Is the machine correct or MFP??? Calories burned

willis84
willis84 Posts: 86 Member
edited December 18 in Fitness and Exercise
When I use the elliptical, it tells me how many calories I burn. But when I log in my efforts on MFP and I put in the number of minutes performed, it gives me a different # of calories burned as much as 150cal difference.
What do I go by? The elliptical machine does have an area on handles to measure heart rate.

Replies

  • ShannonMpls
    ShannonMpls Posts: 1,936 Member
    Neither is likely to be particularly accurate, so I would go with the lower number if you are basing your calorie intake on exercise calories.
  • babyann79
    babyann79 Posts: 49 Member
    Ive been wondering the same thing!! I burn much more calories when I input it into MFP than what the elliptical says! And I input my correct weight into the machine because I know those machines are set at an average weight person...so IDK lol
  • js370
    js370 Posts: 140
    If you're punching in your stats on the elliptical, then you should use that number. MFP's estimate is an average. It doesn't account for the incline or resistance that you set on the machine itself.
  • justlin1
    justlin1 Posts: 3 Member
    I've been putting the lower number in, just to be on the safe side! I can't always trust the machines at our gym anyway, because half the time it must think I'm dead - there's no heart rate!
  • omma_to_3
    omma_to_3 Posts: 3,265 Member
    You'll hear people saying that MFP overestimates the calories by a lot. You'll hear people say the machines do as well. You'll hear people say HRMs are FAR more accurate but still not perfect. Here's what I have learned:

    MFP is generally higher than MY treadmill, which doesn't allow weight/height entries.
    MFP is far LOWER than my HRM states when I do a higher intensity workout. I'd say 20% lower!
    MFP is mildly lower than my HRM states when I do a walking workout. I'd say 5% to 10% lower.

    What I've decided, based on my experience and reading on the forums, is that the more fit you become, the more MFP overestimates your calorie burn. Because I am not fit, it's actually underestimating mine. I use what my HRM says (polar FT7) and eat them all most of the time. Yummy...extra calories!!
  • frugalmomsrock
    frugalmomsrock Posts: 1,123
    For me, mfp tends to be a lot closer, but it still overestimates it a little according to my HRM. However, it's all guesswork anyway.
  • fordies
    fordies Posts: 14
    I find that MFP always underestimates my calories burned by approx 100-150. The machines in the gym know all my stats due to the dongle we use to plug into the machines and also it will take into consideration the incline and resistance so should in theory give a more accurate result.

    I choose to follow the one which gives the lowest result so I can then have a calorie deficit of an extra 100 calories or so.
  • xxxAimeeHxxx
    xxxAimeeHxxx Posts: 28 Member
    From what i can understand what ever on in MFP has been inputted by MFP user's....... so your probs best working off the machines as you have entered your body weight and hight etc....
  • PrincessLou71186
    PrincessLou71186 Posts: 741 Member
    You'll hear people saying that MFP overestimates the calories by a lot. You'll hear people say the machines do as well. You'll hear people say HRMs are FAR more accurate but still not perfect. Here's what I have learned:

    MFP is generally higher than MY treadmill, which doesn't allow weight/height entries.
    MFP is far LOWER than my HRM states when I do a higher intensity workout. I'd say 20% lower!
    MFP is mildly lower than my HRM states when I do a walking workout. I'd say 5% to 10% lower.

    What I've decided, based on my experience and reading on the forums, is that the more fit you become, the more MFP overestimates your calorie burn. Because I am not fit, it's actually underestimating mine. I use what my HRM says (polar FT7) and eat them all most of the time. Yummy...extra calories!!

    I'm the same.
  • 81Katz
    81Katz Posts: 7,074 Member
    YI think you need a HRM with a chest strap. I couldn't believe how much MFP over-estimates their calorie burns. I often found the treadmill to be slightly closer but it was still off, some days a bit higher than the HRM, some days lower than the HRM.

    I personally don't like playing the guessing game with calories, I think a HRM would absolutely be your best bet. You could be cheating yourself, thinking you haven't burned a lot, but maybe you actually burned more. Or you think you're burning a ton, but not burning that much at all, which of course will affect the calories you are eating. You might be over eating (or under eating) without realizing it.

    I have the Polar FT4. LOVE it!
  • LorinaLynn
    LorinaLynn Posts: 13,247 Member
    MFP's elliptical estimate has as much chance of being right as a broken clock.

    There's no variables... MFP doesn't know if you're going fast or slow, at no resistance or high resistance.

    If you plugged in your stats to the elliptical, go by that.

    On the other hand, MFP's estimates for walking and running are pretty good since they go by your speed. You may burn more on the treadmill or when running outside depending on the incline or if you're running/walking on hills.
  • KickassAugust
    KickassAugust Posts: 1,430 Member
    1700+ calories burned per Elliptical = 800+ MFP calories
  • bitterfusion
    bitterfusion Posts: 82 Member
    MFP has already answered the question for you:

    "If you know how many calories you burned (e.g. from a machine at the gym), manually enter that value above."
  • FitForLife81
    FitForLife81 Posts: 372 Member
    neither.......you really need a hrm and yes the more fit you are the less you burn. 30 mins on my elliptical tells me I burned 545 heartrate monitor tells me 200..... mfp also overestimates. Until I bought my hrm i was overestimating and eating back calories i never burned!!
  • luvbeingmomof3
    luvbeingmomof3 Posts: 35
    I received my Polar HRM last week and found that MFP overestimated the number of calories burned for me. I was surprised how much I did actually burn vs. what MFP calculated.
    The walking/running calculations are more accurate vs.other workouts, i.e. dvds, weights...

    I never go by the machines at the gym and read that you should cut that number by 1/3 or 1/2.

    I highly recommend the HRM. I'm hoping to see some really good results now that I have an accurate reading.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories