Aug 2011
8:30pm, 30 Aug 2011
2,488 posts
|
paul the builder
I don't cycle, so this is just a suggestion from a position of blissful ignorance - but does your Garmin know that you're actually cycling, and not just running fast?
|
Aug 2011
9:00pm, 30 Aug 2011
9,603 posts
|
controversial
well the reality is that the calorie calculation with he 305 in running or cycling is very basic an innacurate.
|
Aug 2011
9:35pm, 30 Aug 2011
9,894 posts
|
Ted
Paul, there is the option to switch between splash, wobble and plod.
|
Aug 2011
10:13pm, 30 Aug 2011
2,489 posts
|
paul the builder
I imagined that, Ted, so is RBR selecting the right option?
|
Aug 2011
10:45pm, 30 Aug 2011
9,895 posts
|
Ted
that my friend, is the $64,000 question
|
Aug 2011
8:10am, 31 Aug 2011
2,490 posts
|
paul the builder
*drum roll*
|
Aug 2011
8:34am, 31 Aug 2011
3,569 posts
|
geordiegirl
RBR my cycling cals are definately less than running cals, shame I couldnt convince my body to burn the running ones on a bike ride. Hopefully you're sorted.
|
Aug 2011
10:33am, 31 Aug 2011
158 posts
|
Run Bear Run
You can't do the splash bit with the old 305s, there's a flashy new one for that but you can do the wobble and the plod.
I'm definitely cycling and my garmin agrees with me, which is lucky as I would hate for us to fall out with each other. When you change over it gives you your speed in mph rather than min/m, all very clever stuff.
Look at the stats it seems to be purely based on time - running for 1h (8 miles)=1117cal, cycling for 1h (15 miles)=1117cal
How do your stats compare GG?
|
Aug 2011
12:02pm, 31 Aug 2011
9,897 posts
|
Ted
RBR, there has got to be something that you have not configured on your Garmin. I have a 305 and it is very different between running and cycling.
I don't have it with me now but, are you sure you have a different profile for running and cycling?
|
Aug 2011
7:31pm, 31 Aug 2011
159 posts
|
Run Bear Run
Don't see what I've done wrong Ted, I select cycling and "use this sport", a little picture of a bike appears. In terms of profiles, running has "added weight" etc. which is zero for me (unless you're supposed to count a beer belly?) Cycling has the bike weight, wheel diameter and maybe one more which I can't remember. As contro says, even set up right it's probably wildly inaccurate anyway but you would think that they could take into account HR, time, distance and weight to create something pretty accurate. Beer belly has got a little smaller since I've been cycling so I must be burning a couple of cals at least.
|