Question about hiking and calories burned.

bluenikita
bluenikita Posts: 7
edited November 8 in Fitness and Exercise
I've browsed the message boards before but never posted. :) Sorry in advance for the long post!

I do not have a HRM so that makes calorie assessement harder, and I'm definitely not an expert at this so I need some help.

I've been going for hikes/jogs/walks outside. I live in the mountains and there are a lot of woods. Basically, I'll walk to a trail (gentle downhill incline, moderate pace), hike upwards at a moderate pace - sometimes very steep but with some mild to level areas. Then I more or less reach the top of the mountain and I make a loop and head downwards, on a path that's mildly downhill with many level areas, which I cover by jogging and walking in intervals. Just your typical hill-crawling nature hike, nothing special. Today it took me 75-80 minutes to cover the trail.

But I have NO idea how many calories I'm burning.

If I break it up into sections, and say I spent 20 minutes hiking uphill, MFP says that's 157 calories. Jogging for 10 minutes is 88, and walking for a half hour at a moderate 3.0mph pace is 182. This would add up to 427 calories. Is that even an accurate way to log calories burned with such a variable workout?

Anyhow, I was curious and I went to that "SparkPeople" site, and I saw it had a route map/calculator. I put in my information and pegged the route on the map, and told it that it took me 80 minutes to complete it. It was 1.69 miles.

Well, that site says I burned only 215 calories - half of what MFP says.

I don't want to log in more calories than I've burned but I don't to short-change myself either. I would like to think that the route calculator is wrong because it isn't accounting for the elevation/incline. What do you guys think?

Help! :)

Replies

  • bluenikita
    bluenikita Posts: 7
    I'mma bump this up right quick...since the answers I get from you guys will affect what I eat for dinner tonight. :D
  • jaxCarrie
    jaxCarrie Posts: 214 Member
    OK, it's really hard to tell since you don't have a heart rate monitor....do you know if mapmyrun.com has trail maps? I think if you could figure out the distance you are going/hiking that would be helpful. I've got to think if you are going for ~80 minutes at a good clip (i.e. sounds like your pace is good and you incorporate jog intervals) that your 'reasoning' (calculating the pieces of walking, jogging, uphilling walking) is sound...I think even walking at a snail pace for that long would burn more than 215 calories? I tell ya, the MFP exercise calculator isn't very good, so heart rate monitor is best....PS...your hike sounds really nice.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    When I hike I pretty much log it the way you described (how much uphill, how much cross country, etc.). The 427 calories you got from MFP sounds more correct than the 100-something, maybe even a little low, depending on you current weight and fitness level.

    Are you sure of the distance? 80 min seems a really long time to hike 1.6 miles even if it was all a steep incline?
  • LotusLoo
    LotusLoo Posts: 17
    Caloric expenditure is such an individual thing - all of these sites have to guess at it because it depends on more than just your duration and heart rate. It largely depends on muscle mass as well as body weight, age, gender, and genetics.
    Unfortunately, you'll have to go with a guess/estimate. To help - Consider that a person with more weight to move around will burn more calories than a person with less weight; also consider that a person with more of that weight comprised of muscle mass will burn more calories than a person with the same weight comprised of fat. From there, consider the intensity level of your hike - light, moderate, vigorous?
    Sorry, I know that's not much help, but it's just not that easy to figure out. I suppose for example I'll make an educated guess here - I would expect a 150lb person to burn around 300 calories hiking the 1.69 miles of hills that you described IF at a moderate intensity.
  • bluenikita
    bluenikita Posts: 7
    Thank you so much for the tip! I will check out mapmyrun and see if they can help. This area is pretty rural so a lot of maps may not account for the changes in elevation. And yeah, I think that covering more than a mile and a half, half of which is uphill, would burn off more than 215!

    And yes, the hike is awesome. Heck, there's even a river I walk alongside before heading up the mountain, and a Christmas tree farm to wander through! It's the perfect workout for a nature-loving person who feels self-conscious about going to the gym. :)
  • bluenikita
    bluenikita Posts: 7
    Bcattoes - I logged the distance using a map but it may not account well for turnbacks and those little twists and curves that make hiking so much fun. ;) This is the first time I've experimented with seeing how far I traveled and tomorrow I'll be making more careful mental notes. If anything I was short-changing myself on the distance - because you're right, almost an hour and a half to cover 1.69 miles is a LONG time...but I was in constant motion for that time. So I guess the distance must be off.

    I'm going to go back on that site and see if I can get a more accurate assessment of how far I went. Thanks for the vote of confidence that 200 calories for 80 minutes of moderate to brisk hiking and jogging is low!
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Multiply your weight in kg by 5 to get calories/hr. Multiply that number the fraction of an hour you spent exercising.

    That should be close enough.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories