How accurate is the Cardio machines' Calories burnt reading

Options
Aaloo79
Aaloo79 Posts: 105
in Fitness and Exercise
Hello,
Do you know how accurate is the reading of calories burnt that is displayed on treadmills and cross trainers etc. (given that you have entered your weight etc.)

I am OK with a margin of upto 10-15% but anything of order of 40% of more could be so horrendous!!! :devil:

Replies

  • tangal88
    tangal88 Posts: 689
    Options
    mine is way off, saying I have burned 200-400 or more cal an hour vs my polar heart rate monitor with a chest strap (which is very accurate I believe)

    Also way off for my husband.

    Unless you are wearing a chest strap with the machine, I would be very skeptical of the readings. And even with a chest strap, you may still see accuracy issues.

    If numbers seem high to you, based on what general online calculators are for your height, weight, age, time, are saying they should be - its likely wrong.

    I have seen others comment on machines being way off also.

    Not all HMRs are accurate ether, a Timex HMR I used to have was always about 200 cals higher as well.
  • Fit_Forever25
    Fit_Forever25 Posts: 313 Member
    Options
    I think if you enter Absolutely correct Weight and keep measuring your heart rate (on those machines) it gives you pretty OKish calorie burn count.. I trust them :blushing:
  • BrettPGH
    BrettPGH Posts: 4,720 Member
    Options
    I get lower numbers from the elliptical machine than I do from MFP. So I go with those, figuring it's better to under-estimate. I don't own an HRM so I have no idea really.
  • Fit_Forever25
    Fit_Forever25 Posts: 313 Member
    Options
    Just to back that up.. I have compared calories burnt on the machine and what MFP shows me when I choose any cardio activity and they are pretty close readings, infact MFP shows more in some of the cases which does not seems reasonable so I edit the reading according to the cardio machine. I think that BMR thingy or however they calculate is OKish but obv they are not 100% correct but not completely wrong as well :bigsmile:
  • rheiah
    rheiah Posts: 84
    Options
    I get lower numbers from the elliptical machine than I do from MFP. So I go with those, figuring it's better to under-estimate. I don't own an HRM so I have no idea really.

    Same here.
    The cardio machines at my gym are generally A LOT lower than MFP calorie counts.
  • BeeElMarvin
    BeeElMarvin Posts: 2,086 Member
    Options
    I don't have an HRM, but the machines say one thing, mfp says another - I just go with the lower one and hope for the best.
  • Secret_Agent_007
    Secret_Agent_007 Posts: 1,082
    Options
    A RL close friend of mine just got a HRM and is now posting higher cals burned for her workouts than before. Although I don't know which HRM she has ... she is not the type to buy some cheap piece of crap either.

    So far we've gone without a HRM and just log MFP numbers thinking they're on the high side and eating accordingly. If that fails we may have to look into it further but the trainer doesn't seem to think we'll need one.
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    If they are set up right, they are usually pretty close. Nothing is 100% accurate, not even an HRM, as it's impossible. The best you can hope for is 80-90% anyway, and if you set the machine right, or the HRM right, or the online calculator right, you should get numbers that are close enough.
  • yesthistime
    yesthistime Posts: 2,051 Member
    Options
    I definitely go with the machine's reading (rather than MFP because the machine always shows a lower number and I would hate to overestimate.
  • the_journeyman
    the_journeyman Posts: 1,877 Member
    Options
    I'm not sure I trust the machines. Recently our gym switched out all of their old cardio equipment for new (really nice too) Matrix equipment. The old machines gave me a much higher reading than the new machines do. The new machines are likely more accurate though. MPF still always gives me a somewhat higher number burnt than the machine.

    JM
  • laurastrait21
    laurastrait21 Posts: 307 Member
    Options
    I typically will underestimate my calories burned -- I use the MFP readings take off 10 minutes or so of what I actually did. They will often be similar to what the machine told me.
  • sandy2006
    sandy2006 Posts: 483 Member
    Options
    the elliptical I use is about 30 percent over what my hrm says
  • onefitdiva
    onefitdiva Posts: 331 Member
    Options
    It is impossible for a machine to be accurate. Think about it, every person burns calories at a different rate due to several factors, the machine does not or can not take this into consideration. I wear a HRM and the numbers on it compared to the machine are never even close. The best way to really be sure is a HRM.
  • Minnie_Moo
    Minnie_Moo Posts: 239 Member
    Options
    I have a Nordic Track threadmill with iFit live programs that I use at home.

    Here's an example on of one of my workouts......

    My threadmill and iFit Jillian Michaels workout program gave me the info as follows: 45 Minutes, 2.35 Miles (3.79 Km), 4.40 mph (max) (7.08 km/h), 4.00% Incline (max) and 286.5 Calories Burned

    I was wearing my FT40 Polar HRM and it shows that I burned 229 calories....

    I think that using a HRM with a chest strap would be best even with your entering your info into the machine as I believe that is an average number. I questioned the difference between calories on our threadmill vs my HRM and the people at iFit Live told me to use my HRM as it would be more accurate :noway:
  • Aaloo79
    Aaloo79 Posts: 105
    Options
    Thanks for your answers.

    I guess MFP gives similar readings to machines because may be they use the same formulae. I want to trust machines too (with some 10-15% error factor of-course).

    And yes, elliptical trainer readings are definitely different from machines and MFP. Hence, I've added a new exercise - Cross Trainer in MFP (are they really different? :sick: ).

    The point I was coming from is that some people say that if you do the same exercise again and again, your body will adapt to it and would not burn the same calories, is it true? Is is that you build just endurance or start burning less calories with time? (After all, you can't outperform yourself every single day :huh: )
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    Yes. Endurance exercise actually slows your metabolism by making your muscles more efficient at burning calories. That's why you couple it with strength training, to boost your metabolism.
  • Roni_M
    Roni_M Posts: 717 Member
    Options
    I just bought a Livestrong treadmill which has a chest strap HRM that displays your heart rate and calorie burn on the treadmill. The only info it asks for is my weight (it does not ask for sex, height or age). It says in a little over an hour I only burn 225 calories. I have a separate HRM (type with chest strap and watch) and it says I burn over 750 calories in the same time. I'm going to use the separate HRM's calculations since it has all my stats. Luckily the chest strap from that also reads on the treadmill so I can use the "target heart rate zone" programs on the treadmill and still get the more accurate calories from the watch part when I'm done.

Categories