Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) Looking to lose that spare tire? Ideal weight 200+? Frustrated being a large cyclist in a sport geared for the ultra-light? Learn about the bikes and parts that can take the abuse of a heavier cyclist, how to keep your body going while losing the weight, and get support from others who've been successful.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-07-14, 07:29 AM   #1
Altair 4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Along the Rivers of Pittsburgh
Bikes: 2011 Novara Forza Hybrid, 2005 Trek 820, 1989 Cannondale SR500 Black Lightning, 1975 Mundo Cycles Caloi Racer
Posts: 869
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Is MapMyRide Hopelessly Optimistic regarding Calories Burned?

So I recently put MapMyRide on my phone. Saturday I had a little time and got an hour's ride in even though it was 40 degrees and windy (wind chill into the 30's). My ride was along the Heritage Trails of Pittsburgh - essentially a flat trail with some small, very short climbs. I checked the stats when I was finished and it showed over 570 calories burned. Into the wind, I maintained perhaps 11.5 mph into the wind (13 mph wind, with gusts to 20) and around 13 mph on the return on a MTB with 26 x 2.00 tires.

This just seems wildly optimistic on the calories burned, or am I completely misunderstanding MapMyRide?
Altair 4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 07:57 AM   #2
Weatherby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Bikes: Too many
Posts: 548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Depends on your weight and fitness level.

An out of shape Clyde? Probably underestimated.

Lean racer? Way overestimated.
Weatherby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 08:39 AM   #3
TrojanHorse 
SuperGimp
 
TrojanHorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Whittier, CA
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix
Posts: 11,310
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
Generally speaking, take those sorts of estimates with a big grain of salt.
__________________
"No self-respecting man rides 70 miles and has salad at a pizza joint!" - PhotoJoe
"I like SoCal a lot better than New Jersey" - RubeRad
TrojanHorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 08:50 AM   #4
sstorkel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Bikes: Cervelo RS, Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Pro, Schwinn Typhoon, Nashbar touring, custom steel MTB
Posts: 5,427
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
I haven't found a website or app yet that wasn't 1.5-2X higher than my power meter when estimating calories burned...
sstorkel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 09:00 AM   #5
mrtuttle04
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Bikes: Trek Verve 3
Posts: 228
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I checked map my ride against a heart rate monitor and it was 30% too high.
mrtuttle04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 09:13 AM   #6
rm -rf
don't try this at home.
 
rm -rf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: N. KY
Bikes:
Posts: 3,854
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 110 Post(s)
Riders can get a fairly accurate calorie count if they have power meters. (calories burned are related to power meter watts.)

I've seen reports of 30 to 40 calories per mile. So a 12 mile ride would be 360 to 480 calories. It's still just a rough idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrtuttle04 View Post
I checked map my ride against a heart rate monitor and it was 30% too high.
HRM calorie estimates aren't very accurate, either.

Last edited by rm -rf; 04-07-14 at 09:18 AM.
rm -rf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 09:24 AM   #7
bbeasley 
Cat 5 field stuffer
 
bbeasley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Hammond, La
Bikes: Wabi Lightning RE, Wabi Classic
Posts: 1,425
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
I cut all the estimates in half
bbeasley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 09:26 AM   #8
Altair 4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Along the Rivers of Pittsburgh
Bikes: 2011 Novara Forza Hybrid, 2005 Trek 820, 1989 Cannondale SR500 Black Lightning, 1975 Mundo Cycles Caloi Racer
Posts: 869
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Thanks, guys. Appreciate the insghts.
Altair 4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 09:30 AM   #9
mrtuttle04
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Bikes: Trek Verve 3
Posts: 228
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rm -rf View Post
Riders can get a fairly accurate calorie count if they have power meters. (calories burned are related to power meter watts.)

I've seen reports of 30 to 40 calories per mile. So a 12 mile ride would be 360 to 480 calories. It's still just a rough idea.



HRM calorie estimates aren't very accurate, either.
I use 50 calories per mile for a rough estimate but I'm riding a comfort-hybrid so it is not as efficient as a road bike. What I find interesting about the counters based on miliage and speed is it says I burn more calories when I go faster and less calories when I go slower. In all acutallity it is the exeact opposit, when I am goin faster it is because I am going down hill and thus brurning less calories and when I am going slower I am climbing a hill and thus brining more calories.
mrtuttle04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 10:00 AM   #10
jsigone
got the climbing bug
 
jsigone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: San Diego
Bikes: one for everything
Posts: 8,530
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
best way to trust those sites is with use of a heart rate monitor and/or power meter. Also make sure your user profile is up to date.
__________________
Rule #10 // It never gets easier, you just go faster.
jsigone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 12:04 PM   #11
sstorkel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Bikes: Cervelo RS, Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Pro, Schwinn Typhoon, Nashbar touring, custom steel MTB
Posts: 5,427
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrtuttle04 View Post
I use 50 calories per mile for a rough estimate but I'm riding a comfort-hybrid so it is not as efficient as a road bike.
That estimate sounds pretty high, to me. I can burn 35 (power meter-confirmed) calories/mile on my endurance-geometry road bike if I'm riding as hard as I can go. Jump on the touring bike and slow down a bit and I'm lucky to hit 30 calories/mile. Efficiency of the touring bike probably isn't that much different than a hybrid...
sstorkel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 12:47 PM   #12
TrojanHorse 
SuperGimp
 
TrojanHorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Whittier, CA
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix
Posts: 11,310
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 167 Post(s)
I seem to range from 42-48 calories per mile for most of my routes, but I hit 65 per mile 2 weeks ago in the mountains. (with a power meter) Strava seems to correct the work done into calories burned and I'm not sure how they do it but it looks like about an 11% bump (so 836 kj corresponds to 932 kCal for a 19.4 mile ride.) I don't use that information to eat more, so it's more of a curiosity to me than anything else.
__________________
"No self-respecting man rides 70 miles and has salad at a pizza joint!" - PhotoJoe
"I like SoCal a lot better than New Jersey" - RubeRad
TrojanHorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 01:13 PM   #13
cvskates 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: On my bike...
Bikes:
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
I've been calorie counting as part of my weight loss, and typically I use the lowest of three sources; my Heart Rate Monitor, MyFitnessPal, and Strava (paired to my HRM). Typically (though not always), MyFitnessPal gives the highest calories for an activity, then my HRM in the middle, and Strava is the lowest (for biking). I'd never heard of the 40 calories per mile thing, and when I compare it to Strava (the lowest calories), it's not that far off.

69 mile ride last week (average 14.3 mph on a 35lb touring bike):

69*40=2760
MFP=3314
HRM=4105
Strava=2810

Longer rides tend to really skew things with the HRM.
cvskates is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 02:56 PM   #14
bbbean 
Senior Member
 
bbbean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Missouri
Bikes: Giant Propel, Cannondale SuperX, Univega Alpina Ultima
Posts: 1,524
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Altair 4 View Post
This just seems wildly optimistic on the calories burned, or am I completely misunderstanding MapMyRide?
Yes. MMR gives you credit for a lot more calories than most people burn. Using a HR monitor and a power meter I can confirm I burn 20-40 calories per mile, and to burn 40/mile I have to be hammering at race pace and close to FTP. Riding at a leisurely pace on flat ground, 20-30 calories per mile more than covers it.

FWIW, I've compared GPS based (i.e no HR or power) calorie estimates from MMR, Strava, and Garmin. As a rule, Strava tends to be the most conservative estimate, although they're still pretty generous when you compare to estimates based on power and HR.

My advice is to assume your calorie burn is 20 cal per mile, or no more than 500 cal per hour if you're trying to lose weight. Similarly, assume you're actually eating more calories than your food log apps indicate. Over time, your weight will tell you if you're on targt or not.

BB
__________________
www.beancotton.com
Formerly fastest rider in the grupetto, currently slowest guy in the peloton

bbbean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 03:28 PM   #15
Weatherby
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Bikes: Too many
Posts: 548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Does the power meter know the Gross Metabolic Efficiency of its subject? Does this variance get plugged into the conversion to calories burned per hour.

It is all a SWAG.
Weatherby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 03:30 PM   #16
bbbean 
Senior Member
 
bbbean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Missouri
Bikes: Giant Propel, Cannondale SuperX, Univega Alpina Ultima
Posts: 1,524
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weatherby View Post
Does the power meter know the Gross Metabolic Efficiency of its subject? Does this variance get plugged into the conversion to calories burned per hour.

It is all a SWAG.
More data = less guesswork.
__________________
www.beancotton.com
Formerly fastest rider in the grupetto, currently slowest guy in the peloton

bbbean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-14, 07:30 PM   #17
DMC707 
Senior Member
 
DMC707's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Oklahoma City
Bikes: Too many to list
Posts: 2,135
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 189 Post(s)
I've had estimates on the Garmin Edge 500 that swing pretty high for an hour of rowing on my Concept 2 (i use it for the HR function on the rowing machine too ) - 7-800 calories some hours --- i have a hard time believing this , but it lets me compare one workout to another and compare calorie burn of a bike to the rower, since i am using the same monitor
DMC707 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-14, 12:01 AM   #18
OiS
Senior Member
 
OiS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Singapore
Bikes: 2010 Trek Madone 6.9 Project One Livestrong, Single Speed "Tokyo Bike", BH 29'er, Trek California Cruiser Classic Springer
Posts: 315
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yes!

... That was my reply before actually reading any more than the heading. Now after reading your full comment, and the reponses, I would say.... Yes! I tend to assume it may be around half, as a very general rule.
OiS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-14, 11:34 AM   #19
Jarrett2
Senior Member
 
Jarrett2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: DFW
Bikes: Steel Roadies
Posts: 3,555
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 274 Post(s)
The LoseIt app is pretty high on calorie burn numbers. I generally just half it when entering my exercise. 30 cals/mi sounds like a decent way to do it as well.

But in my experience (120lbs lost in last 14 months) its much more important what you put in your mouth rather than how much you exercise.
Jarrett2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-14, 11:50 AM   #20
kc0bbq
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Bikes: 2006 Raleigh Cadent 2.0, 2013 Trek Madone 3.1, 2015 Propel Advanced SL 2, 2000 K2 Zed SE
Posts: 931
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Strava's kJ estimate is pretty close to what I observe when counting calories. At a 1:1 conversion it had me at a hair over 26.5 calories per mile on Sunday for a long slow miles day. 180-185lbs, 18.5lb bike, 70.14 miles in 4h20m, 1650 feet climbing and descent. 118 watts average seems like it was a fair estimate.

Garmin 500 with HRM estimates higher, but if you assume it includes basal metabolic rate it isn't too far off.
kc0bbq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-14, 02:24 PM   #21
Little Darwin
The Improbable Bulk
 
Little Darwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wilkes-Barre, PA
Bikes: Many
Posts: 8,402
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrtuttle04 View Post
I use 50 calories per mile for a rough estimate but I'm riding a comfort-hybrid so it is not as efficient as a road bike. What I find interesting about the counters based on miliage and speed is it says I burn more calories when I go faster and less calories when I go slower. In all acutallity it is the exeact opposit, when I am goin faster it is because I am going down hill and thus brurning less calories and when I am going slower I am climbing a hill and thus brining more calories.
I agree, this is a big weakness in estimated that do no real measurement of effort. One ride last week was on crunchy snow and mud, I only managed to do a mile, and it may be the hardest mile I have ever ridden. An easier 3.6 mile ride on pavement I rode at 3 times the speed later in the week in roughly the same amount of time supposedly used twice the calories.

My Bluetooth HRM should get here shortly, then I will hopefully get a little more accuracy.
__________________
Slow Ride Cyclists of NEPA

People do not seem to realize that their opinion of the world is also a confession of character.
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Little Darwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-14, 04:54 PM   #22
Beachgrad05
Just Keep Pedaling
 
Beachgrad05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Lakewood, CA
Bikes: 99 Schwinn Mesa GS MTB, 11 Trek 7.2 FX WSD, 12 Trek 4.5 Madone, 15 Trek Domane 5.9 Dura-Ace
Posts: 2,775
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Interesting that Garmin Connect typically comes up lower and more realistic than Strava does with the same data.

Example is the Palm Springs Century in Feb of this year:

Garmin Connect: 2004 calories (2992kj)
Strava: 3337 calories (2993kj)

I choose to use the lower number as the more "real" number. I use both a HRM and a Power Meter.
Beachgrad05 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-14, 05:57 PM   #23
MSLiechty
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Behind The Orange Curtain, CA
Bikes: 1996, Giant ATX converted to single speed, 2013 Custom Coconino One Speed
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I've found Lose it way over estimates Garmin Connect and Wahoo Fitness are very similar.

Anyone know the formula to determine Calories burned?

ML
MSLiechty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-14, 10:00 PM   #24
sstorkel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Bikes: Cervelo RS, Specialized Stumpjumper FSR Pro, Schwinn Typhoon, Nashbar touring, custom steel MTB
Posts: 5,427
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beachgrad05 View Post
Interesting that Garmin Connect typically comes up lower and more realistic than Strava does with the same data.

Example is the Palm Springs Century in Feb of this year:

Garmin Connect: 2004 calories (2992kj)
Strava: 3337 calories (2993kj)

I choose to use the lower number as the more "real" number. I use both a HRM and a Power Meter.
If you use a power meter, the rule of thumb is that kilojoules of work is equal to calories burned. That assumes, I believe, around 25% efficiency. If true, that means the Strava number is slightly too high and the Garmin number is way too low.
sstorkel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-14, 06:18 AM   #25
Pakiwi
Senior Member
 
Pakiwi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Bikes:
Posts: 367
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sstorkel View Post
If you use a power meter, the rule of thumb is that kilojoules of work is equal to calories burned. That assumes, I believe, around 25% efficiency. If true, that means the Strava number is slightly too high and the Garmin number is way too low.
I just got a power meter and finally I understand why my calories burned were so far off the actual calories burned on a ride. As you stated Kilojoules of work is equal to calories burned.

When I am out on the road, I coast, though the application does not know that I am coasting.
Actual burned vs reported on application was about 2 - 1
Just my experience

Allan
Pakiwi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:57 PM.