Are my elliptical's readings correct?

[DesiPower]

I have this Reebok elliptical. I am worried about its readings. I work out a few times a week on it, do a 45 minute workout, try to maintain heart rate above 100. It has resistance setting from 1 to 14, I set it to 7. Speed, I maintain at 45 - 50 (not sure what the unit is) Distance at the end of 45 mins is generally close to 1500 - 1700 (again, not sure about the unit). At the end it shows calories burnt ~ 600. Does that seem correct? I think its showing a bit too high... I cannot possibly be burning that many calories... am I?

Oh btw, I am 5' 11" 185lb

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Exercise equipment's estimations of calorie burn are notorious for being inaccurate. Caloric expenditure during exercise depends on a lot of things - age, weight, body composition, which muscles you use more, etc. I would suggest finding a better source online (in a research article preferably) for the caloric expenditure of different activities, but I don't know if the elliptical would be on there. Most of the comprehensive lists I've seen were done before ellipticals were popular and therefor don't include them.

And, no, you definitely aren't burning 600cal on very low intensity elliptical work in 45min. If you think about it, running at 10mph for an hour only burns something like 800cal for someone about 160lbs. That's much more intense that elliptical work where you keep your heart rate above 100bpm.

 

[neocpp]

Without knowing how fast you're going, I would say this is reasonable if not a little on the high end.

Running 10 mph for an hour burns about 800 calories if you weigh 100 lbs. This goes to ~1500 calories at 185 lbs. This goes to ~1100 calories if you work out for 45 minutes, but you're probably not going 10mph (or whatever the equivalent is for the elliptical). If you go 1/2 that speed, you get ~550 calories, and 5mph running is very doable. This is all very rough, but this is why I decided your 600 calorie figure probably isn't too far off the mark.

Here is where I got the estimate for calorie expenditure:
http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist3.htm

A calorie burn calculator (has elliptical trainer, not sure what parameters):
http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/cbc

 

[DesiPower]

This is the elliptical...

http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product...rodid=11541189

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

I'm in agreement with SociallyChallenged.

And I would not worry about calorie burn that much. 400 or 600 calories. it doesn't matter that much.

 

[gar655]

Depending on BW running or walking burns about 100-125 calories per mile on flat terrain, maybe more if you're over 200#.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Our elliptical's calories burned number is generally within +-5% the calories burned estimate of the heart rate monitor I wear sometimes.

Your speed of 45 - 50 is probably revolutions per minute.

If you're running 1700 somethings in 45 minutes, I'd have to guess it's fathoms or something weird. Unless it's counting revolutions for distance too. (Which would be silly.) It may be RTFM time.

Depending on BW running or walking burns about 100-125 calories per mile on flat terrain, maybe more if you're over 200#.

Theoretically, calories burned is a unit of "work" and should scale pretty closely with mass moved (body weight.) Individuals will vary, of course.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Without knowing how fast you're going, I would say this is reasonable if not a little on the high end.

Running 10 mph for an hour burns about 800 calories if you weigh 100 lbs. This goes to ~1500 calories at 185 lbs. This goes to ~1100 calories if you work out for 45 minutes, but you're probably not going 10mph (or whatever the equivalent is for the elliptical). If you go 1/2 that speed, you get ~550 calories, and 5mph running is very doable. This is all very rough, but this is why I decided your 600 calorie figure probably isn't too far off the mark.

Here is where I got the estimate for calorie expenditure:
http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist3.htm

A calorie burn calculator (has elliptical trainer, not sure what parameters):
http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/cbc

That figure is massive. At 185lbs, running 10mph does not burn 1500cal. Depending on the research source you use, the caloric expenditure should be between 800-1200cal per hour at that weight. Very few people can maintain a workload so high that they burn over 1000cal in an hour, let alone 1500cal.

 

[dlock13]

This really doesn't have anything to do with the discussion going on, but you folks seem to know enough about fitness to help me out here.

This looks like one of those things you'd see on an infomercial: http://www.amazon.com/Stamina-55-161.../dp/B000VICRO8

Can you tell me if it's actually practical or even usable to the extent a full-size elliptical would be?

 

[neocpp]

That figure is massive. At 185lbs, running 10mph does not burn 1500cal. Depending on the research source you use, the caloric expenditure should be between 800-1200cal per hour at that weight. Very few people can maintain a workload so high that they burn over 1000cal in an hour, let alone 1500cal.

You seem to know what you're talking about, but I would like to see the links to research you mention. I'm genuinely curious, as the ones I can find mostly related to shorter distances (about a mile or so seems to be popular), and the first few hits on google give figures that are roughly in line with what I quoted.

Am I overestimating because these calculators don't assume "steady state"? I imagine that for shorter distances the energy required to accelerate is significant compared to the energy required to fight air resistance once you are moving.

I was able to find this research article from 1963, but using their data I still get around ~1300 Cal/hr for a 185 lb runner at 10mph. That is for the athletes, who are apparently more efficient than normal people in their caloric expenditure; using a regular person and extrapolating to 10mph, I get over 1400 Cal/hr.

http://jap.physiology.org/content/18/2/367.short

 

[Sixguns]

When using my treadmill, it gives me a different number everyday when I do the same routine everyday. I cant help but laugh at it. I have never taken the readings to heart, I just know that my heart was pumping, I was sweating, and I was out of breath by the time I was done. So by those I know I did a good job.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

You seem to know what you're talking about, but I would like to see the links to research you mention. I'm genuinely curious, as the ones I can find mostly related to shorter distances (about a mile or so seems to be popular), and the first few hits on google give figures that are roughly in line with what I quoted.

Am I overestimating because these calculators don't assume "steady state"? I imagine that for shorter distances the energy required to accelerate is significant compared to the energy required to fight air resistance once you are moving.

I was able to find this research article from 1963, but using their data I still get around ~1300 Cal/hr for a 185 lb runner at 10mph. That is for the athletes, who are apparently more efficient than normal people in their caloric expenditure; using a regular person and extrapolating to 10mph, I get over 1400 Cal/hr.

http://jap.physiology.org/content/18/2/367.short

I use the following source:

Ainsworth et. al. Compendium of physical activities: an update of activity codes and MET intensities. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;32(9):S498-504.

You're right though, I hadn't actually calculated it and must've been working via levels at my weight (~150lbs). However, elliptical is much lower intensity than the equivalent speed of running. I'm not even sure why the OP wants to know. If he's trying to lose weight, then he doesn't need the exact measurement if his diet is in check.

 

[darkxshade]

So how much truth is there to the saying that you generally burn 100 calories/mile(for running)? Say we're comparing a mile @ 2mph vs a mile at 10mph? What would the caloric difference be between the two since one would have taken significantly longer than the other? What about a mile @ 10mph 5 times spaced out in a day(so 6 mins every other hour) vs doing 5 miles flat out in 30 mins?

 

[SociallyChallenged]

So how much truth is there to the saying that you generally burn 100 calories/mile(for running)? Say we're comparing a mile @ 2mph vs a mile at 10mph? What would the caloric difference be between the two since one would have taken significantly longer than the other? What about a mile @ 10mph 5 times spaced out in a day(so 6 mins every other hour) vs doing 5 miles flat out in 30 mins?

It's a massive oversimplification that doesn't take into account age, weight, gender, etc. If you want to estimate it, look up the paper I posted (if you can; if not, PM me) and calculate it for your body weight (in kilograms).

 

[mechBgon]

Very few people can maintain a workload so high that they burn over 1000cal in an hour, let alone 1500cal.

I concur. This workout was an estimated 750-800 kcal/hour and I was at 90%-93% of max HR, pouring sweat in front of a high-velocity blower: http://connect.garmin.com/activity/137886035 So 600kcal @ 100bpm in a zero-impact activity... uh, probably not I weigh a little less, but not that much less.

Not to discourage you, OP, keep at it!

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

The best I've done on an elliptical was 630 in 40 minutes (as the elliptical says so who knows for sure (it was dialed in to my weight at least)), and that was hauling ass most of the way through. I'm 135 pounds.

 

[DesiPower]

I concur. This workout was an estimated 750-800 kcal/hour and I was at 90%-93% of max HR, pouring sweat in front of a high-velocity blower: http://connect.garmin.com/activity/137886035 So 600kcal @ 100bpm in a zero-impact activity... uh, probably not I weigh a little less, but not that much less.

Not to discourage you, OP, keep at it!

I am not discouraged at all, I know I was not burning 600, I has around 300 in mind in fact, but it does not matter, cardio is not all about about burning calories...

 

[neocpp]

I use the following source:

Ainsworth et. al. Compendium of physical activities: an update of activity codes and MET intensities. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000;32(9):S498-504.

You're right though, I hadn't actually calculated it and must've been working via levels at my weight (~150lbs). However, elliptical is much lower intensity than the equivalent speed of running. I'm not even sure why the OP wants to know. If he's trying to lose weight, then he doesn't need the exact measurement if his diet is in check.

Thank you for the reference, I will check it out. I agree that most of the time this exact number doesn't matter. If I'm doing a workout, I usually go by duration, mileage, or intensity (heartrate) to decide if I'm doing things correctly. For the OP, I honestly probably have a higher variance in my intake than my output due to exercise, so I would focus on eating healthy first (although I am still working on this myself).

 

[episodic]

That figure is massive. At 185lbs, running 10mph does not burn 1500cal. Depending on the research source you use, the caloric expenditure should be between 800-1200cal per hour at that weight. Very few people can maintain a workload so high that they burn over 1000cal in an hour, let alone 1500cal.

Exactly. I'm 185 and I burn an average of 30 calories per mile riding a bike at over 17mph in a hilly area. So if I'm going all out and make 20 miles in an hour, that is only around 600 calories.

 

[neocpp]

Exactly. I'm 185 and I burn an average of 30 calories per mile riding a bike at over 17mph in a hilly area. So if I'm going all out and make 20 miles in an hour, that is only around 600 calories.

Just curious, how do you measure how many calories have been burned? Is there some sort of device that can measure it accurately without being in a closed system?

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Just curious, how do you measure how many calories have been burned? Is there some sort of device that can measure it accurately without being in a closed system?

You can really only estimate it.