Who do I trust?

Options
aimeerocksx3
aimeerocksx3 Posts: 91
in Fitness and Exercise
Hello friends. I'm having trust issues with my treadmill.

According to the machine, if I run for 20 minutes at 8 mph, I burn 140 calories. But according to MFP, if I run for 20 minutes at 8 mph, I burn upwards of 300 calories!

My question is, which do I trust? Does running on a treadmill and running normally differ at all?

Merci!

Replies

  • scottb81
    scottb81 Posts: 2,538 Member
    Options
    MFP is more accurate there. At the pace you are running you are probably burning somewhere between 110 to 120 calories per mile.
  • crystal8208
    crystal8208 Posts: 284 Member
    Options
    I have a love/hate relationship with the machines at the gym on calories. According to the machines, I burned around 200 calories last night, but when I logged it in MFP, it says I burned 500. So, meh. Total accuracy would be one of those calorie tracker/HRM things. Body Bugg is what my bestie uses. $150 plus online membership. But she loves knowing exactly what she burns.

    If you are concerned about it, and don't want to spend the money, why not go half way. Take what the machine says and what MFP says and divide by 2 for an average. May not be the most accurate but it's always better to overestimate calories eaten and underestimate calories burned, or so I've heard.
  • EatClenTrenHard
    EatClenTrenHard Posts: 339 Member
    Options
    Use machines which measure watts and convert them to calories based on age/weight.

    Also if it counts METs it might help.

    In my gym, "LifeFitness" brand machines are very accurate. - i know it because i sweat after 700cal/hr, but not before that on elliptical. Same with bike and treadmill.

    Watts = energy, energy = calories.


    If machine calculates calories based on number of steps/rotations then i guess its not accurate reading.
  • crystal8208
    crystal8208 Posts: 284 Member
    Options
    What's the calculation on Watts??????
  • Captain_Tightpants
    Captain_Tightpants Posts: 2,215 Member
    Options
    Depends what you weigh.
  • aimeerocksx3
    aimeerocksx3 Posts: 91
    Options
    Depends what you weigh.

    I never enter my weight into the machine. Would that change anything?
  • crystal8208
    crystal8208 Posts: 284 Member
    Options
    Depends what you weigh.

    Duh. :huh: What is the formula for it? Weight x blah blah blah = Watts or whatever. :ohwell:
  • johnsonje82
    johnsonje82 Posts: 46 Member
    Options
    Depends what you weigh.

    I never enter my weight into the machine. Would that change anything?

    Yeah it would change the formula values the machine uses to determine the calories burned....however....its still just an estimation. A HRM is your best option to get a true reading.
  • aimeerocksx3
    aimeerocksx3 Posts: 91
    Options
    I have a love/hate relationship with the machines at the gym on calories. According to the machines, I burned around 200 calories last night, but when I logged it in MFP, it says I burned 500. So, meh. Total accuracy would be one of those calorie tracker/HRM things. Body Bugg is what my bestie uses. $150 plus online membership. But she loves knowing exactly what she burns.

    If you are concerned about it, and don't want to spend the money, why not go half way. Take what the machine says and what MFP says and divide by 2 for an average. May not be the most accurate but it's always better to overestimate calories eaten and underestimate calories burned, or so I've heard.

    I don't have THAT much money lol. I'm okay with guesstimating.
    I've heard that too. My fiance says to go with the lesser of the two, that way I don't have an excuse to eat more, thus not actually losing any weight! Not like I've been losing any anyway. I like your splitting the difference idea... I might do that.
  • Rozlynmac
    Rozlynmac Posts: 71
    Options
    There's lots of stuff on here about trusting neither & using a heart rate monitor.

    100 calories per mile is average, but dependent on weight, it'll potentially be less, I'd say MFP was exaggerating, but then again, gradient will change things too. I find if I do slower (so lower heart rate & in fat burning zone), with a gradient, my treadmill zooms through the calories as it assumes my heart rate. If I run faster, it actually calculates slower 'cos it assumes my heart rate is higher.

    So get an HRM that does calories :)
  • EuroDriver12
    EuroDriver12 Posts: 805 Member
    Options
    MFP is way off SORRY PPL!!!! my number vary when i wear a HRM by 200+cals compared to what MFP says...

    if you dont have a HRM then try to set ur machine up so it takes ur age and weight... this will give u a more accurate reading then MFP will.....
  • EmDrake13
    EmDrake13 Posts: 27 Member
    Options
    Yesterday I put my hands on the heart rate monitor on the elliptical machine at the gym, and apparently my heart was beating 197 bpm... I didn't even feel my heart exploding... I certainly don't trust the machines. In terms of MFP, I generally tend to log whichever number is lower.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    Hello friends. I'm having trust issues with my treadmill.

    According to the machine, if I run for 20 minutes at 8 mph, I burn 140 calories. But according to MFP, if I run for 20 minutes at 8 mph, I burn upwards of 300 calories!

    My question is, which do I trust? Does running on a treadmill and running normally differ at all?

    Merci!

    Are you running at 8 mile per hour, or are you running an 8 min per mile pace which is 7.5 MPH.

    How many miles are you running in that 20 minutes? As 8MPH is a pretty fast pace, not saying you are not doing it but most people don't go near that number from what I have witnessed.
  • PepeGreggerton
    PepeGreggerton Posts: 986 Member
    Options
    Get a heart rate monitor
  • johnsonje82
    johnsonje82 Posts: 46 Member
    Options

    I don't have THAT much money lol. I'm okay with guesstimating.

    You can get a good HRM off of Amazon, shipped and all, for less than $30
  • aimeerocksx3
    aimeerocksx3 Posts: 91
    Options
    Hello friends. I'm having trust issues with my treadmill.

    According to the machine, if I run for 20 minutes at 8 mph, I burn 140 calories. But according to MFP, if I run for 20 minutes at 8 mph, I burn upwards of 300 calories!

    My question is, which do I trust? Does running on a treadmill and running normally differ at all?

    Merci!

    Are you running at 8 mile per hour, or are you running an 8 min per mile pace which is 7.5 MPH.

    How many miles are you running in that 20 minutes? As 8MPH is a pretty fast pace, not saying you are not doing it but most people don't go near that number from what I have witnessed.

    The machine said my speed was 8. So... I dunno. I usually run about 2.5 miles in the 20 minutes.
  • Makaer
    Makaer Posts: 4 Member
    Options
    Looks like your machine is probably set to km/h. Would lead to a similar sort of cal loss as it is predicting.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    Hello friends. I'm having trust issues with my treadmill.

    According to the machine, if I run for 20 minutes at 8 mph, I burn 140 calories. But according to MFP, if I run for 20 minutes at 8 mph, I burn upwards of 300 calories!

    My question is, which do I trust? Does running on a treadmill and running normally differ at all?

    Merci!

    Are you running at 8 mile per hour, or are you running an 8 min per mile pace which is 7.5 MPH.

    How many miles are you running in that 20 minutes? As 8MPH is a pretty fast pace, not saying you are not doing it but most people don't go near that number from what I have witnessed.

    The machine said my speed was 8. So... I dunno. I usually run about 2.5 miles in the 20 minutes.

    So that is 8 minutes per mile (20/2.5miles) , not 8MPH (8MPH will give you 3 miles in 20 minutes (20/3mile) ) Try entering 7.5 MPH on MFP as that is the speed you ran and it may be closer to the machines number of cals
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    Looks like your machine is probably set to km/h. Would lead to a similar sort of cal loss as it is predicting.

    If it is in Km/hour then you would be going at 7.5km./hour or 4.7 MPH.

    OP: Are you running really fast, faster than 90% of the people in the gym is so you are probably going 7.5MPH not Km/hour, if you are jogging not running then you are probably going 4.7 MPH (7.5 KM/hour)

Categories