Wildly inaccurate calorie counts?

Options
SomeoneSomeplace
SomeoneSomeplace Posts: 1,094 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
I just joined a new gym recently, which has introduced me to a new cardio work out. It is the Precor AMT100i Experience Series Adaptive Motion Trainer,

See this link to know exactly what machine I am talking about. http://www.amazon.com/Precor-AMT100i-Experience-Adaptive-Trainer/dp/B0029KL2MO/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

I entered my weight/age (130 lbs 23 y/o) and had the resistance on 15/20. And it told me I was burning between 12 and 15 calories A MINUTE. In 30 minutes I burned 400 calories according to the machine. The girl next to me had been on for almost an hour and probably weighed around 145 and it said she had burned close to 900 calories before she had even completed the full 60 minutes. It just seems really unbelievable to me that this would burn more calories than running does. I do a speed of about 6.0 on the treadmill I'm coming off a tear of my Achilles Tendon so it's been a while since I've run/ I'm out of shape. I get winded very quickly on the treadmill and it takes A LOT more effort than this Precor machine does. So I don't understand how it could burn more calories then running does,
I certainly feel like I'm working out on the Precor and my heart rate IS within the "Cardio zone" where as when I run lately it has been "Above Zone" to the point where it tells me to slow down because my HR is too high...so is it really possible that a machine that is easier to work out on actually burns MORE calories then running does? Cos if machines like the Precor/Elliptical actually do burn more (or as much as) running does, that's kind of a miracle. I know that they say those calorie counts on machines over-estimate by like 20 percent but I was just wondering if anyone has any specific experience or knowledge with these specific machines. Thanks!
«1

Replies

  • ahealthy4u
    ahealthy4u Posts: 442 Member
    Options
    Not really sure how that works all I know is if I am looking to pretty when walking out of gym I haven't worked or trained hard enough to burn anything. Hope someone has an answer for us! I am curious as well
  • k_braddock
    k_braddock Posts: 51 Member
    Options
    That's pretty much an elliptical machine isn't it?
  • southern_gurl
    southern_gurl Posts: 77
    Options
    I use this machine at my gym as well, so am curious as to wether or not this is accurate, thanks for posting:happy:
  • Chowder_17
    Chowder_17 Posts: 141 Member
    Options
    Use a HR monitor to get accurate calorie burns
  • Destinie589
    Destinie589 Posts: 211
    Options
    I use this machine almost every day. I wear a heart rate monitor and I weigh 149 and I am 5'6". I usually put the resistance between 7-9 and in an hour my HRM says I burn 700+ calories per hour. Never exceeding 800. It is normally about 750ish. Give or take depending on the day or how hard I really push myself.
  • fitnatic67
    fitnatic67 Posts: 154
    Options
    get a personal hrm and do a comparison.
  • tageekly
    tageekly Posts: 3,755 Member
    Options
    I have found that ALL machines at the gym are too high for me. That's why I got my HRM and found they would be as much as 35% too high. And I enter my age and weight and I'm working hard - 75%-85% of my max HR - but the machines just don't calculate accurately.

    Do know that it's pretty common for an elliptical-type machine to burn more than a treadmill.
  • CallieM15
    CallieM15 Posts: 910 Member
    Options
    I use that machine too and it says I burn 430 calories in about 35 minutes. I had a friend use her HRM while doing it and it was pretty accurate. She is 180 lbs (20# less than I) and she burned about 400 calories in 35 minutes on level 15.
  • ldalbello
    ldalbello Posts: 207 Member
    Options
    Not sure about the machine you are talking about, but I know someone who works for a company that makes treadmills and ellipticals and stuff and he told me that they set up the machines to overestimate calories, that way they sell more. I believe it.
  • bluestocking06
    bluestocking06 Posts: 66 Member
    Options
    I know that when I talked to a trainer (granted this was years ago, but I think it's still true) she said in general machines grossly overestimate how many calories someone burns. She highly recommended a heart rate monitor as being the only way to get an accurate calorie burn count.
  • continue29
    continue29 Posts: 16
    Options
    i use the exact same machine at my gym & like you, programme it all correctly - weight etc etc

    I also got pretty much the same results as you, it shows me as burning about 400 cals for 30 minutes with a max heart rate of about 158, averaging 140 for the whole half hour.

    I got a HRM for xmas & the results are quite different from that to what the machine says.

    The heart rate is correct, ie what my HRM tells me, the machine does... however im buring far less cals than the machine says according to my HRM.

    I burn on average 280 for 30 mins & not the 400 the machine says i have.

    Obviously these results are personal to me & yours might be different.. but i hope that helps you :)
  • Butterfly3730
    Butterfly3730 Posts: 220
    Options
    Not sure about the machine you are talking about, but I know someone who works for a company that makes treadmills and ellipticals and stuff and he told me that they set up the machines to overestimate calories, that way they sell more. I believe it.

    The employee at my gym told me the same thing. I use a HRM and it is way under what those machines say at the gym. I love my HRM and now I have to work harder too. It is worth the investment imo.
  • ShellyKay67
    ShellyKay67 Posts: 489 Member
    Options
    i use the exact same machine at my gym & like you, programme it all correctly - weight etc etc

    I also got pretty much the same results as you, it shows me as burning about 400 cals for 30 minutes with a max heart rate of about 158, averaging 140 for the whole half hour.

    I got a HRM for xmas & the results are quite different from that to what the machine says.

    The heart rate is correct, ie what my HRM tells me, the machine does... however im buring far less cals than the machine says according to my HRM.

    I burn on average 280 for 30 mins & not the 400 the machine says i have.

    Obviously these results are personal to me & yours might be different.. but i hope that helps you :)

    this is EXACTLY why I need a HRM! hopefully soon!
  • Jrabes
    Jrabes Posts: 2 Member
    Options
    I've read a few places that it really doesn't matter that much what the activity is, it's mostly your heart-rate that determines how many calories you burn. Did the machine tell you what your average heart-rate was at the end of your workout? If so, try inputting your numbers into this calculator
    http://www.triathlontrainingblog.com/calculators/calories-burned-calculator-based-on-average-heart-rate/
    to see how it compares. You will technically need to know your VO2 Max for it to be 100% accurate but if you're in moderately good condition you can just use 35-40 and it should be close.
  • jessicaeden
    jessicaeden Posts: 1
    Options
    Most machines over-estimate the number of calories you are burning (treadmills too, although they are a little more accurate). When I use the eliptical, I subtract 20% from the total calories burned and I think it is more of an accurate number.
  • Pebbles536
    Pebbles536 Posts: 199
    Options
    A good HRM is not that expensive. I was able to get a Polar FT4 on sale for $69.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    I just joined a new gym recently, which has introduced me to a new cardio work out. It is the Precor AMT100i Experience Series Adaptive Motion Trainer,

    See this link to know exactly what machine I am talking about. http://www.amazon.com/Precor-AMT100i-Experience-Adaptive-Trainer/dp/B0029KL2MO/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

    I entered my weight/age (130 lbs 23 y/o) and had the resistance on 15/20. And it told me I was burning between 12 and 15 calories A MINUTE. In 30 minutes I burned 400 calories according to the machine. The girl next to me had been on for almost an hour and probably weighed around 145 and it said she had burned close to 900 calories before she had even completed the full 60 minutes. It just seems really unbelievable to me that this would burn more calories than running does. I do a speed of about 6.0 on the treadmill I'm coming off a tear of my Achilles Tendon so it's been a while since I've run/ I'm out of shape. I get winded very quickly on the treadmill and it takes A LOT more effort than this Precor machine does. So I don't understand how it could burn more calories then running does,
    I certainly feel like I'm working out on the Precor and my heart rate IS within the "Cardio zone" where as when I run lately it has been "Above Zone" to the point where it tells me to slow down because my HR is too high...so is it really possible that a machine that is easier to work out on actually burns MORE calories then running does? Cos if machines like the Precor/Elliptical actually do burn more (or as much as) running does, that's kind of a miracle. I know that they say those calorie counts on machines over-estimate by like 20 percent but I was just wondering if anyone has any specific experience or knowledge with these specific machines. Thanks!

    At your weight, if you ran at a speed of 6 mph, you would burn 600 calories per hour, so that's a good reference.

    It's not easy to find studies on these subjects, because, quite frankly, most serious researchers don't think it's very important. However, sometimes you can find an undergraduate or graduate thesis, and I got lucky.

    I didn't have time to read all the detail, so I don't know the stride length/cadence they used, but a brief look at the results showed that the AMT overestimated VO2/calorie measurements by 35%-50% on levels 3-12 when compared to actual measurements taken with a metabolic cart.

    That should tell you everything you need to know.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Options
    Not sure about the machine you are talking about, but I know someone who works for a company that makes treadmills and ellipticals and stuff and he told me that they set up the machines to overestimate calories, that way they sell more. I believe it.

    They used to, but once they got a lot of negative publicity, they scaled it back.

    Many machines still overestimate, but it is usually because they use an equation for a different movement (e.g. running) and apply it to the machine (e.g. a cross trainer). It's more laziness than purposeful deceit.

    Life Fitness has a full biomechanical testing lab at their headquarters. For the past 5-6 years, they have tested and developed unique calorie-estimating algorithms for every new machine they have developed. Unfortunately, I don't think they have gone back and redid their older cross trainers (the ones most used in clubs), so there are still a lot of inaccurate ones out there. But, if you are fortunately enough to have access to a new Elevation style cross trainer, the calorie counts should be very accurate--even more accurate than an HRM.
  • EricMurano
    EricMurano Posts: 825 Member
    Options
    If I use a machine for aerobic exercise I'll take the calories it estimates and reduce it by some factor like 0.75 or 0.5.

    I don't try to get the exact number of calories from the exercise. I just record how much more I feel I should eat because I exercised. The number on the machine is just a way to loosely quantify the effort I exerted.
  • EricMurano
    EricMurano Posts: 825 Member
    Options
    Oh I might add that when you've measured your exercise calories remember that the calories you would have burned if you were just at rest are included in those exercise calories. When you add the exercise calories to your diary you need to subtract those 'at rest' calories.

    At that point, though, it's a much of a muchness. It's more reason to reduce the calories reported by the machine before adding them to your diary.

Categories