Do you burn more at the gym than MFP says?

kparks2
kparks2 Posts: 121 Member
edited December 20 in Fitness and Exercise
I know there are a few other posts similar to this but they are not the exact same question I am going to ask. I plan on investing in a heart rate monitor soon but I do a lot of high intense aerobic classes at my gym. I am aware that when you lose weight you burn less calories but I feel that the more weight I lose the more energy I have to push myself in these classes. If I log in 45 minutes of a high aerobic class it says I burned about 374 calories but I am drenched and my heart rate is high and I feel I burned more. So my question is has anyone noticed they burn more calories than it lists on MFP??

Replies

  • kazzari
    kazzari Posts: 473 Member
    I actually noticed when I wear my HRM for my runs MFP is right on target. I was actually very surprised as my fear was that it would overestimate.
  • kparks2
    kparks2 Posts: 121 Member
    Jogging yes I am sure that is on point and I know the cardio machines are accurate or I adjust the time to match the calories. My concern is unless you have a heart rate monitor you cannot measure the cals burned in an aerobic or spinning class and I could be wrong but I feel I am burning more than just 300 cals.
  • kazzari
    kazzari Posts: 473 Member
    Yeah, MFP is probably giving some kind of average because it can't know you're true intensity. You may be burning more, but isn't an underestimate better than an overestimate? I would doubt it is off by too much. What is confusing to me is that as you continue to do that class, as your body adapts, and once you've reached the point that you can't push anymore, you will be burning less due to cardiovascular effeciency regardless of whether you've actually lost. MFP can't possibly account for this adaptation, so it seems that even if it is underestimating now, eventually it will be right on then even overestimating as you burn fewer and fewer calories doing the same workout. Not sure how long that takes, but I know the body adapts to endurance fairly quickly.
  • tigerlily8045
    tigerlily8045 Posts: 402 Member
    I know with doing zumba that the more I did it, the less calories I burned do to getting more efficient at it. My heart rate wouldn't get nearly as high as it did when I started. Better to be on the low side of calories burned for now until you get your heart rate monitor then to think that you burned 500 and you really didn't.
  • kparks2
    kparks2 Posts: 121 Member
    And I agree with what you ladies say. That is most likely bound to happen. I do think one way to counteract that is to not do it daily...when we switch up the exercises our bodies still get shocked. Then again that is my thoughts ha ha I could be wrong.
  • New_Keeley
    New_Keeley Posts: 170 Member
    I find it depends on the exercise.... Running its pretty much on track; strength training it was under by quite a bit and HIIT it was over but not by so much. I now use my HRM every time I exercise.
  • tawnabanana
    tawnabanana Posts: 36 Member
    I do a lot of interval training and I wear a quality HRM. My monitor always comes back with a higher reading than MFP. My monitor reads about 60+ calories higher than what MFP will give me. I've wondered if I'm exercising too hard as my heart rate is usually in my max range during all cardio, but I don't feel bad and to bring it down, I'd have to cut my intensity way back. I'm with you in that as I become fitter I try to push harder and farther causing the calories burned to go up even though I don't weigh as much as I did before.
  • kparks2
    kparks2 Posts: 121 Member
    I do a lot of interval training and I wear a quality HRM. My monitor always comes back with a higher reading than MFP. My monitor reads about 60+ calories higher than what MFP will give me. I've wondered if I'm exercising too hard as my heart rate is usually in my max range during all cardio, but I don't feel bad and to bring it down, I'd have to cut my intensity way back. I'm with you in that as I become fitter I try to push harder and farther causing the calories burned to go up even though I don't weigh as much as I did before.

    Awesome! In 6 more lbs I am going to get a HRM to see if I need to push myself harder or if I already am. Thanks a bunch!
  • MusicKeepsMeSane
    MusicKeepsMeSane Posts: 309
    It's actually the other way around for me. The HRM always give me a lower reading then what MFP says I have burned. I never trust the MFP calories burned because they're always so far off for me.
  • babycook
    babycook Posts: 172 Member
    It's actually the other way around for me. The HRM always give me a lower reading then what MFP says I have burned. I never trust the MFP calories burned because they're always so far off for me.

    Same for me.
  • kparks2
    kparks2 Posts: 121 Member
    Don't take offense to this question but how hard do you guys push yourselves in exercise?
  • Jacwhite22
    Jacwhite22 Posts: 7,010 Member
    I push myself damn hard....My HRM says I burn less than the machines do......The machines say I burn less than MFP.
  • fletchilicious
    fletchilicious Posts: 6
    I think how right MFP is on calorie estimates is a function of how much you weigh. If you're in the 150-175 lb range, it seems right on. If you're lighter, it over estimates. And if you're heavier, it underestimates. That's been my experience, but YMMV
  • TheAncientMariner
    TheAncientMariner Posts: 444 Member
    I'm a big guy, so it's nothing for me to burn ridiculous amounts of calories. I find that my HRM (not low quality either) is pretty spot on. It and MFP are pretty much within 60 calories of each other if I'm running. If I'm riding at bike, they are grossly different because MFP can't account for "effort" exerted. My HRM is always higher than MFP, but on the bike rides the HRM is almost double what MFP is thinking because it doesn't account for terrain, etc. MFP was pretty close in the beginning because I did nothing but run, but when I got my HRM things were a little different. The good thing about the HRM is that it will let you see in hard numbers exactly the effort you're putting into that workout. You can adjust from there! Good luck!
  • kparks2
    kparks2 Posts: 121 Member
    I push myself damn hard....My HRM says I burn less than the machines do......The machines say I burn less than MFP.

    The machines are always off esp the elliptical. I just burn as much as I would like and then adjust the time via MFP but I feel in the classes I burn harder than MFP says. But again I know I need a HRM to determine that.
  • babygurl48
    babygurl48 Posts: 1,237 Member
    It's actually the other way around for me. The HRM always give me a lower reading then what MFP says I have burned. I never trust the MFP calories burned because they're always so far off for me.

    This applies to me as well. MFP gives me a reading of 60+ more calories than my HRM. So I go by what the HRM says.
  • sdevan45
    sdevan45 Posts: 74 Member
    I think that a good quality HRM is probably more accurate than gym machines as gym machines typically do not know your body statistics. A good quality HRM, especially one that makes a stab at your max V02 is probably as close as you're going to get. And even they are formulaic, so they're going to be off.
  • StephTheBookworm
    StephTheBookworm Posts: 177 Member
    I have a HRM. This site is usually VERY wrong, and stating much higher than I am actually burning. For example, on the elliptical, for an hour I usually burn around 650, but MFP says something like 900. For the bike, I burn around 220 for 30 minutes, and again, MFP says much higher numbers. I would definitely get a HRM and go with those numbers instead.
  • sdevan45
    sdevan45 Posts: 74 Member
    I think that a good quality HRM is probably more accurate than gym machines as gym machines typically do not know your body statistics. A good quality HRM, especially one that makes a stab at your max V02 is probably as close as you're going to get. And even they are formulaic, so they're going to be off.
  • jdploki70
    jdploki70 Posts: 343
    According to the cardio machine, I burn more calories than MFP says. Since I have those calories already figured in, I just log them anyway.
  • kparks2
    kparks2 Posts: 121 Member
    Thanks for the responses everyone but I am more so talking about while doing aerobic classes...not the machines because I know those are off ha ha ha
  • mamagooskie
    mamagooskie Posts: 2,964 Member
    I think I always burn more than MFP says, but less than what the machines at the gym say.
  • sherry9300
    sherry9300 Posts: 149 Member
    It's actually the other way around for me. The HRM always give me a lower reading then what MFP says I have burned. I never trust the MFP calories burned because they're always so far off for me.

    Yes, sadly my HRM gives me much lower calories burned than what MFP says.
  • ALH1981
    ALH1981 Posts: 538 Member
    It's actually the other way around for me. The HRM always give me a lower reading then what MFP says I have burned. I never trust the MFP calories burned because they're always so far off for me.

    same for me - sometimes MFP will estimate almost double what my HRM shows..... I would be careful taking MPF estimates...
  • Fit4lifestlouisbethpennington
    Fit4lifestlouisbethpennington Posts: 51
    Everyone burns a different amount of calories and different heart rates. Whether you are using a heart rate monitor or MFP, they both calculate your caloric burn by the data you put into it. If you really want to know how many calories YOU burn specifically, I would suggest doing a Metabolic Assessment. Then you can really utilize the features of your heart rate monitor to the most of its ability. You can go to www.newleaffitness.com to find a testing location near you.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories