Stevensondrive

I just finished my ride. 27.2 miles 2:04 hours fairly flat on Madone. I'm 6' 275 pounds down from 300

Garmin 500 with hrm said 1276 calories

Mapmyride 2450 calories

Both have my weight. That is pathetic!!!

Which one is correct? I'm guessing Garmin

RollingBlubber

Are you using a cadence sensor as well? Garmin is usually correct and even it over estimates calories burned. I'm 100lbs heavier than you and a few inches taller but when I did a 76 mile ride a couple of weeks ago Strava estimated about 5,500 calories burned but Garmin had it at over 9,000, I can't imagine what Mapmyride would have had.

jsigone

I'd stick with a Garmin hardware #s vs internet program.. Minus the 10% though unless you're using a power meter

WonderMonkey

I use 300 per hour as a basic starting point. I think some use 30 cal per mile. If I lollygag it then it's lower and if I melt the path I raise it. Generally I just use it as a loose guide.

chefisaac

To be frank, it shouldn't matter much. Watch what you eat and the calories you take in versus expell. The reason why it's so hard to figure out how many calories you burn is because each person is different. There are tests that can be preformed to hone in on it if interested but with the fact that each person is different, makes it harder for gadgets to estimate.

ShortLegCyclist

Unless you have a power meter or heart rate monitor at least hooked up, all of those programs are basically estimating calorie burn based on time spent and average speed.

Works out to about 400 calories per hour at 10 mph and goes up or down based on average speed, but that's again all an estimate.

sam_cyclist

You're only getting to get a rough estimate at best.

Calories burned depends upon: rider weight, % body fat vs lean mass (more lean mass means more cal. burned), terrain, speed, fitness level (the more fit you are, the efficient you are and the fewer calories you burn), how aerodynamic your equipment (the more aero, the fewer calories), your riding position (drops vs. hoods or flats), whether you have good pedaling technique (efficient pedal stroke), width of tires, etc.

There are various calculators available, but all use a formula to calculate approx. calories burned based primarily on rider weight and speed.

Little Darwin

Calorie estimations can only be accurate to a certain level. Even being moderately accurate would require a lot of variables and/or assumptions. Below are a few.

1) BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate) This is the number of calories that would be burned sitting on the couch... My guess is that some include this in calories burned, and others don't. MapMyRide does from my interpretation of their documentation. This can lead to a number higher than an estimate that doesn't include it. While either method is potentially accurate, whether or not this is included should be known to use the numbers reasonably. It could lead to the disparity to some degree for estimates that vary widely.

2) Rolling resistance. Rolling resistance can make a difference. Does one assume an efficient bike on smooth surfaces, and the other a rougher surface? Also relevant to rolling resistance are tire treads, sizes, and inflation pressure, along with how they are made.

3) Altitude increase or decrease. Obviously climbing will burn more calories per mile, although calories per minute may not be impacted if you climb by maintaining the level of exertion, but in a lower gear... Going down hill can record as burning a lot more calories than actually used if the slope isn't considered.

4) Bicycle condition. Does your bike absorb energy, either through friction of components, or sucked up by the suspension fork (if present)?

5) Frontal area. This is necessary to compute wind resistance. Is it considered at all, or computed strictly based on weight?

6) Wind speed and direction. Also needed to compute wind resistance accurately... but probably not considered in any estimations.

Short of riding with a power meter and a heart rate monitor, and possibly a device to measure metabolism (i.e. O2/CO2 balance of exhaled breath), your only chance at getting anything accurate is pure luck that the parameters used to compute the estimate is even close to your specific conditions during the ride.

WonderMonkey

I say choose the highest value so weight is lost fastest.

IBOHUNT

Welcome back Chef. Thought we'd have to put you on a milk carton...

chasm54

Better make it a skimmed milk carton. Not many calories in that.

All the gadgets use algorithms that overestimate, to varying degrees, the calorie burn. I generally make a guess at about 25 kcal per mile. It seems to work out OK.

Stevensondrive

you win for the funniest response!!!

Thanks for the responses guys. Lots of variables I hadn't considered.

I do not have a cadence thingy

IBOHUNT

You have the correct verb when you say guessing. All of it's just a WAG unless, as has been posted, you do testing or have measurement devices.
Want to see what pathetic really is? I did 2 rides last weekend.

The first with an Edge 500

Distance: 37.06 mi
Time: 2:16:43
Avg Speed: 16.3 mph
Elevation Gain: 4,350 ft
Calories: 1,012 C
Avg HR: 2.7 z
Avg Power: 2.9 z
Work: 1,616 kJ

Using power numbers I can see I burned ~ 1600 Calories versus the ~1,000 reported by Garmin connect.

The next day with an Edge 510 since the Edge 500 screen got cracked when I hit a hole on the previous ride..
Same settings from Garmin Connect (height/weight/age etc.)

Distance: 52.30 mi
Time: 3:05:39
Avg Speed: 16.9 mph
Elevation Gain: 3,012 ft
Calories: 3,969 C
Avg HR: 2.4 z
Avg Power: 2.1 z
Work: 1,723 kJ

Say what! 3 hour ride and I burned ~4,000 Calories. Now how in the world can the Calories reported using the Edge 510 be 2x+ the value of the Work in kJ? That's pitiful.

This calculator has the calories burned as 1715. Pretty close to the Work value reported by my power meter (Stages).
570 Calories/hr based on a Z2 ride is, for me, believable. I can only get to ~1,000 kJ/hr if it's a 40K TT and I have nothing left after the effort.

Flatbroke

I don't know what is corect as I get various results. I use a garmin 510 with cadence and heart rate monitor. Yesterday I rode 46.6 miles moving time 2:36 min total time with 5 flat tires 3:12 min. 17.76 average speed mostly flat max speed 28.09. Elevation gain only 650 ft. Suffer score 72 and 2046 calories on strava. Garmin listed calories at 1,582. I vomited when I got home so I assume I lost more calories than both indicate.

Calories burned do do not matter to me though as I am not calorie counting. I did see a bunch in the toilet though lol.

Drew Eckhardt 

It's not. Spend $400+ on a power meter and you can measure actual energy output, with 1 kj = 1 Calorie at typical cycling metabolic efficiencies.

Both are high.

Jarrett2

My guess is you burned 1000-1100 calories on that ride.

I'm also a 6' - 278 lb. rider.

Here's my suggestion:

Get a Strava account
Enter your bike weight and your body weight (without gear on) into your profile
Have Garmin Connect auto feed ride info to Strava
Have Strava auto feed exercise info to MyFitnessPal (or whatever calorie counter you use)

In my experience with using a bunch of different methods (including a heart rate monitor) this method tends to get you much closer to accurate. For example, I put 280 lbs for me in Strava and 19 lbs for my bike. I'm around 280 on the scale minus cycling gear and my bike is around 19 lbs on the scale minus saddle bag, water bottles, computer, etc. When I put those numbers in, my calorie burn rate is right around the same as what I get from my heart rate monitor, which is the most accurate way to estimate calorie burn aside from an expensive power meter.

Willbird

I'd figure 800 calories for 2 hours. It really is pretty easy if you just do that. Typically the people most concerned with the number have the least real "need" for precision :-). IE if you have body fat to spare (I still do) it really does not matter much :-).

Bill

Jarrett2

I think that's true as long as you aren't pushing it. Meaning eating 1500 calories banking on your ride only burning 500 calories when its really burning 1500.

Stevensondrive

Nah, those are just bonus burnt calories. My goal is to drop another 20 pounds before the end of summer. I'm about 6-7 pounds into goal.

Willbird

Over a roughly 100 lb loss 7-9 hours a week riding was worth about 1 lb week loss for me. Intake was a 7000 calorie a week deficit, riding added roughly another 3500.