calories burned: treadmill v garmin
3 watchers
Feb 2016
9:29am, 26 Feb 2016
2,271 posts
|
Icelandic Trigirl
To give you context, I'm sitting with a boring bowl of porridge, well aware that there is a packet of jaffa cakes with my name on in the cupboard. Today I ran on the treadmill with my garmin HRM; it was a short interval set of 25 minutes. I put my weight and age into the TM (and garmin has this as well as, I think, my baseline heart rate and stuff). TM reckons I burned 280 calories; but Garmin a measly 188 (Garmin measured heartrate but not distance or speed as I was indoors; TM got speed and distance but not heartrate). Whom to trust? I know it's all a bit witchcrafty but in short: How many jaffa cakes can I eat? |
Feb 2016
9:45am, 26 Feb 2016
17,568 posts
|
GlennR
Unfortunately the HR based data is probably more reliable. The treadmill doesn't know how efficient you are, the Garmin does. I've had the same problem with indoor cycling recently. The bike thinks I'm working hard, the Garmin knows I'm an idle toad. |
|
Feb 2016
10:00am, 26 Feb 2016
2,272 posts
|
Icelandic Trigirl
piss it. too late for the jaffa cakes :/ I suspect you are right. I also suspect that with all the running, my body has become super efficient at calorie conservation which means if I ever stop, I will turn into my mother. |
|
Feb 2016
10:17am, 26 Feb 2016
17,569 posts
|
GlennR
I've been trapped that way for years ITG. Anything less than the equivalent of 30 miles per week and I turn into the Michelin man.
|
|
Feb 2016
11:13am, 26 Feb 2016
17,575 posts
|
GlennR
I've realised that I'm more puzzled about this than I thought I was. I've asked a related question on the More Efficient Running Style thread.
|
Feb 2016
11:40am, 26 Feb 2016
2,345 posts
|
chunkywizard
Which Garmin do you have? (they all give different calorie count!). If you've got a new one (23x/630) then Garmin have just 'improved' the algorithm (actually Firstbeat their provider did) which tends to read lower but they believe it more accurate.
|
Feb 2016
11:49am, 26 Feb 2016
8,516 posts
|
Chrisull
Does calorie count always remain the same throughout your lifespan? So two questions 1) is it possible to get more efficient at burning calories as you run more? (or is it always the same) 2) as you get older does how that affect your ability to burn calories? |
|
Feb 2016
11:56am, 26 Feb 2016
17,579 posts
|
GlennR
1) Yes, it must do. If I impede progress by heel striking too much, or waste energy on unnecessary upward movement, then I will burn more calories per mile than I otherwise would have done. 2) No idea. |
|
Feb 2016
12:55pm, 26 Feb 2016
8,519 posts
|
Chrisull
I suspected it must do for 1) as well, because running use to eat into my weight for years, especially big miles, but now eating the same level means I don't lose weight any more (I don't gain it either), even though I'm not eating any more or less.
|
|
Feb 2016
1:00pm, 26 Feb 2016
2,273 posts
|
Icelandic Trigirl
but having lost weight will also mean that you need fewer net calories to maintain your weight (as you have smaller body to carry around and smaller organs to fuel). smaller people need fewer calories to stay the same size. (pisser, isn't it?)
|
Related Threads
-
Garmin
Apr 2024
-
From Garmin connect to Fetch...
Nov 2023
-
Garmin 405
Jul 2023
-
Garmin Upload broken or just me?
Jun 2023
-
Garmin advice
Sep 2022
-
Garmin link to fetch issues?
Nov 2021
-
Garmin connect & Fetch
May 2021
-
Back to Garmins...
Mar 2021
-
Garmin forerunner 10
Mar 2021
-
Garmin 735xt problem
Jan 2021
