  • Lietchi
    Lietchi Posts: 7,333 Member

    I don't see any screenshots. But two thoughts:

    • Do you know if your watch and runkeeper app are showing net or gross calories? That's a common explanation for calorie divergence, if one shows gross and the other net
    • I like this calculator for a realistic estimate: https://exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs it has a toggle for gross versus net calories
  • gofaulk28
    gofaulk28 Posts: 25 Member

    I don't know why the screenshots aren't showing up, I'm sorry. Thanks for your reply. Runkeeper shows 400 calories burned and my watch shows 587 for the same walk. Im pretty sure those are both the calories from my walk only.

  • Retroguy2000
    Retroguy2000 Posts: 2,170 Member

    Is one showing gross (i.e. all calories burned in that time, which includes the calories you'd have burned instead just sitting on the sofa which is already accounted for in your baseline MFP estimates), and is one showing net (i.e. just the additional calories, basically total walking calories - sofa calories)?

    Do both have your accurate weight and age stats entered?

    At the end of the day, it's all an estimate. Best to err on the side of safety and use a lower estimate, then see how you're getting on after a few weeks with your weight change.

  • gofaulk28
    gofaulk28 Posts: 25 Member

    Ok thanks. I believe both the watch and the app were showing activity calories only. I started them both at the beginning of my walk and stopped them at the end of my walk. Both counters started at zero calories burned. They both have correct info.. Age, weight. The watch monitors heartrate though, which the app does not.

  • Lietchi
    Lietchi Posts: 7,333 Member

    The fact that they start at 0 calories doesn't mean they're giving net calories. A Google search would seem to indicate that both your app and watch are giving gross calories (if AI can be believed). The fact that one uses heart rate and the other doesn't can certainly explain the difference, but to know which one is accurate I'd use the site I linked, set to gross calories.

    If the question is 'which one can be believed, to eat back those calories', then a net calorie calculation would be more useful.

  • cmriverside
    cmriverside Posts: 34,905 Member

    Heart rate is not an accurate measure of calorie burn, either.

    If it was me I'd use the lower calorie burn number and use it consistently for 4-6 weeks to see just how accurate it is. I wouldn't rely on the one with the HR. Runkeeper should be fairly good for walking and running.

    At the end of the trial period you'll know more. There are a lot of ways to screw up calorie counting, and this is just one data point. The trick is to use it consistently while still trying to get the other numbers dialed in like food intake calories and actual TDEE.

  • gofaulk28
    gofaulk28 Posts: 25 Member

    Thanks for the advice, I appreciate the answers. I used runkeeper for years before I got my watch and using those numbers has always worked in the past for weight loss. The watch calories just seem too good to be true! I'll check out the gross calories calculator too.

Categories