Treadmill at gym calorie burn different than MFP?

I have noticed that too! I run my butt off on my treadmill and it says I burn a lot of calories... Then when I enter it into MFP it says wayyy less. Either way I just leave what MFP says, this way I have less to eat back if I decide too But Yeah I hope someone will have a clear answer to whats the correct one! I like to think its the treadmill because running gives me way more of a crazy workout than an elliptical trainer ~ and those people burn like a thousand calories! I think maybe its cuz they count the arm movement, but Im movingmy arms when I run as well!

I have the opposite problem MFP says way more than my treadmill at the gym. I follow the treadmill & adjust the time to suit. I've just assumed on a treadmill your doing less work than actually running as the track is in motion.

So I have been reading some articles as well and they are telling me that power walking at speeds between 3.5 and 4 mph burn a ton of calories... I found it kind of interesting and guess I dont have to always beat myself up over not burning as much when I power walk and dont run! Kind of off the subject but it was somwthing that sparked my interest!:)

I use a polar FT4 HRM to log all my calories the gym and MFP are always higher so my trust is in my HRM :bigsmile:

Anyone know why there is such a drastic difference in calories burned between what MFP reports it to be and what the gym equipment says?

For instance - if i spend approximately 30 minutes on the treadmill the calories reportedly burned per the treadmill will be 220. If i put in 30 minutes of treadmill/stairmaster in the exercise section here it has me burning WAY more than 220 calories so I have to pretty much cut my time in half to reflect what the equipment reports the calories burn to be.

Any idea what I could be doing wrong?

I you log all your treadmill miles as "walking" or "running" with the appropriate mph, you'll find the number are just about spot on to that of the machines. I do believe the person that entered "treadmill/stairmaster" based their figures more towards stairmaster or maybe one of those combination machines. When I first started I made the mistake of logging under "treadmill/stairmaster" and realized the numbers were way off.

I've compared my treadmill numbers to those such as "Walking, 3.0 mph, mod. pace, walking dog" or "walking, 3.5 mph, uphill" and the numbers seem to be very close every time.

I have the opposite problem MFP says way more than my treadmill at the gym. I follow the treadmill & adjust the time to suit. I've just assumed on a treadmill your doing less work than actually running as the track is in motion.

Why not keep the time and adjust the calories, that way you can still keep track of how long you are exercising for

No that's really good information. On the treadmills at the gym you stay in the "fat burn" category if you keep your heart rate within certain rates and generally i get to those rates when i'm walking fast - running generally puts me beyond the fat burn and into cardio rate. I tend to alternate between fast running and walking. Only a few minutes at a time for each and then i walk at normal pace but hit the incline to 10. I hear that variation is the trick. I dont know if i'm doing it right but time will tell lol!

So I have been reading some articles as well and they are telling me that power walking at speeds between 3.5 and 4 mph burn a ton of calories... I found it kind of interesting and guess I dont have to always beat myself up over not burning as much when I power walk and dont run! Kind of off the subject but it was somwthing that sparked my interest!:)

The fat-burning zone is a myth. Calories in/out counts more, so there's more benefit in going into a higher zone and burning more. That said, the best exercise is the one you do, so if you feel more comfortable and can keep going longer at a slower rate, stick with that but maybe throw in some faster sections.

Everybody burns different amounts. Mfp just does the average, as do treadmills: the most accurate measurement is a hrm.
Many people can weigh 140lbs but they can be different heights, therefore burn more or less.
If you don't have a hrm just do an average of the two, or only eat back half of your exercise calories.
Its impossible for a machine or website to get it exactly right.

MFP = generic calculation - does not account for weight, age, sex etc. Also does not know what resistance / incline you are using (least accurate)
Gym kit = generally allows you to enter age, weight and sex and does know the resistance / incline - so is going to be a more accurate calculation (reasonably accurate)
Heart rate monitor = generally allows you to enter age, weight and sex - doesn't matter what the incline / resistance is as it will impact your heart rate directly.(most accurate)

Side note - some GPS watches (like my forerunner 305) have heart rate monitors but do NOT use the heart rate to determine calories burned (it uses speed, time, age sex and weight) - Most gym kit which monitor heart rates dont use this for calorie calculations either.

All of the above are approximations - but then so are the calories in your food (not all chicken breast has the same fat content for example)

FYI, MFP standard calculations come out +/-10% of pretty much everything I do based on the machines / GPS watch. I guess that makes me a very average guy