Calories burned at the gym machine or MFP?

missmary221
missmary221 Posts: 3 Member
in Fitness and Exercise
If you work out at the gym, do you use the calories burned on the machines at the gym or do you use what MFP calculates? Which is more accurate? MFP seems to be more generous :)

Replies

  • mhotch
    mhotch Posts: 901 Member
    I use my HRM. Both the machines and MFP grossly over estimates the calorie burn.
  • sjtreely
    sjtreely Posts: 1,014 Member
    MFP is Santa Claus.

    I use my HRM. It's the Grinch. Maybe that's a little harsh, it doesn't take away, it's just more honest. It shows up to 300+ calories less than MFP for some workouts.
  • lovelylovebug
    lovelylovebug Posts: 27 Member
    I would choose the machines over MFP, since the machines know better how hard you are working (i.e, resistance on an elliptical). Make sure everytime you use the machines you enter in your weight and age too for a better estimation.
  • lovelylovebug
    lovelylovebug Posts: 27 Member
    MFP is Santa Claus.

    I use my HRM. It's the Grinch. Maybe that's a little harsh, it doesn't take away, it's just more honest. It shows up to 300+ calories less than MFP for some workouts.

    Just wanted to say I love your profile pic! Haha!
  • SwimTheButterfly
    SwimTheButterfly Posts: 265 Member
    Bump:flowerforyou:
  • RaeN81
    RaeN81 Posts: 534 Member
    I actually have an HRM and have found the estimates on MFP to work for me for things like cycling and running when I know my approximate speed. Not sure why that is....but for me it is usually within 100 calories of my actual burn according to the HRM. I know this is not the case for most people though.
  • Chloe_P78
    Chloe_P78 Posts: 43 Member
    I have to agree that an HRM is the only real way to know how much you've burned. Both the machines at my gym and MFP give a higher reading than my HRM.
  • timrap
    timrap Posts: 18 Member
    I will say I use a body bugg and thought I was calculating pretty good using the gym equipment but was very surprised how off it was. I run in intervals of run 3 walk 2 and the treadmill calculates an hour of this around 500 calories. My bugg calculates around 700. The eliptical calculates around 650 for an hour where my bugg calculates around 400. This is a big difference so I suggest getting a heart rate monitor or body bugg/fitbit if you want a good idea. It really inspires me to get that extra in if at the end of the day I haven't met my goal. I absolutely love my bugg.
  • realme56
    realme56 Posts: 1,093 Member
    Yup, HRM is best. If you can't afford one check your pulse intermittently get an average and use this site to estimate your burn:
    http://www.triathlontrainingblog.com/calculators/calories-burned-calculator-based-on-average-heart-rate/
    Be sure to put in the 35% VO number that she recommends
  • LaurenAOK
    LaurenAOK Posts: 2,475 Member
    I just got a HRM today and it's funny because my HRM actually said I burned a little MORE from my workout than MFP said (most people say MFP overestimates, but I found the opposite). It was actually pretty close though, not a huge difference.

    Personally I'd trust MFP over the machines because it takes into account your weight and such, which machines don't. If you can, I'd recommend investing in a HRM. I wish I had gotten one sooner!
  • sharleengc
    sharleengc Posts: 792 Member
    I use my machine over MFP just because it also keeps track of if I slow down/speed up for a few minutes. Plus, sometimes I change the incline and MFP doesn't factor that in.

    However, I did just by an HRM that hasn't arrived yet (should be here Tuesday)...then I will see what the difference is.

    HOWEVER, I think that if you're eating back your exercise calories, whether you use MFP or the machines, and you're still loosing, it doesn't matter which location you get your calorie number from.
  • ahealthy4u
    ahealthy4u Posts: 442 Member
    Nothing is really all that accurate even the HRM’s it is all estimations. It is data that is created to give an average.
  • thefreebiemom
    thefreebiemom Posts: 191 Member
    The other day I was happy with my HRM it told me I did 163 calories total doing various of the Wii Fit aerobic exercises. After last night I am now angry with it. It said I only burned 221 calories doing 30DS even though I felt like I was going to pass out after that 20 min was over. I don't know if it lost contact from all the changing positions or what, but if I only burn THAT amt by doing 30DS I would rather burn the 300 that I burn hiking for 30 minutes.
  • _trickpie
    _trickpie Posts: 87
    To be honest, I'll always take the lowest burn, just in case. For me my HRM is always the lowest, compared to MFP and Runkeeper, but even if it wasn't, I'd take the lowest out of all my options.
  • htolen
    htolen Posts: 28
    I use my machine over MFP just because it also keeps track of if I slow down/speed up for a few minutes. Plus, sometimes I change the incline and MFP doesn't factor that in.

    HOWEVER, I think that if you're eating back your exercise calories, whether you use MFP or the machines, and you're still loosing, it doesn't matter which location you get your calorie number from.

    I agree completely with this. Use the machine numbers (that's what I have been doing), and so long as you are still losing weight while eating back those calories, then you are doing fine! If you aren't losing, try adjusting down the calories when you enter them to slightly less than the machine numbers until you find that place where you are losing weight fairly consistently.

Categories