Garmin Extreme Confusion

[Beethoven]

I have a Garmin forerunner 405CX which I bought for running but I have now also bought an Edge 500 for cycling because the 405CX battery life is too short for my long cycles.
Cop this :
A 75 mile cycle on the 405CX (battery died at 75 miles) with HR monitor estimates 3439 calories
A 100 mile cycle on the Edge 500 with HR monitor registers only 2700 calories.

I checked the user profile in the Edge and it was wrong even though I thought I'd set it correctly (showed my age as 41, 150 lbs....I'm 37 143 lbs). Even so, 25 miles more but 700 calories less ???

One other thing about the Edge 500. My odomoeter for my bike profile is still reading zero after several rides.

Very frustrating, can anyone help please ???

Matt

 

[ufkacbln]

I have a Garmin forerunner 405CX which I bought for running but I have now also bought an Edge 500 for cycling because the 405CX battery life is too short for my long cycles.
Cop this :
A 75 mile cycle on the 405CX (battery died at 75 miles) with HR monitor estimates 3439 calories
A 100 mile cycle on the Edge 500 with HR monitor registers only 2700 calories.

I checked the user profile in the Edge and it was wrong even though I thought I'd set it correctly (showed my age as 41, 150 lbs....I'm 37 143 lbs). Even so, 25 miles more but 700 calories less ???

One other thing about the Edge 500. My odomoeter for my bike profile is still reading zero after several rides.

Very frustrating, can anyone help please ???

Matt

The quick question is - is it on autopause?

I found my journeys much slower on the Edge than on my old computer until I realised it was recording journey time not moving time.

As a guess if you cycle 30 miles and the time is three hours (total), or you have used autopause (moving time) then the effort will be calculated as less and therefore calories less?



There are a number of ways that mean the two could be recording differently

 

[snomaes]

I have a Garmin forerunner 405CX which I bought for running but I have now also bought an Edge 500 for cycling because the 405CX battery life is too short for my long cycles.
Cop this :
A 75 mile cycle on the 405CX (battery died at 75 miles) with HR monitor estimates 3439 calories
A 100 mile cycle on the Edge 500 with HR monitor registers only 2700 calories.

I checked the user profile in the Edge and it was wrong even though I thought I'd set it correctly (showed my age as 41, 150 lbs....I'm 37 143 lbs). Even so, 25 miles more but 700 calories less ???

One other thing about the Edge 500. My odomoeter for my bike profile is still reading zero after several rides.

Very frustrating, can anyone help please ???

Matt

The 2700 calories for 100 miles sounds about right, unless you are very fast or very unfit! It is almost exactly what I record for 100 miles.

I have never burnt 3439 calories on any ride, although the longest I have done in one day is only 126 miles.

If you have set up your profile correctly in the 500, the speed, heart rate, your weight, the bike weight and your age are all taken into account in the calculation and the calorie count should be quite accurate.

Try doing a reset of the unit (this involves holding three of the buttons in simultaneously, but I can't remember which without looking at the instructions). This will reset the unit, but not remove the data that you have installed.

 

[amaferanga]

They probably just use different algorithms. Some Garmin devices overestimate calories while other underestimate. They're all wrong though so no point in worrying about it.

 

[Garz]

The 500 will be more accurate, it sounds much more reasonable too.

I have an edge too, are you pressing start when beginning your journey?

 

[Garz]

If your doing that already then try Auto-Relocate and deleting your fit files.

 

[addictfreak]

According to my edge 800 I burned 1300 cals this morning over 19 miles at an 18.5mph average.

 

[amaferanga]

According to my edge 800 I burned 1300 cals this morning over 19 miles at an 18.5mph average.

1300kCal would mean you averaged around 360 Watts. 360 Watts on regular British roads would see you doing well over 25mph.

So your Edge is wrong.

 

[Sapper]

Whether using a cycle computer, a Life fitness cardio thingie with a polar HRM, the calories burnt function are always hit and miss.

Each system will use differing algorithms. Each one of us are slightly different, so they are a guide rather than an absolute measurement.

I have a garmin Edge 705 and some of the values it suggests are way of the mark I would suggest!

Adrian

 

[addictfreak]

1300kCal would mean you averaged around 360 Watts. 360 Watts on regular British roads would see you doing well over 25mph.

So your Edge is wrong.

Well that may be true. But having compared mine to another 4 guys I know, its actually quite typical give or take a few calories.

Perhaps the garmins just aren't very accurate.

 

[Garz]

1300kCal would mean you averaged around 360 Watts. 360 Watts on regular British roads would see you doing well over 25mph.

So your Edge is wrong.

Well that may be true. But having compared mine to another 4 guys I know, its actually quite typical give or take a few calories.

Perhaps the garmins just aren't very accurate.

I'm afraid amaferanga is correct.

They way overestimate calories. It has been discussed many times to my knowledge and even before I started posting no doubt. Deduct around 20% of your total and it will start giving a realistic figure.

 

[Garz]

Just checked out my Garmin Edge 500 logs:

Time: 1h:10
Distance: 21.19 Miles
Calories: 661
Av Speed: 18.1 mph

So riding less miles than my journey at similar pace you burn more than double the calories...