Why the huge burn diff between MFP and the machine?

jcpmoore
jcpmoore Posts: 796 Member
edited November 12 in Fitness and Exercise
:huh: I've been on MFP since the top of the year, so not that long. Before that I had used Sparkpeople.com, though not for awhile. Here's my question: Why is there such a HUGE difference between MFP's estimate in calorie burn and what the cardio machine tells me? For example:

I used the stationary bike today at the gym. I was pushing as hard as I could possibly push. For me, that's level 10. A week ago it was level 5, so big improvement. So I tell MFP it's vigorous effort. MFP tells me 739 calories burned. The machine says 248. Why the huge diff? Had I said moderate effort, MFP gives me over 500 calories burned. Still a huge diff. And I'm sorry, but I'm not going to tell it minimal effort because it wasn't.

To fix it, I already know to go in and just put in what the machine tells me and overwrite the default. No need to tell me that, thanks though. This is really just a matter of curiosity about why it's so incredibly out of whack for beginners like me. I noticed sparkpeople.com estimated a lot closer to the machine estimate-maybe that's annoying to folks at higher resistance levels.

This happens on most of the cardio machines I've used, including the elliptical, dreadmill, etc. Does MFP use an incredibly high level of resistance as the basis of their estimate? I'm just curious.

Replies

  • jcpmoore
    jcpmoore Posts: 796 Member
    Anyone?
  • mollyjackson82
    mollyjackson82 Posts: 128
    Machines or Trackers like MFP are not completely accurate. MFP should be more accurate becuase they use your personal info to help calculate. I wouldn't trust a machine at all becuase it knows nothing about you. I would HIGHLY recommend a heart rate monitor with chest strap. only way to be most accurate. I have one and find MFP and Machines to be very inaccurate...at least for me.
  • Balice57
    Balice57 Posts: 125
    It certainly helps to be more accurate when they know your weight; for instance, I use the Endomondo app on my phone to track my walks and once I figured out how to fill in my current weight it upped the amount of calories I was burning. If you're packing more weight than what the app or machine figures is "average" obviously it will take more effort and thus burn more calories. Congrats on the big step up in levels on the machine!
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    The more information a machine has the more accurate it will be.

    Does your machine ask your gender? Really cheap (esp. home) models default this setting to male. Men burn more calories because they have more muscle mass.

    Does your machine ask your height & weight? Larger people burn more calories than smaller people do.

    Does your machine ask your age? This effects your resting heart rate

    Finally, what a HRM does is calculate your heart rate on an on-going basis. This is compared to your resting heart rate. This tells the HRM how hard you are working. This is why many people opt for a HRM with a chest strap.
  • GdeVries
    GdeVries Posts: 232 Member
    I was confused about that, too. So I went searching out on the web to compare the numbers that MFP came up with. What I discovered is that it has to do with your weight. My machine is pretty simple and doesn't ask anything. It keeps track of time and distance and I can set it to different resistance. But even the heart rate thing is way off. I'm going with what MFP say. Mostly because I know that I push myself as hard as I can.

    I've been doing this now for over 3 months and I've managed to lose 10k / 22lbs using this 'formula'.

    Good luck to you!
  • jcpmoore
    jcpmoore Posts: 796 Member
    Ah, this is interesting. The machine I use makes me enter my age and weight before I begin. It also has a heart rate monitor that I try to use regularly while I'm on it so it knows at least an accurate average heart rate. I don't really have money to get a heart rate monitor right now, though I hope to get one when my bonus comes in a few months.

    The machine does not ask my gender or my height, though MFP knows these things. So does this mean MFP is actually more accurate?
  • TeaBea
    TeaBea Posts: 14,517 Member
    Ah, this is interesting. The machine I use makes me enter my age and weight before I begin. It also has a heart rate monitor that I try to use regularly while I'm on it so it knows at least an accurate average heart rate. I don't really have money to get a heart rate monitor right now, though I hope to get one when my bonus comes in a few months.

    The machine does not ask my gender or my height, though MFP knows these things. So does this mean MFP is actually more accurate?

    How frustrating! I have no idea what the answer is. All I can suggest is, use 1 number consistantly for awhile. Eat those calories back, but if your weight loss seems slower than it "should" be, then the exercise calories are too much. If you're hungry (or wiped out) all the time, then the calories are too little.

    This is why some people always eat back only a portion of their exercise calories.
  • princesspita
    princesspita Posts: 28 Member
    We've found MFP to be a good 25-35% high on estimated calories burned vs actual burned. Unfortunately, I have to advise, don't rely on MFP for those calories burned.
  • BrettPGH
    BrettPGH Posts: 4,716 Member
    We've found MFP to be a good 25-35% high on estimated calories burned vs actual burned. Unfortunately, I have to advise, don't rely on MFP for those calories burned.

    What she said. Most people will tell you MFP's estimates are just a bit too generous. That's why I usually go with the numbers I get from the machine, because they're lower.

    I always figure it's better to underestimate my exercise cals without the aid of an HRM. So I use the machine's nubers when I log running on the treadmill and when I strength train I knock 100-200 off the MFP number, depending on how long I worked out, etc.
  • mgero212
    mgero212 Posts: 96
    Get a Heart monitor to wear whether its a watch or one you wear under your shirt. On here isn't correct and some times machines aren't right either when they are over used. Best Christmas present I have received was my heart monitor watch :)
  • agentscully514
    agentscully514 Posts: 616 Member
    Never use calories from the machine. They are notoriously inaccurate. Even if it makes you enter a lot of information, chances are the calibration is completely out of whack from being used all the time.
  • jcpmoore
    jcpmoore Posts: 796 Member
    thanks for all the input, everyone. I really appreciate it. It seems like the best bet is to trust nothing fully and use my best judgement for awhile until I can get that HRM. :) Man, sure makes me happy I only use those machines twice a week. lol Sadly, I do the rest of my exercise in the pool, so no hrm there. Or do they make affordable ones that you can actually wear in the water, too?

    thanks again!
This discussion has been closed.

Categories