Which Calorie Count Is Correct?

[david k]

just done a 23 miles ride and it gave me around 750 calories, it would have been nearly double that before i wore a HBM, in fact i may not wear it from now on as i clearly burn more calories when i dont

 

[Albert]

My Garmin 705 gives some strange figures.
When I'm on my turbo trainer averaging 95rpm, 120bpm and doing 25mph I use between 1400 and I600 calories an hour.
On the road, averaging the same heart rate, but riding at 75rpm, averaging 15mph and climbing between 1000 and 1500 ft it says that I am using between 600 and 800 calories an hour. I reckon the second estimate is likely to be reasonably accurate and therefore always divide my Turbo number by 2.

 

[Rob3rt]

That's because in that hour it thinks you have gone 10 miles further than when on the road. The resistance on your turbo is set too low.

 

[Punt1971]

I have several tools that give me a calorie count (garmin, strava, runkeeper, endomondo). While I appreciate that none of them are accurate I use Strava, due to it giving me the lowest count, to compare rides and not as an excuse for me to eat more (otherwise I'd use garmin! Which gives by far the highest figure). Any calories burned while riding is a bonus to my reduced calorie diet and do not figure into any equations.

Nice loss MattHB! I hope I can follow your example

 

[Nigelnaturist]

I just look in the mirror compared with 3 months ago.
I have used these sites that calculate calories
My Bryton 35 (first ride with it Tues though no hrm yet, limited funds) said I did an easy 20m and used 744 calories for 1hr 30min riding, so about 500 an hr or 37.2 per mile, first time i worked that out tonight, from when i compared it using web based calculators it would give 50-60 per mile.

I dont eat any different to how I used, maybe a little more, but not very much, I dont weigh myself dont have scales I have an idea what weight I was about 95Kg (though I might have been a tad higher).I dont know what I weigh at the mo and really dont care, but I am fitter have more stamina and run up stairs, my legs are much stronger a weakness I had in my right leg isn't so bad.

I have some shorts that in May I couldn't fasten, now they fit, 34" .and I am 6ft

 

[Stonerosegardens]

I have a question about the calorie calculators, but from a little different skew.
I am dragging a trailer with 2.5 gallon water jugs inside for training. 2.5 gallons of water weighs approximately 20 lbs. The trailer weighs about 23 lbs.
Can I add the weight of the water and the trailer to my weight and then calculate the calories burned?

 

[ColinJ]

Why make the rides less pleasurable by riding slower and lugging extra weight behind you, when you could just ride faster without the extra load?

Many of us are trying to do the opposite - minimising weight on us and the bikes.

The added weight isn't going to make a huge difference to how much energy you use unless you are riding up lots of hills.

 

[Garethgas]

I used to ride with a heart monitor that also measures calories, a polar ft4.
It shows that I burn about 300 to 350 calories an hour. I don't know how accurate it is but when I had it, I had to put my data in ie. height, weight, age resting heart rate etc.
So I'm assuming that it's accurate enough for most people.
I also happen have one built in to a cheap Aldi computer (Crivit) and it's amazingly close every time!

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

I used to ride with a heart monitor that also measures calories, a polar ft4.
It shows that I burn about 300 to 350 calories an hour. I don't know how accurate it is but when I had it, I had to put my data in ie. height, weight, age resting heart rate etc.
So I'm assuming that it's accurate enough for most people.
I also happen have one built in to a cheap Aldi computer (Crivit) and it's amazingly close every time!

Calories burned via HRM calculations are arbitary numbers at best.

I have a question about the calorie calculators, but from a little different skew.
I am dragging a trailer with 2.5 gallon water jugs inside for training. 2.5 gallons of water weighs approximately 20 lbs. The trailer weighs about 23 lbs.
Can I add the weight of the water and the trailer to my weight and then calculate the calories burned?

No

 

[Garethgas]

Calories burned via HRM calculations are arbitary numbers at best.



No

They are not arbitrary at all.
They are a reasonably accurate estimate based on your heart rate and the personal data you enter.
Different manufacturers may use different algorithms for this but they're certainly good enough to give a reasonable estimate for most people's needs.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

LOL

 

[uclown2002]

They are not arbitrary at all.
They are a reasonably accurate estimate based on your heart rate and the personal data you enter.
Different manufacturers may use different algorithms for this but they're certainly good enough to give a reasonable estimate for most people's needs.

I have no confidence in their estimates, much like the online calculators that spit out different results.
I have 2 garmin devices that track heart rate; the Edge 800 and the FR70, both loaded with the same personal data,i.e age, height, weight, fitness activity class etc.
However, calories burned during a bike ride are miles apart, often the 800 is 40% lower with its estimate.

 

[Garethgas]

I have no confidence in their estimates, much like the online calculators that spit out different results.
I have 2 garmin devices that track heart rate; the Edge 800 and the FR70, both loaded with the same personal data,i.e age, height, weight, fitness activity class etc.
However, calories burned during a bike ride are miles apart, often the 800 is 40% lower with its estimate.

I only have experience of the Polar.
As I said earlier, everyone knows it's an estimate but it's based on your details and is perfectly adequate for Mr. Average as a guide.
To be really accurate, you'd need lab conditions I suppose.
I also don't think there's any need for such accuracy for normal exercise, a guide is just a guide.
I must admit though, 40% is way out!
According to some lab tests, the Polar is 2% accurate for men but I'm sceptical about that level of accuracy to be honest.
I don't refer to it much these days but it was a handy reference particularly as I had no idea if I was burning 50, 500 or 5000 calories before.

 

[Shut Up Legs]

I've been using this web site to calculate calorie expenditure. At the end of this page, there's a link to another calculation which takes vertical gain into account. It's not perfect, obviously, but one of the best I've seen myself.
http://www.cptips.com/formula.htm
I made an Excel spreadsheet with these formulae for convenience.

As for the Garmin, I found that the Edge 705 consistently overestimates calorie expenditure, and so does the Edge 800. But these are just my opinions.

 

[ColinJ]

You should not really need to know how exactly how many calories you are using. That is an indirect way of working out whether you should be gaining weight, losing weight, or staying the same weight. Why not just weigh yourself?

If you want to be lighter, just exercise more and/or eat and drink less and use scales and a tape measure round the waist to measure progress accurately. It is easy to see if it is working.