I'm guessing that the # of cals burned calculated by "cheap" machines is not acurate.

[Locut0s]

By cheap machines I mean any workout machine that doesn't ask you any questions about your weight, body type etc.. and doesn't take into account your heart rate. The treadmill I've been using downstairs here for example has been showing me that I'm burning about 310 calories during my 40min workout but I have difficulty seeing how this can be anything but a ballpark number without knowing anything about the person doing the exercise. Obviously simple physics dictates that to go x distance at speed y requires a MINIMUM of z calories and I'm guessing that they are using some average multiple of this assuming you fit some average body type. Otherwise the 600lb man doing the same exercise would be burning the same number of calories as the 160lb fit athlete which makes no sense. But then I don't know anything about calorie burn.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Most machines, even with input of your height, weight, age, etc, do not correctly calculate caloric metabolism. Even with the same stats, two people could burn significantly different calories due to different metabolic rates, body composition, etc.

 

[brikis98]

Most machines, even with input of your height, weight, age, etc, do not correctly calculate caloric metabolism. Even with the same stats, two people could burn significantly different calories due to different metabolic rates, body composition, etc.

This. Any machine or formula you find online is just a rough estimate of calories burned. If you are tracking calories in order to lose/gain weight, then you'll need to do some trial and error to figure out how accurate these estimates are by monitoring the one thing you can measure accurately: your bodyweight. If it is going up/down at the rate you expect, your estimates are good; if not, you'll need to tweak your estimates and try again.