Just how inaccurate are "calories burned"

jskaggs1971
jskaggs1971 Posts: 371 Member
edited October 4 in Fitness and Exercise
I've been noticing lately that some of the fitness activities (for me, it;s the "Bicycling, 14-16 mph, vigorous (cycling, biking, bike riding)) activity listed in MFP's tables have a higher calorie burn rate than I expected to see. I know the only really accurate way to measure is with a good HRM, but dag nab it, I just don't want to have yet another item to keep track of before I go biking.

So, for those of you with HRM's, do you find your calorie burn to be higher or lower than what MFP lists? By how much?

I don't eat back all my exercise calories on most days, so for me it's not THAT big a deal -- just a question out of curiosity.

Replies

  • AngelTwin27
    AngelTwin27 Posts: 33 Member
    Thanks for asking this question! I'd be really keen to know too.

    Some things I feel are probably quite accurate, but others seem a bit "out there"...
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    For some people it's high, some people it's low, and for some people it's right on. MFP values are basically averages, so they work for a large cross section of people, but obviously not for everyone.
  • chevy88grl
    chevy88grl Posts: 3,937 Member
    I think you'll find a wide range of answers to this... based on the person's height, weight, age, activity etc. There will be a large variation.


    For me, MFP estimates high for the treadmill but estimates low for the incline trainer. So, there's even a variation for me. I've never owned a HRM and won't spend the money on one - I lost my weight just following what the machines at the gym said I had burned. :)
  • psarah
    psarah Posts: 84
    I use my HRM and I find that my calories burned is lower than what MFP has for them.
  • LorinaLynn
    LorinaLynn Posts: 13,247 Member
    I've mainly used MFP calculations, and had no problems losing while eating earned calories from exercise.
  • anyonebutmehaha
    anyonebutmehaha Posts: 174
    i was just gonna ask something along those lines too! like when i'm on stationary bike at gym for 30 minutes it tells me i burned 100 calories or so but when i go to log in my cardio at MFP it says i burned like 350 calories in that 30 minutes?? so which one is right? (i've been using what the machines at gym say rather than MFP's numbers).
    dunno but i feel like all MFP's exercise numbers are inflated...like no way do i feel like i burned some 500+ calories gardening for xx amount of time like MFP says...so i just change numbers to what seems more logical or i would have to stay up and eat all night to make my calorie requirements, lol
  • Juliebean_1027
    Juliebean_1027 Posts: 713 Member
    I ignore everything that MFP says for calories burned as I've found that they're usually double, or sometimes triple what I really burn. I'm 5'11 and 290 and when I wore my HRM and rode 6 miles on the recumbent bike (on the weight loss program and averaging a speed of 80) I only burned roughly 100 calories. MFP had it set at almost quadruple that.

    If you're working out at the gym, I would suggest entering you age and weight into the machines and using those calories burned instead, as they tend to be a little more accurate (at least in my experience). Hope this helps.
  • nanegan
    nanegan Posts: 39 Member
    My HRM always is less - running, walking or cycling. My HRM uses my weight, age, height & sex.
  • jhardenbergh
    jhardenbergh Posts: 1,035 Member
    for me I burn more calories using my HRM calories burned than the MFP database. My HRM has a chest strap so I know it's fairly accurate
  • oldy76
    oldy76 Posts: 185 Member
    I use an HRM and regularly find that the MFP figures are much much higher than what I'm getting. Doesn't seem to matter what activity it is either. So many variables involved in getting a 'number' so I'm not surprised it's a bit off for many people!!
    Incidentally, the more weight I lose and the fitter I get, the lower my calorie burn is becoming!! I don't mind working harder to get results because I AM getting results and only have MFP to thank for this :)
  • Juliebean_1027
    Juliebean_1027 Posts: 713 Member
    i was just gonna ask something along those lines too! like when i'm on stationary bike at gym for 30 minutes it tells me i burned 100 calories or so but when i go to log in my cardio at MFP it says i burned like 350 calories in that 30 minutes?? so which one is right? (i've been using what the machines at gym say rather than MFP's numbers).
    dunno but i feel like all MFP's exercise numbers are inflated...like no way do i feel like i burned some 500+ calories gardening for xx amount of time like MFP says...so i just change numbers to what seems more logical or i would have to stay up and eat all night to make my calorie requirements, lol

    Yes. The same thing happens to me when I'm on the bike at the gym. I've tried entering my weight and age into the machine and using my HRM and found the machine to be closer to an accurate burn.
  • cschu544
    cschu544 Posts: 320 Member
    Before I got my HRM I thought the calories I was burning were too low. For 1 hour of Zumba it told me I was burning approx. 650 on a good day. After comparing to my actual HRM I was burning on average between 811-970 an hour. It was REALLY under... A lot of folks here say that MFP over exaggerates the calories burned, but I've encountered the exact opposite. I guess it depends.
  • Bourds
    Bourds Posts: 90 Member
    I find the numbers on here to be considerably higher than my HRM. About 2/3 of what is on here is about what my actual reading comes to. Of course it can vary from person to person with differences
  • MinaAriel
    MinaAriel Posts: 138 Member
    I've had my HRM for a little over a week and MFP is the higher of the two numbers. HRM is only about 2/3 of MFP number when it comes to the elliptical but it's been pretty close when doing 30 Day Shred (entered as circuit training). I did some major gardening (tilling and such) today and MFP was lower by a tad.

    I've only had my HRM for a short time but I weighed in today and I lost 2 lbs this week compared to the .5-1 lb I had been losing the past few weeks.
  • dustyhockeymom
    dustyhockeymom Posts: 537 Member
    I was on MFP for about 6 weeks before I got a HRM. When I got my HRM I found out that I was burning about half of what MFP was estimating for me. It was a bummer, but it was more important to be accurate. I think it's pretty unique though because I know people whose was right on and people who were actually burning more.
  • emmajane_2288
    emmajane_2288 Posts: 132 Member
    The machines in my gym and MFP are very similar to what my HRM says, give or take 50 calories or so.

    However, on exercises such as my spinning class, and 30 day shred, I have found a difference.

    For a 45 minute spin class, MFP says I would burn around 350 calories, however my HRM says anywhere between 520-600 depending on how hard Ive worked.

    The only real way to determine is to get a HRM, however some gym equipment allows you to enter your age and weight, which will give a more accurate reading.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories