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


Go Back   > >

General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-05-11, 09:28 AM   #1
jrickards
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
jrickards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sudbury, ON, CA
Bikes: 2002 Norco Bigfoot, 2012 KHS Tempe, 1988 Bianchi Strada, 2012 Kona Sutra, 2002 Look AL 384
Posts: 2,261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Calorie counters

I have started using MapMyRide.com to keep track of my bike rides as a motivational tool to keep riding and improve my health and fitness.

However, when comparing the calorie counter from various sources on the 'net with the one used on MapMyRide, the MMR one is about 15-20% lower.

Anyone else discovered the same?

On the other hand, perhaps I could ask myself, should I even bother thinking about it?
jrickards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-13, 04:55 PM   #2
Cyclogenesis
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Chicago
Bikes: Trek Madonne 4.5, Yeti 575
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What are people's thoughts about Strava? My commute (~30 mins moving time at ~16-20mph) burns ~300Cal on Strava but using, say, livestrong I burn 600 cals...
Cyclogenesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-13, 05:23 PM   #3
howeeee
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
all the people I know that count calories are fat.
howeeee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-13, 06:30 PM   #4
Machka 
Long Distance Cyclist
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: I ride where the thylacine roamed!
Bikes: Lots
Posts: 46,008
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 224 Post(s)
Assume 500 calories per hour and you'll be in the ball park.
Machka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-13, 06:43 PM   #5
Cyclogenesis
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Chicago
Bikes: Trek Madonne 4.5, Yeti 575
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by howeeee View Post
all the people I know that count calories are fat.
Well I definitely do not skew your sample set then..
Cyclogenesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-13, 10:28 AM   #6
Notso_fastLane
Senior Member
 
Notso_fastLane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Medford, OR
Bikes: Kona MTN bike, Bent TW Elegance
Posts: 710
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
MMR and other apps like that don't really know how hard your body is working, how much you're coasting, etc. I think an actual heart monitor, properly set to your age/weight, etc, will at least get you closer to the ball park.
Notso_fastLane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-13, 02:07 PM   #7
Looigi
Senior Member
 
Looigi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 8,951
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by howeeee View Post
all the people I know that count calories are fat.
Or have been, and count to keep from getting a fat again.
Looigi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-13, 06:48 PM   #8
dramiscram
ouate de phoque
 
dramiscram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St-CÚsaire, Qc, Canada
Bikes: Bianchi, Nakamura,Suteki, escapade 10 speed, 1973 CCM Elan
Posts: 1,769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
On RunKeeper if I enter my data manually (time and distance) I 'burn' about 1000 calories/hour, if I download the ride with a gps it's about 600 cal/hour so I don't rely on those number ever, instead I keep on being fat.
dramiscram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-13, 01:14 PM   #9
umazuki
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Bikes: Crossrip Elite, Bikesdirect tarck bike custom build
Posts: 155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Most calorie counters/GPS apps tend to overstate how many calories you're expending while biking. I've heard around here a more reasonable estimate is 30-50 calories a mile, depending on your size, ability, speed, etc.

Probably the best measurement of energy used while biking is a power meter on the crank. Guestimating via your speed or heart rate will probably introduce some error. (not to poo-poo heart rate monitors, they are useful, but for energy use there are better measurements)

Last edited by umazuki; 01-17-13 at 01:15 PM. Reason: HTML garbage
umazuki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-13, 08:33 PM   #10
GT4
Goofy Goober
 
GT4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Francisco
Bikes: Fuji SL 3.0, Motobecane Track, Specialized Rockhopper FS, low track standard
Posts: 331
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The calories burned in MMR is purposely made to be 15-20% lower than reality too make you feel like you didn't ride long enough. That's another motivator.

If you want accurate "calories burned", get a garmin 200 or above. It also has a lot more stuff than just MMR.
GT4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-13, 09:27 AM   #11
charbucks
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Calgary, AB
Bikes:
Posts: 393
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GT4 View Post
The calories burned in MMR is purposely made to be 15-20% lower than reality too make you feel like you didn't ride long enough. That's another motivator.

If you want accurate "calories burned", get a garmin 200 or above. It also has a lot more stuff than just MMR.
I'll second the garmin!

I've got the 310xt and the difference between calories burned using the HRM and when I don't use the HRM is huge. For example, a just under two hour 50 km loop where I *didn't* use the HRM says that I burned 1180 calories. Another ride where I did use the HRM is on the same loop (but minus an out and back): an hour and a half, 38 km, and 420 calories. I highly doubt that my last 10k on that first ride burned 720 calories.

I'm guessing that speed-based calorie calculators don't consider that downhill = fast.
charbucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-13, 09:29 AM   #12
charbucks
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Calgary, AB
Bikes:
Posts: 393
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by howeeee View Post
all the people I know that count calories are fat.
Or people who just really like numbers
charbucks 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 04:14 AM.